reflections on netiquette and nexus

[montky]

Howdy Nex-ites

(qwertyzeldar's term is catching on, much better than Nexus-ers or Nexusians)

 

at the request of several folks,

several people wanted to discuss netiquette in general,

and how it is applied in different places.

 

I think that is a great topic of discussion, and I look forward to seeing what ideas people discuss.

I am far from fully informed on this matter, and relish opportunities to learn from fellow nex-ites.

Our discussion needn't be solely concerned with Nexus -

we can also reflect on macro-history and on elsewheres and elsewhens.

 

here are some scope questions for back-of-mind icebreaker prompts on the topic.

what does netiquette mean to you?

is netiquette an example of an egalitarian voluntary code, or are different people impacted differently by netiquette?

what is the etymology of netiquette?

how is netiquette applied elsewhere?

can there be multiple netiquettes?

why ought some implied netiquettes trump others?

as a gamer, how do you feel about different representations and approaches to netiquette?

 

some guidelines before we begin;

-more formal critical thought responses are sought and encouraged;

any videogamer could offer insight on this interesting issue.

-no ad-homenims or invective, "play the game and not the player".

If you've got nothing nice to say, and your YOLO TLDR time is more precious than anyone elses,

invest your time however you want and move along.

-derailments and hijacking will not be tolerated; though tangents are always interesting

-recall the Kipling Method

-keep hypothetical sketches as brief as possible.

-recall other forms of communication, we can use images and sketches in our discussion too,

though these may not solely form the discussion.

 

------

Netiquette exists for a number of reasons;

mainly, it is so as people have more than a blank page in front of them,

and is similar to "guided feedback" as part of literature-declaiming.

though it is also to prevent things like text rage, griefers etc...

Netiquette, when it functions effectively, helps to keep things fun.

There is explicit netiquette, and implied netiquette.

 

Explicit netiquette takes the forms of rules and laws, which are often

in the forms of ToS and codes of conduct, which are scrutineered by

moderators, and are in the broader context of legislative or regulatory

requirements. This area overlaps with; quantifiable data,

social-transactional theory and other frameworks.

these must be considered at multiple times -

-when a user joins x,y,z

-whenever a user inputs and shares content etc.

 

Implied netiquette, are the ineffable forms and often not expressly de-

lineated, which are informed by different cultural norms and values.

different spaces and boards on the internet have very different implied

netiquette or 'cultural practices'. These are analogous to 'common

courtesy', 'polite discourse' and to taboos or cultural strictures.

ie "don't be that |person|" meme-posters elsewhere were made as

netiquette.

 

Historically, if you look at Netiquette for Dummies, you can see that

before the age of Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube...

communication took place via emails and on forums and boards not

much different to these. Images back then though were not as easily

sharable...

|tangent: if pictures are worth a thousand words, then why do so many

people to this day in (current year) under-utilize the communicative power of imagery

or real-time communications such as VOIP or google hangouts etc?|

 

A great example of explicit netiquette from those cyber-darkages,

was to not share images of certain formats or beyond a certain size.

Private Messages? what were those; they'd not been invented yet.

 

my, how netiquette can change over time.

one thing which hasn't changed though, despite the march of time,

the progress of technology, and many shifts real-world in values

or cultural customs; are the explicit netiquette of ToS and some de-

limitation of what can be discussed where when, and how.

 

Then, as now, speech which was not harmful and consistent with

the ToS, was tolerated. With the advent of Private Messages,

people could communicate both "front of house" and "back of house",

and new explicit and implied netiquettes arose...

 

-----

let's reflect on changes in implicit netiquette;

as time has gone by, changes in the realworld have influenced

implicit netiquette, such that an implicit "memento mori

YOLO TLDR" norm has emerged.

"Be minimalist, or else... we'll ignore you until you do."

Format apparently trumps the content of what people have to say,

and abrogates any other aspect of netiquette, much less social interaction

or concepts of empathy or decency.

 

Understandably, this ostensibly correlates with incidence rates of

text-rage, and more frequent misunderstandings as people

"say more with less" and misunderstandings are had at a per-word level.

when there are fewer words spoken, or diminished vocabulary etc,

people from a social transactional-theory standpoint cannot help but

value what few words are spoken, differently.

 

Where and when did that become a 30 characters or fewer norm?

Who decided by what authority, that "from now on, this implicit netiquette

is the norm"?

 

This goes beyond the request that, a semblance of effort at

communication be made, and that people speak in full and complete sentences,

in whichever language they'd like to communicate in...

ie, a tacit disdain of 'dialects', such as NadSat, l337zor etc, as a norm,

and into that most nebulous of realms - semantic deconstruction, declaiming,

censorship, aesthetics, concepts of pluralism or individuality, and philosophy.

 

Curtailed real-world outlets for freedoms of expressions,

are causing a lot of passion for gamers, who feel increasingly

an encroachment on what little freedom or choice they have left,

as these norms in real-world imposed by various factions,

are starting to alter the implied netiquette in many places,

and not necessarily for the better of all people.

 

So, not only are people unable to speak freely in the real world,

approaching anywhere, be it at work, a public library or park, anywhere.

not only do some people wish for videogames themselves to be

heavily censored or redacted or constrained beyond some negotiated norm;

now, virtual spaces are being also subjected to similar standards of conduct

both via explicit netiquette and increasingly implicit netiquette?

 

Where was the coverage of these events, in an independent

"videogame journalism establishment"?

Why does that necessarily have to transpire, and how does implicit netiquette

trump the explicit netiquette?

of two or more competing implicit netiquettes - how is the determination made

as to which of those netiquettes becomes 'the norm'

and who made the determination that "there can only be one"?