• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

My Ethnography on GAF!

Status
Not open for further replies.

explorer

Member
Thanks to everyone who participated in my surveys. This is a college paper w/ mainstream audience, so it may be a bit dumbed down for people in the know (i.e.: most of the hardcore forumites on board, i.e.: YOU!). This report originally contained images, but I removed them in order to post here. Some images are now replaced by links. GAF was a big part of my research. Enjoy! :)

A geek (pronounciation /gi:k/) is a person who is fascinated, perhaps obsessively, by obscure or very specific areas of knowledge and imagination (Geek, 2006).

This Ethnography is focused on Internet Geeks:

According to Barbara Miller (2005), culture is best defined as “all learned and shared behavior and ideas…universal among human beings.”

It’s difficult to distinguish whether Internet Geeks belong in a sub-category of culture. On one hand, the World Wide Web allows this culture to transcend local barriers, thus dismissing it as being a microculture. On the other hand, it’s hard to distinguish it as a macroculture due to dynamic and multi-nationalistic nature of the group.

This report will cover the ethnography and the cultural definitions of Internet Geeks in an attempt to better understand this cultural group and its cultural classification.

Background Info:

As society becomes more complex, the people within its confines form elaborate cultural groups to cope with the inherent loneliness that comes along with advancements in technology. These are not people who simply go on to the Internet to Google their favorite movie or check their Hotmail. Internet Geeks live on the internet. Via web logs (Blogs), forums, and various web site communities, Internet Geeks have the distinction of being on the Internet 24/7.

Internet Geeks are the peanut gallery of the internet age; a group of individuals who sit perched behind their computers while monitoring world and social events from their screens. Their commentaries go beyond any conventional boundaries. No subject, offensive or otherwise, is taboo. Death, misfortune, politics, hobbies, sex, and anger management are discussed with relentless abandon. While most people in the “physical society” don’t care what Internet Geeks have to say about the aforementioned topics, the people within the virtual community take these topics very seriously.

The Virtual Community:

Most virtual communities revolve around online Internet forums. According to the Wikipedia website (Internet Forum, 2006), “An Internet forum is a facility on the World Wide Web for holding discussions, or the web application software used to provide the facility.” Forums consist of Administration; those who created the forum, Users; those who post on the forum, and Moderators; those who enforce the rules.

• Administration: Administrative personal create the theme for the website and forum and integrate the web address, the DNS, the design, and the server into a virtual community.

• Users (also known as Members): The virtual community allow users to create a topic that fits within the category of the forum (I.e.: gaming, off-topic, movies, technology, politics, etc), while other users respond to the topic with their insight or opinions. Some topics may contain hundreds of replies in chronological order.

• Moderators (or Mods): Mods enforce any forum rules and provide other duties such as the deletion of pornography or illegal discussions. Mods also ban users from the forum who violate rules by suspending the user’s account, or in serious cases, banning their physical IP address so that the user cannot access the website at all.

Cast System:

Note: Forums keep track of how many times a topic has been viewed and replied to. The amount of posts any given user makes is directly correlated to their reputation or title within the virtual community.

Interestingly enough, Internet Geeks subject themselves to a strict cast system. The cast system is usually based on tenure; The longer a user has been on the board, the better their reputation. For example, on YTMND.com forums, users have been posting derogatory topics to new members referred to as “06ers” (referring to the fact that they joined the community in 2006). One topic proclaims: “All 06ers shut the fuck up and get the fuck out (2006).” Additionally, members who post more topics and replies earn a higher “post count,” thus increasing tenure as well. However, users need to be aware of the fine line between posting enough and posting too much, lest they be called a “spammer.”

The hierarchy of the virtual community is as follows:

1. Administrators
2. Moderators
3. Users (Ranking based on tenure)
4. New Users
5. Lurkers
6. Spammers and trolls

Lurkers refer to people who loiter on the board and never post. Spammers refer to people who post senseless posts or advertisements. Trolls refer to people who post insulting comments in order to ignite an argument, otherwise known as a “flame war.”

Most forums are not a democracy. In fact, they are much closer to a Monarchy. Whatever the Administrator or Moderator says is typically the law of the forum. An example of this is Team Xbox Forums (TXB Forum Rules, 2006), where several interviews with prior members (Private Interviews, 2006) have revealed that any negative comments towards the staff, the forum, the parent company IGN, or even the Xbox console itself, resulted in a ban of membership.

It should also be noted that most people in the virtual community have developed a sort of “Stockholm Syndrome.” It’s not uncommon for users to act as if they are moderators themselves and notify moderators of any rule breakings created by fellow users. Some of these users spend all day patrolling the community so that they will be able to tell the admins and moderators of any wrong doings. Anyone who speaks (I.e.: Posts) within the group is subject to the scrutiny of all others within the group. Members, especially new members, are advised to tread softly when voicing their opinions, otherwise, they may be subject to malicious feedback or bans at any given moment.

Language:

According to the Urban Dictionary website (L337, 2005), Leet Speak is “A language in which numbers and symbols are put together to look like letters.” While most outsiders relate “L337 Sp33k” to Internet Geeks, most insiders will simply state that this is no longer the case and that leet speak is almost extinct. According to Lord Requiem (2002), an internet user, “Anyone using this type of speak in the present day in age is either a clueless net newbie who somehow thinks its still "cool" to speak this way,” or “a veteren net user who uses it to parody the type of people mentioned in example A.”

While this is true in most cases, some remnants of Internet jargon remain and are still highly used. Below is a list of the most commonly used phrases as defined by various Internet Geeks:

N00b: “A inexperienced and/or ignorant or unskilled person. Especially used in computer games.” Haha that n00b got pwned (Lord Emporer, 2003).

Pwned: “A common typo of owned that is used in the same way, or more sarcasticly to mock 1337 speak.” you faggots just got pwned (Pwner, 2005).

Teh: “For english speakers, this is a typo of 'the' turned into an overused deliberate typo of 'the' by leet speakers. They mostly use it for 'the', 'very', or both at the same time.” Teh cow says, 'moooooo' (Raboof, 2005).

Geek Values:

Internet Geeks maintain a multitude of values. However, the two values that are detailed in this ethnography are cognitive humor and comradery.

Cognitive Humor:

One major attribute of an Internet geek is their ability to create inside jokes and reference them during subsequent communications.

According to Steven Johnson’s “Everything Bad is Good for You” (2005), Gamers (and Internet Geeks) have a particular advantage due to the “cognitive virtues of gameplaying.”

This “cognitive humor” is evident throughout various forums and website communities. For example, on “Gaming-Age Forums,” whenever the word “retail” is used, another user will almost always mention the words “magazine rack.” While most people wouldn’t have a clue what this means, people on Gaming-Age know exactly what it refers to:

The magazine rack was right around the time Gamestop (a video game store) changed their open box return policy. Kinesis (a user) wanted to return an open-box game a few days after he bought it for the full store credit, but they told him they didn't do that anymore and would only give him the used game return price. He flipped out at the store clerk and flipped over the rack in rage, then posted about it on GAF (Gaming-age Forum). – Nerevar, a Gaming-Age Member (Magazine Racks and Such, 2006)

In some cases, users will simply post a picture of a magazine rack to maintain the inside joke.

You’re The Man Now, Dog:

In order to fully understand cognitive humor, you need to understand the website You’re The Man Now Dog.com.

You’re The Man Now Dog (YTMND) is a website created by Max Goldberg in 2001 (YTMND, 2006). YTMND covers Internet geek cognitive humor in one stroke.

Its roots were simple: The original website consisted of a juxtaposed photograph of actor Sean Connery with large 3-d text, "YOURE THE MAN NOW DOG.COM," and a soundbite of Connery repeatedly saying "You're the man now, dog" from the film Finding Forrester (YTMND, 2006).

However, it soon became an internet phenomenon. Goldberg allowed other users to create their own YTMNDs by utilizing the same format that he had used to create his own Sean Connery page.

As more and more users came aboard, fads began to develop.

Fads in the internet community refer to an idea or a craze that starts off as one simple image, article, or idea and later evolves and merges into other fads for maximum comical effect.

One highly popular example was the “All your Base Are Belong to Us (Wikipedia, 2006)” craze in 2001. What started as a poor English translation of a Japanese video game named “Zero Wing,” later became a full-on media craze as more and more Internet Geeks altered real-life images to include the phrase.

According to Wikipedia (All Your Base Are Belong to Us, 2005), “(All Your Base) is interesting because it demonstrated the Internet's power to quickly spread idiosyncratic messages that would never have been covered by the traditional mass media.”

YTMND is an extension of the “All Your Base” fad. By allowing users to create their own pages, Goldberg unleashed a new animal on the Internet. YTMND allowed users to make obscure references to prior fads, merge them with existing fads and create whole new hybrid fads. In fact, some of the hybrid fads become more popular than the originals.

http://timetraveler.ytmnd.com/

This image, in conjunction with the eighties song, “Push it to The Limit” (Engleman, 1983) sparked a whole mythology surrounding the character referred to as “Safety” or “Mullet Man.” Variants include “Hitler’s Safety Not guaranteed,” “Ming Dynasty Safety Not Guaranteed,” and so on. Recent variants include a Dick Cheney hunting variation:

http://cheneysafety.ytmnd.com/

This type of cognitive and recurring humor fuels the Internet geek.

Comradery:

Despite the harsh environment of virtual communities and Internet forums, Internet Geeks have been known to stand together when various issues arise.

Take MikeRoweSoft.com, for instance. In 2003, a Canadian student by the name of Mike Rowe created a website under his own name and thought it would be clever to add the word “soft” to the end of it. In 2004, he was slapped with a lawsuit by the real Microsoft claiming trademark infringement. When Mike Rowe went to the press, he was instantly contacted by a bevy of supporters across the internet who donated over $6,000.00 to his defense fund (Canadian teen who battled Microsoft, 2004). Mike eventually settled and gave the money to a local charity, but the support of the Internet community did not go unnoticed.

Another instance of comradery occurred when Miami lawyer, Jack Thompson, an opponent of video games, declared that he would pay $10,000 to a charity if someone created a game in which a disgruntled father of a killing victim takes his revenge upon the games industry and its executives. When a group of developers published the game, Jack Thompson retracted his promise (Jack Thompson, 2006).

The creators of Penny-Arcade, a popular web-based comic, decided to donate the $10,000 in Jack Thompson’s name to the ESA Foundation. The note attached to the donation stated, “For Jack Thompson Because Jack Thompson won't” (A Modest Video Game Proposal, 2006). Thompson immmediately retaliated with legal threats. Users on the Penny-Arcade site joined together and sent hundreds of letters to The Florida Bar requesting to have Thompsons legal license removed. They suceeded in having him withdrawn from his case, Strickland vs. Sony, on November 8th 2005 (Steel, 2005).

Currently, Penny-Arcade runs “Child’s Play” (2006), a charity that raised over half a million dollars for sick kids across North America during the 2005 holiday.

Additional Research:

According to my personal survey, Most Internet Geeks are video gamers, have significant others, are students with part-time jobs, and are split on religion (Massey, 2006)

Methodology:

www.gamedreamz.com was used as a base of operations while collecting data and private interviews. Surveys were posted at www.gaming-age.com and www.gamedreamz.com. The users on www.ytmnd.com and www.gaming-age.com were monitored to collect behavior patterns. Data and facts were collected as a result of personal experience, personal research, and sources listed in the Literature Sources. The resources on Wikipedia, an invaluable creation of Internet Geeks, were used for the bulk of this research.

Conclusions:

Internet Geeks define a unique culture with their willingness to self govern, their distinct language use, their willingness to help others in the community, and their use of cognitive humor. However, it is more important to realize that Internet Geeks are not confined by traditional borders. To define Internet Geeks as a microculture or a macroculture would be incorrect. Their customs transcend states and countries into other cultures throughout the world forming one huge “mega-culture.”

As time goes by, it will be interesting to monitor the effects of this “mega-culture” as more and more nationalities, ethnicities, and sub-cultures are consumed by the digital age.

Literature Sources:

133t (2006). Retrieved February 21, 2006 from Urban Dictionary website: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=1337

A Modest Video Game Proposal (2006). Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Wikipedia website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Video_Game_Proposal

All 06ers shut the fuck up and get the fuck out (2006) Retrieved February 23, 2006 from YTMND Forums website: http://forums.ytmnd.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5

All Your Base Are Belong To Us (2006) Retrieved February 21, 2006 from Gamespy/Planet Tribes website: http://allyourbase.planettribes.gamespy.com/story.shtml

All Your Base Are Belong To Us (2006). Retrieved February 21, 2006 from Wikipedia website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base

Associated Press (2004). Canadian teen who battled Microsoft over Web name donates leftover defense fund to charity. Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Sign on San Diego website: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/computing/20040324-0706-mikerowesoft.html

Child’s Play (2006). Retrieved February 16, 2006 from Child’s Play Video Game Charity website: http://www.childsplaycharity.org/

Engleman, Paul (1983). Push It To The Limit. Scarface Original Soundtrack, Geffen Records.

Geek (2006). Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Wikipedia website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geek

Internet Forum (2006). Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Wikipedia website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_forum

Jack Thompson (2006). Retrieved February 21, 2006 from Wikipedia website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_thompson

Johnson, Steven (2005). Everything Bad Is Good For You: How Today’s Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter. New York: Riverhead Books

Lord Emperor (2003) n00b. Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Urban Dictionary website: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=n00b

Lord Requiem (2002) 1337. Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Urban Dictionary website: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=1337

Massey, Adam (2006). Survey. Retrieved February 20, 2006 from GameDreamZ.com Forum website: http://www.gamedreamz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3516

Massey, Adam (2006). Survey. Retrieved February 13, 2006 from Gaming-Age Forum website: http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=85915

MikeRoweSoft (2006). Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Wikipedia website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MikeRoweSoft.com

Miller, Barbara (2005). Cultural Anthropology: Third Edition. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Nerevar (2006) Magazine Racks and Such (2006). Retrieved February 25, 2006 from Gaming-Age Forum website: http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?p=2838097#post2838097

Private Interviews (2006) Retreived February 25, 2006 from GameDreamZ Forum website: http://www.gamedreamz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1952

Pwner (2005) Pwned. Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Urban Dictionary website: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pwned

Raboof (2005) teh. Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Urban Dictionary website: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teh

Rushmore (2006). Gamestop refused to cancel my BLACK preorder until I bring back the demo WTF. Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Gaming-Age Forums:
http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=84553&highlight=gamestop

Steel, Wade (2005). Jack Thompson Withdraws from GTA Case. Retrieved February 23, 2006 from IGN website: http://xbox.ign.com/articles/665/665357p1.html

TXB Forum Rules (2006). Retrieved February 23, 2006 from Team Xbox Forums website. http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=85759

YTMND (2006). Retrieved February 21, 2006 from Wikipedia website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ytmnd
 
"Whoa, whoa, things just got too real!"

petergriffin.jpg




Just kidding, interest read. Who knew GAF was good for something besides cheap thrills.
 

BuG

Member
Farore said:
*bookmarking*

I don't have time to read it right now but I sure will :) ...
Same. Only replying for now to put in my subscribed threads, will read shortly.
 

emomoonbase

I'm free 2night after my LARPing guild meets.
Interesting. You did a good job on breaking down some of the nuances that appear in many forums, but for revealing our secrets to the world at large you have been assessed a security risk and will now be promptly killed.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
good thing you went into YTMND, also.

shoulda thrown in some info about those damn owls, man. that just completely typifies the internet meme's you were talkin' about.
 

etiolate

Banned
miyuru said:
Isn't it Caste system?

Just lookin' out for ya! :)

Yeah, it's caste.

And your rankings are off

1. Administrators
2. Moderators
3. Users (Ranking based on tenure)
4. New Users
5. Lurkers
6. Spammers and trolls

Spammers and trolls
This caste is at least third in ranks, but more likely completely outside the realm of social classes. If you look at a trolls power and influence, they rank higher than the average user. Infact, in internet communities the most hated person is in actuality the most powerful. Internet communities need a focal point, without the focal point they turn on each other and quickly dissolve. The troll/whipping boy is the focal point.
 
Teh: “For english speakers, this is a typo of 'the' turned into an overused deliberate typo of 'the' by leet speakers. They mostly use it for 'the', 'very', or both at the same time.” Teh cow says, 'moooooo' (Raboof, 2005).


A perfect time to mention your old buddy TEH hamburglar.
 

-=DoAvl=-

Member
ethnoWHAT?!

Wikipedia:
Ethnography (from the Greek ethnos = nation and graphein = writing) refers to the qualitative description of human social phenomena, based on fieldwork. Ethnography is a holistic research method founded in the idea that a system's properties cannot necessarily be accurately understood independently of each other. The genre has both formal and historical connections to travel writing and colonial office reports. Several academic traditions, in particular the constructivist and relativist paradigms, claim ethnography as a valid research method



ooohhh....




.... waht?
 

way more

Member
I always wanted to write the great American expose of the internet forum. When I first heard of GAF of was amazed by the community that was created in a haven of video game lovers who required refrences to every bit of information given. No opinion could be given without sufficient resources to verify the claim among a internet savy, and well educated population. A properly written sociolgy essay would deserve at least 5 pages in the New Yorker.

Your paper is not it but you are on the right track. Using words like Fag and Fuck probably will not fly with who ever grades your paper and youdo not dumb it down enough. I think adding values which the community respects is needed.
 

MrSardonic

The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
ouch, all the reification and hierarchical categorization of "culture(s)" was painful
 

explorer

Member
Thanks for all the comments so far. This is an ongoing project for me. I'm integrating these results into a much bigger paper for 209.

Correct me if I'm wrong. I thought "Caste" referred to something you were born into....with no way of moving up or down, whereas a "cast system" is imposed by the community and is more flexible. Cast Am Cry.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
explorer said:
Correct me if I'm wrong. I thought "Caste" referred to something you were born into....with no way of moving up or down, whereas a "cast system" is imposed by the community and is more flexible. Cast Am Cry.

You thought wrong.

<checks dictionary>

Yup, definitely thought wrong.

Unless...

Code:
Researcher explorer = ResearcherFactory.createResearcher("explorer");
if (explorer instanceof Geek) {
  setGeek((Geek) explorer);
}

Hope you don't mind criticism, because I'm going to be negative about your ethnography. It seems way too shallow to me, skimming across a disparate range of subjects that seem more to be excuses to say 'fuck' and drop in inside jokes than to actually probe the subject material. There's a strong tendency to overgeneralise (it's far from a universal truth that forums accord respect based on tenure, for example). Your discussion is actually of a much narrower community than the one you describe - web forums of the sort you discuss are only a very small subset of what I'd view as 'Internet Geeks'.

So:

C-

6.8

Not rock. Potato. 3/10 See Me

Sorry.
 
I missed a deadline recently for a paper on ethnographic research. Perhaps we're on similar courses....

I'll check this out later. Too sleepy after work at the moment. I'll bump when I do... cheers!
 

human5892

Queen of Denmark
Citing Wikipedia? Does your professor approve?

Overall, a nice paper and an interesting read...as iapetus said it was a bit shallow, but perhaps your assignment did not require in-depth ruminations.
 

explorer

Member
iapetus said:
So:

C-

6.8

Not rock. Potato. 3/10 See Me

Sorry.

C- ? So it's as good as Ninja Gaiden? :lol I don't mind criticism at all. The bar was set low on this paper. I actually exceeded the page limit by 2 pages. It should have been even more "shallow" according to the teacher. Nevertheless, I'll probably get a perfect score. Wish I could say the same for my other classes....

However, I challenge you to write a "deeper" paper. Then meaybe i can cite you next time for my next report.
 

MrSardonic

The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
He's right though, it is shallow, tenuous and generalizing. If you're going to write a short paper like that, then you want to focus on a much smaller topic that you can provide layered insights on and use a variety of analytical tools/perspectives. You start off the ethnography with an extremely brief description of what a "geek" is and assume that everyone using GAF is one of them - it would have been more interesting to write an ethnography on what is a "geek" and how is such a social category viewed and used by people on GAF...for example

You should also not try to situate these things within a rigid hierarchy of cultural forms and try not to reify culture (i.e. don't treat it like a "thing") - read Adam Kuper's book "Culture" for starters :)
 

Ichirou

Banned
No offense, but if I were your college professor, I would fail you for using Wikipedia as a source. It's not reliable and not valid because it is constantly changing and is subject to editing and inclusion of false information.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Ichirou_Oogami said:
No offense, but if I were your college professor, I would fail you for using Wikipedia as a source. It's not reliable and not valid because it is constantly changing and is subject to editing and inclusion of false information.

No source is entirely reliable. Appropriate use of an 'unreliable' source isn't a problem.
 

Shompola

Banned
Ichirou_Oogami said:
No offense, but if I were your college professor, I would fail you for using Wikipedia as a source. It's not reliable and not valid because it is constantly changing and is subject to editing and inclusion of false information.

Would the same professor also fail a person who uses an encyclopedia, say Brittanica as a source?
 

Ichirou

Banned
iapetus said:
No source is entirely reliable. Appropriate use of an 'unreliable' source isn't a problem.

Oh, I didn't know you were his professor. I guess if you say it's okay then I'll have to take your word for it. :p
 

Ichirou

Banned
Shompola said:
Would the same professor also fail a person who uses an encyclopedia, say Brittanica as a source?

Well, first off, if you're doing a college paper, you really shouldn't be using any encyclopedia extensively - that's high school level stuff.

Second of all, comparing Wikipedia and Britannica is like comparing apples and oranges. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and is constantly changing. As such, there's no guarantee that the information you collect from there will even BE there by the time the professor checks out the link. It might have been deleted, reorganized, or moved. What's more, let's say you want to use Wikipedia as a resource - what's to stop you from writing an entry and then just quoting yourself? As such, it's completely invalid and unreliable.
 

MrSardonic

The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
using Wikipedia (or Brittanica even) for the "bulk" of your ethnographic research is not acceptable, and it doesn't produce ethnography. If you are studying a community of people then you find out what THEY think a "geek" is and the social settings in which you observe this category being employed. You look example of how new phrases come about (search for old threads), you ask people about how they use these phrases, you look at how they are used in social relations...blah blah blah

And if you are going to provide anthropological definitions of terms such as "internet forum", then the least you could do is reference other anthropological texts about the internet - of which there are many - to provide anthropological understandings of what an internet forum is.

You cited, what, one anthropological text? You could have at least read:

Miller D. & Slater D. (2001) The Internet: an ethnographic approach. Oxford: Berg

Is this just an early assignment in your first year? If so, it's no big deal, but it sucked
 

Ichirou

Banned
MrSardonic said:
using Wikipedia (or Brittanica even) for the "bulk" of your ethnographic research is not acceptable, and it doesn't produce ethnography. If you are studying a community of people then you find out what THEY think a "geek" is and the social settings in which you observe this category being employed. You look example of how new phrases come about (search for old threads), you ask people about how they use these phrases, you look at how they are used in social relations...blah blah blah

And if you are going to provide anthropological definitions of terms such as "internet forum", then the least you could do is reference other anthropological texts about the internet - of which there are many - to provide anthropological understandings of what an internet forum is.

You cited, what, one anthropological text? You could have at least read:

Miller D. & Slater D. (2001) The Internet: an ethnographic approach. Oxford: Berg

Is this just an early assignment in your first year? If so, it's no big deal, but it sucked

Thanks for putting it better than I ever could.
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
Iapetus said:
No source is entirely reliable. Appropriate use of an 'unreliable' source isn't a problem.
I beg to differ kind sir. Sources I write are always perfectly reliable - it's just the damn compiler and OS that refuse to run my code the way I intended it to. :)
 

MrSardonic

The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
i'll just add that you should read Malinowski's and Boas' ethnographies from 80+ years ago to understand the major limitations of using surveys and generalized sources to generate anthropological understanding
 

Shompola

Banned
Ichirou_Oogami said:
Well, first off, if you're doing a college paper, you really shouldn't be using any encyclopedia extensively - that's high school level stuff.

Second of all, comparing Wikipedia and Britannica is like comparing apples and oranges. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and is constantly changing. As such, there's no guarantee that the information you collect from there will even BE there by the time the professor checks out the link. It might have been deleted, reorganized, or moved. What's more, let's say you want to use Wikipedia as a resource - what's to stop you from writing an entry and then just quoting yourself? As such, it's completely invalid and unreliable.

Ok I just wanted to know your opinion as I personally think that wikipedia is really not worse than any encyclopedia... Britannica is just as much unreliable as a source.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Ichirou_Oogami said:
Oh, I didn't know you were his professor. I guess if you say it's okay then I'll have to take your word for it. :p

You mean you didn't see me in the staff room? I'm shocked. :D I have every much right as you to have an opinion on this. More, in fact, because my opinion is better.
 

Ichirou

Banned
iapetus said:
You mean you didn't see me in the staff room? I'm shocked. :D I have every much right as you to have an opinion on this. More, in fact, because my opinion is better.

You have a right to your opinion, as long as it doesn't contradict facts. The fact is, go to any university or institution of higher learning and try to hand in a paper where your primary source is an online encyclopedia which can be modified by anyone and you'll get a failing grade - that is, after you're laughed out of the classroom.

I'm not denying the importance of a project like wikipedia, but the truth is, the information contained there is not academically valid.
 

Zaptruder

Banned
Ichirou_Oogami said:
You have a right to your opinion, as long as it doesn't contradict facts. The fact is, go to any university or institution of higher learning and try to hand in a paper where your primary source is an online encyclopedia which can be modified by anyone and you'll get a failing grade - that is, after you're laughed out of the classroom.

I'm not denying the importance of a project like wikipedia, but the truth is, the information contained there is not academically valid.

Wikipedia is a powerful tool... probably the best bit (for researchers) is that they have references, so you can go and check out some of the references yourself.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Ichirou_Oogami said:
You have a right to your opinion, as long as it doesn't contradict facts. The fact is, go to any university or institution of higher learning and try to hand in a paper where your primary source is an online encyclopedia which can be modified by anyone and you'll get a failing grade - that is, after you're laughed out of the classroom.

The fact is, you claimed someone should be failed for using Wikipedia as a source at all, not as their primary source. The fact is, I never claimed Wikipedia should be used as a primary source, just that insisting that anyone should be failed for daring to use it at all is a ludicrous attitude. And one that you seem to be backing away from now, so everyone can be happy.
 

Flynn

Member
You should watch out for statements like this:

In order to fully understand cognitive humor, you need to understand the website You’re The Man Now Dog.com.

It's just not true. I'm sure there are people in the world, professionals in their fields, that fully understand cognitive humor without ever having seen the site.

Your sentence should probably read:

The formation and explosion in popularity of the website YTMND.com presents a unique window into the world of cognitive humor.

I understand what you were trying to do with the line, you're trying to set up the importance of YTMND for your argument, but for an ethnography piece, I think you need to be way more reserved in your statements.

Right now your writing is rife with generalizations and overstatements like the one I cited. I'd go through the piece and read each line asking yourself, "Is this really true?"

I admire your efforts, though. It's evident that you've put quite a bit of thought, work and effort into this. These cultures are worth studying. Keep up the good work and be sure to ask yourself tough questions at every turn. Think about how your worst critic would view your writing and try to craft your work in such a way that it deflects every possible attack.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Ichirou_Oogami said:
As such, there's no guarantee that the information you collect from there will even BE there by the time the professor checks out the link. It might have been deleted, reorganized, or moved.

Believe it or not, I gave some thought to that issue:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fish&oldid=251117

Welcome to the entry on 'Fish' as it was in January 2002. :D

Ichirou_Oogami said:
What's more, let's say you want to use Wikipedia as a resource - what's to stop you from writing an entry and then just quoting yourself?

Absolutely nothing. There are all sorts of ways of falsifying sources, most of which you won't get away with in the long term. With that specific example, the entry would most likely be reverted as vandalism or similar, which would be obvious from the history if anyone chose to check up on the source, just as incorrectly citing an obscure periodical is going to get you caught as soon as anyone decides to check what you write against the contents of that periodical.

Where we're both in agreement, though, is in agreeing with Mr Sardonic's can't-be-QFT-often-enough comments:

If you are studying a community of people then you find out what THEY think a "geek" is and the social settings in which you observe this category being employed. You look example of how new phrases come about (search for old threads), you ask people about how they use these phrases, you look at how they are used in social relations...blah blah blah

And if you are going to provide anthropological definitions of terms such as "internet forum", then the least you could do is reference other anthropological texts about the internet - of which there are many - to provide anthropological understandings of what an internet forum is.

To be fair to explorer, he did do at least some of what the first paragraph advocates (you can find the thread in the gaming forum, I believe) but unfortunately none of it shows through in the finished work.
 

MrSardonic

The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
Using Wikipedia in this way for an anthropological or ethnographic study is simply not suitable in my opinion, and certainly not to this extent. Explorer's work is obviously a very early attempt, flawed in the ways that has been discussed, but that is to be expected and you learn from your early mistakes. As he reads more theory and gets familar with certain forms of ethnographic methodology and scope, he can look back and laugh at how shit his early stuff was. We've all been there and you go through it your entire life!

Anyone know what subject explorer is studying? Is it straight social/cultural anthropology or sociology? Good luck explorer, draw on the criticism you get back and don't be shy of the academic texts ;)
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
MrSardonic said:
Using Wikipedia in this way for an anthropological or ethnographic study is simply not suitable in my opinion, and certainly not to this extent.

I agree entirely. My reaction was to the kneejerk "I would fail you for using Wikipedia as a source" comment. It's fine IMO to use Wikipedia as a source, ideally with supporting evidence from elsewhere (which I'd like for any source), and always bearing in mind the nature of the medium. It's not fine to use it as the source for a large portion of a paper.

I also maintain that lack of focus is a more serious problem with the paper as presented here than which sources are used. You can replace the sources with sources that are as reliable as you like, and it will still be weak and disjointed.
 

Oldschoolgamer

The physical form of blasphemy
Take their criticism and work with it. Trust me. It will help you in the long run.

I'm not saying I could have done a better job, but they have some good points. I also wouldn't rely on Wikepedia that much...some proffesors would probably have a huge problem with it.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Oldschoolgamer said:
I also wouldn't rely on Wikepedia that much...some proffesors would probably have a huge problem with it.

That's probably a good approach to take - whether it's right to object so violently to citing Wikipedia or not is a moot point. If some people are going to take that attitude (and they are) then you might as well protect yourself against it. Use Wikipedia in your research and find more conventional sources for the same information once you've got the details - which has the double benefit of avoiding anti-Wikipedia feelings and verifying what it tells you.
 

Oldschoolgamer

The physical form of blasphemy
iapetus said:
That's probably a good approach to take - whether it's right to object so violently to citing Wikipedia or not is a moot point. If some people are going to take that attitude (and they are) then you might as well protect yourself against it. Use Wikipedia in your research and find more conventional sources for the same information once you've got the details - which has the double benefit of avoiding anti-Wikipedia feelings and verifying what it tells you.

Basically. Backup sources FTW! Try using a database as well.
 

Ichirou

Banned
iapetus said:
The fact is, you claimed someone should be failed for using Wikipedia as a source at all, not as their primary source. The fact is, I never claimed Wikipedia should be used as a primary source, just that insisting that anyone should be failed for daring to use it at all is a ludicrous attitude. And one that you seem to be backing away from now, so everyone can be happy.

No, I'm not backing away from it. Wikipedia = fail. :p
 
• Administration: Administrative personal create the theme for the website and forum and integrate the web address, the DNS, the design, and the server into a virtual community.

Should be 'personnel'. I noticed a few other mistakes here and there, but that's the one I remembered vividly after skimming your paper. Perhaps do a little proofreading if you haven't already submitted this paper for grading.

By the sounds of it, your teacher wasn't expecting too much from this assignment so perhaps GAF's being a little harsh. I definitely would've focused on a smaller topic, used less generalizations, and avoided cliches (starting a paper off with a definition? I've never done an ethnography before, so maybe it's ok here, but try to avoid doing that), but it's not a horrible paper.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom