Be
sure to post the four digit course section at the top of your blog
posting. There is no need to include the ENC 1101 part; Just put the
four digits of the course section. After you post the course number, you
are welcome to give your posting a title if you so choose.
Both of the readings from week ten deal with identity construction on some level. Consider "The Psychology of Cyber Space" by Suler, and explore your own online identity. Consider your level of disinhibition or inhibition as you enter into discussion in online environments. At this point, you should already have a collection of communicative instances from the community you are a part of. Consider how you or your friends behave in online environments. What accounts for some of these differences in the variant identities you assume in an online space or in online spaces? Your initial posting should demonstrate a sense of critical thinking with regard to your inflective identity in online spaces, and you should also connect or use the ideas from the Suler reading to help frame your own self-analysis.
_____________________________________________________________
In a second section, discuss what it means to have authority within an online discourse community you are a part of. What sense do you have of yourself as an authority within this community? What actions have you taken that have improved your social capital within the online community you are in? On the other hand, has there been anything you have done that seems to have reduced your social capital within the community?
Your original posting for this blog is due no later than Sunday, 10/21/2012, by 11:59pm (Eastern Standard Time).
Your response to a peer's posting is due no later than Tuesday, 10/23/2012, by 11:59pm (Eastern Standard Time).
In the article, Suler says that he sees himself as "having come full circle" throughout the decade researching cyberspace. He started out researching websites that used imagery to communicate. People created avatars and were able to display their personalities and interact this way which Suler was fascinated by. He later got into studying addiction to the Internet, text communication, behaviors online, and psychotherapy in cyberspace. Now, he has come back to studying the use of images online once again. Throughout my experience of using the Internet, I would say that my online identity has gone through many phases. When I was introduced to the social media through myspace, I'll admit that I wasn't very wise with the things I posted or the people I added. I just wanted to have a cool profile background with songs that I knew other people liked. I basically added anyone without knowing them previously and my grammar was terrible. I guess you can say I was just inexperienced and wanting attention. Two years later I decided to join Facebook and I was so confused when I first began. Everything looked so plain and boring and I kept asking myself, "How can this be more popular than Myspace?" To still show my personality, I would post a lot of pictures and statuses to make myself seem more interesting. It almost became like a popularity contest to see who could have the most friends and likes on pictures and stuff. So I found myself once again adding people that I didn't talk to but this time I made sure I at least knew who they were in person. More recently, I've taken a more mature identity while using Facebook. I deleted all the people I didn't talk to, I stopped posting unnecessary pictures of myself (mirror pictures), and I have stopped posting statuses about myself to "show off" or get attention. I join groups that are of interest to me like the psychology group at UCF and I make sure I use correct grammar and language that's not provocative. I am more aware of myself and who's watching me now. You're still able to get a sense of who I am but as I try to still to post funny and interesting statuses, memes etc. Most of my friends are a whole different story. A lot of them are still in that "attention seeking" stage and now that they've entered college, they feel the need to post pictures of all the drinking and partying that they do which I think is really unnecessary. I know a lot of my friends are those people who like to put their whole life in Facebook for everyone to see so you can tell that their intentions are a lot more different than mine. Some of them are just unaware of some of the consequences for posting the wrong stuff and some don't care at all. I think the level of maturity accounts for the differences in our online identities.
ReplyDelete________________________________________________
Having authority in an online community can have different meanings. I personally believe that it means having a lot of followers (not in the sense of followers like on twitter or instagram) but followers as in having people who view your page and interact with you because they gain something out of it. I wouldn't say I have much authority in the online community because I am more to myself and I go online to follow others not necessarily to have them follow me. Pretty much the changes I talked about in the 1st section of this posting has increased my social capital as I have gained a lot from making those changes. I join groups to learn about things related to my major and life which has helped me learn more about myself and to grow from it. I don't think I know of anything that has decreased my social capital up to now.
I thought it was interesting that you talked about the famous mirror pictures that was a really big thing when Mypsace came out. I liked how you talked about Suler's research on imagery.I found it interesting how you talked about how you thought of Myspace as a popularity contest and you would post stuff to get attention. I think that your definition of having followers such as people who you interact with the most. I never really thought of it that way.
DeleteI agree with what you said about things being a popularity contest. I think a lot of people use the internet as a place to portray themselves as being popular or interesting. For Facebook this can be very evident. People try to add as many friends as possible or post "interesting" statuses that will garner likes.
Delete0037
ReplyDeleteIn The Psychology of Cyberspace, Suler explains why you can be who ever you want to be online. I completely agree with his statement “people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldn't ordinarily say or do in the face-to-face world.” Most people relate this to the negative comments they see online, but this is also represented in other ways.
My online identity changes based on what website, blog, social network, or video I am watching. For example the only things I ever post on Facebook or Twitter are jokes, pictures that I’ve taken, or inspirational quotes. When I comment on YouTube videos my comments change based on what video I am watching and how I am feeling at that time. The thing about social networking sites today is that people update them 24/7 and they posts about what is going on in their lives at that very second. A look at my Facebook and Twitter news feeds shows that a majority of my friends are frustrated with the UCF Math department after their test today. This shows inhibition because the majority, if not all, of my friends won’t say anything to their teacher about it. They feel more uninhibited and they express themselves more openly about the test online with their friends because they feel some dissociation with their online identities. I would have to say that the majority of my friends on Facebook post negative things or complain about the events of their everyday lives. This relates to what Suler says about benign disinhibition because people reveal secret emotion, fears, and wishes online. I use YouTube a lot and when I go to comment on videos I always am saying something funny or talking about what I liked about the video. I don’t know if it’s the majority of users or it just seems that way, but too many people have negative comments on YouTube. I believe that the main reason for this is the fact that they are behind a computer screen and not face to face with the person in the video. Suler talks about this in the article, saying that you have invisibility when online because all people can see is your username and the photo you have on your profile. The online identities people take depends on the community they are a part of, if your on a website devoted to a healthy lifestyle you will see a lot of people with determination, enthusiasm, and encouragement. My online identity changes depending on what mood I am in, what website I am on, and how the other people in that community are behaving.
--------------------------------
Authority in online communities definitely depends on how many subscribers, followers, and friends you have. To have authority in an online community means that there are people listening to what you are saying and doing what you are telling them to do. Authority could also mean that you get a lot of likes, retweets, or favorites on your posts. This shows that people are not just listening to what you are saying, but they are also enjoying what you do. The way to gain authority in an online community is to post funny, unique, or relatable things so that people will enjoy what you say. This will give you more followers and friends and therefore give you more authority. Things that will reduce your social capital would be posting things that are not relatable. Saying things that are offensive or against the values of your friends will make you lose your authority.
I really liked that you talked about Youtube. I can not tell you how many negative comments i have seen on youtube while watching a video. I also see that a lot of people click the thumbs down button on that comment thus bringing it to the top of the comments. I liked that you used the healthy website example. Everyone seems to be wanting to eat healthy now so more and more health websites are popping up. I also like your definitions of authority. I saw that you said people who are your "friends" will lose authority if they post an unrelatable status. But if on youtube when you post, how do you lose authority? You aren't friends with those people, and therefore your definition would become invalid when applied. But i do, again, agree with your definition.
DeleteIn Suler’s article he talks about the way that people want to portray themselves online. Some people put a guard up and others are open. However people only expose what they want others to see considering most people interact with friends online. Suler talks about the alternate experiences of people being both guarded and open when online. When I began using social media I was very young and naïve. When I first started out on Twitter and Facebook I wasn’t sure of the purpose that they served. On Twitter everyone I followed was a celebrity so I would always try and post something appealing or interesting hoping that would retweet my status. On Facebook I was always paranoid about who read my statuses or looked at my pictures because I knew there was always someone watching. My behavior on MySpace and Facebook were completely different. On MySpace I was more interactive with people I didn’t know. I can relate to Suler’s article on this aspect on disinhibition. He talks about how people act and how they behave in conversations. I was able to hide things over the internet so I may have portrayed myself as someone I really wasn’t because I knew the other person didn’t know me and we would most likely never meet. I don’t believe my personality changed on purpose but holding a conversation over the internet doesn’t give you the opportunity to express emotions or feelings. Therefore my words over the internet could be misinterpreted. However when I became older and Facebook blew up I was more conscious of my behavior, I realized that I wasn’t going to talk to people I didn’t know anymore or add strangers. I only added friends that I knew. I only posted statuses that were simple but nothing personal. On MySpace I remember there was a section that you could talk about yourself and self-interests. At first I remember being very personal but as I got older I realized people were reading it and that’s how they saw me as a person so I simply cut my about me section short and kept it to a bare minimum. This carried over to Facebook I always made sure I wasn’t to revealing about my personal life. My pictures were appropriate and my statuses were simply just quotes.
ReplyDelete_______________________________________________________________________________
I think having a lot of authority online means that having control of other peoples reactions to certain things on the internet. For example I think some kind of authority plays on people who get 50 likes on majority of their statuses on Facebook or a picture with 100 likes even if the picture or status doesn’t have much meaning. Also how celebrities get on Twitter and post Tweets along the line of “you should follow this person” or “retweet this if you like so and so”. It’s amazing to see how many of their followers take into that and actually retweet and follow certain people that celebrities demand. Also when people on Facebook share a picture saying” share if you believe this is wrong” and people actually do it. Your news feed blows up with this picture. I think that a lot of people don’t see it as authority they see it as a just a way to communicate.
Brittan Petty
ReplyDeleteOM08
Part 1
After reading the article “The Psychology of Cyberspace: The Online Disinhibition Effect,” I have to say that I completely agree with Suler. He explains that people can be whoever they want, say what they want, and feel what they want online. Benign disinhibition, as Suler explains in the opening paragraph, is when people reveal secret emotions, fears, and wishes; or they may reveal unusual acts of kindness and generosity. On the other hand, toxic disinhibition happens when “out spills rude language and harsh criticisms, anger, hatred, and even threats.” The difference between the two disinhibitions is this: benign disinhibition is an attempt to understand and explore oneself, to work through problems, and find new ways of being. Toxic disinhibition is simply a blind catherarsis, an acting out of unsavory needs and wishes without any personal growth at all. (Page 1, p 3)
My online identity is all the same across the board as of right now, but it has certainly changed since I was first introduced back in 8th grade. When I first started using Myspace in 8th grade, I remember that I wanted the best profile. I always changed my profile based on what “in.” I would post a bulletin to start a conversation with other people, post comments on profiles, and post pictures that would interest everyone. When I started using Facebook in 9th grade, I was doing the same thing as I did on Myspace. I wanted to have the best page. I would post funny statuses, pictures, and change my profile based on what was “in.” As I grew older and matured more, I started to care less and less about what people were thinking. I posted what was “on my mind.” Now in college, I post very rarely, but when I do post, it is usually about something that has happened to me during the day and what I am about to do. I never really go on twitter, but recently I posted about having a bunch of homework and that it never seems to stop. I would say that my identity online doesn’t really change with my identity in the real world. I say what I feel in reality and also online.
My friend’s identity on seems to change. They post more negative things online and seem to complain about more than they do in real life. This is what Suley would refer to as “benign disinhibition.” An example of this would be about the presidential debates. My friends never seemed to care about who was president, but now they are all hyped up about it online because everyone else is. In reality, my friends would never talk bout this, but since they are online and it is a hot topic, they feel more inclined to post about it.
In conclusion, I believe that people’s identity, even mine sometimes, changes. It changes based on what kind of mood people are in, what the hot topic is at the moment, what community you are apart of, and how other people behave. “…They loosen up, feel more uninhibited, express themselves more openly,” certainly applies to everyone and their identity.
Brittan Petty
ReplyDeleteOM08
Part 2
Having authority in an online community can mean numerous things. Wenger’s theory of authority states that authority is “continually negotiated within communities of practice.” He goes on to state that, “authority is bestowed by institutions, can be just as easily withdrawn by those same institutions or its members, and must be maintained through appropriate expressions of authority.” I have to say that I agree with this definition of authority. On Facebook, authority is based on how many friends you have, how many likes you have on a status or picture, and how many reposts you have. On twitter, it is based on the amount of followers, retweets, and favorites you have. On Instagram, authority is based on how many followers you have and how many likes you receive on a picture. To gain authority in an online world is, in my opinion, very easy, but it is also very easy to lose it. Wardle states that, “a person can understand clearly how to speak in ways that are acceptable in particular circumstances. Authority comes to language from outside. It at most represents this authority, manifests and symbolizes it.” By tailoring your language to fit that specific online community, you can gain authority (posting/tweeting relevant topics.) On the other hand, if you don’t tailor your language to fit a specific online community, you lose authority (posting/tweeting irrelevant topics.)
0119
ReplyDeletePt.1
After reading John Suler’s “The Psychology of Cyberspace”, I have really taken a different perspective to social media and other web sites where there is human to human interaction. Everyone has that one person on Facebook that always trash talk to other people, and consider themselves experts at life. For example I’ve noticed during the presidential debates, almost everyone seems to become a political expert, which sparks some heated debates. I thought about why everyone sees a need to post there political statuses and I believe Suler hit the nail on the head when he talks about the invisibility factor. When people say things, they know that nobody can see them and they know the worst that can happen to them is somebody writes something negative back to them.
I have also found this same thing to be true not only in social media sites, but also on sports websites. Just the other day I read an article on ESPN.com about how Tim Tebow is trademarking “Tebowing”. After I read the article I went and explored comments, and once again you can see the invisibility factor at work. One person said “maybe he should try winning. He has a large ego for a man who can’t even wash tom Brady's jock strap. Tebow is a joke his skills where left in collage where is team made him look so good. the fact the worlds even talking about him makes me sick.” I believe this is the only instance this person would have said this. If there was a round table discussion on this article between the people that commented on the article, the context of this comment would be very different.
Pt. 2
ReplyDeleteI believe having authority in an online community can mean many different things. You can judge it on how many friends/followers you have, How many people like stuff that post, or even how many comments you get. These are all good ways, but I believe the best way to measure your authority is how many people agree with what you are saying. You might get a lot of comments on one post, but they could be all negative which means you don’t have much authority in the conversation. If people usually tend to agree with what you’re saying, you will have more authority and have the luxury of convincing people to believe your view on a topic.
I really found it interesting how you connected the invisibility factor to the topic. Your example about the political debates was a perfect example displaying the invisibility factor which showed that you had a clear understanding of it. You analyzed having authority in an online community in a different way that i found really interesting. I agree with what you're saying when you talk about having people agree with you rather than just people commenting back because if the comment is negative then there is no authority. In fact, that person is probably trying to take authority.
Delete0119
ReplyDeleteSuler produces good points about identities in online spaces, and I can definitely relate to some of them. Suler says the people tend to loosen up and express myself more in online spaces. I’ve noticed that I would talk to people over a microphone that I wouldn’t even try talking to outside of online spaces. I really just become much more social. Most people my age are willing to act more immature online; however, I believe my online identity is just important as my real-life one. In result, I act very maturely online and tend to hang around very relaxed mature groups of people, most of which consisting of people much older than me. I have friends that act extremely immature on purpose in online spaces. Their goal is often to anger, or upset their audience, this often results in them being kicked or banned from the certain online space, but that just motivates them more to do the same in another online space. They have tried to get to me to join them in this activity they call “griefing” but I find it unethical and just plain wrong, always refusing to join them.
________________________________________________
When you are in a position of authority within an online discourse community you feel important but most of all, comfortable. You have already established an identity for yourself within the community to the point that new people already know what to expect from you and often look up to you and your position within the community. Your peers know that you have done your service to get where you are and that you are in some way superior to them in the community. The online community I have an authority in is the Virtual Motorsports community, one based on competitive racing in the video game “Forza 4”. I have been active in this community and its predecessor with most of the same people for a total of over 3 years. As a long time member of this community I have met many fellow racers, some have come and gone, but the ones that have continued to stay active over the years like myself have developed a sort of unsaid authority. In addition to racing in dozens of events within the community I have made other actions that have improved my social community within this community. For example, I have volunteered to be a host as well as a backup host for both the qualifying and racing sections of races. Personally, I havn’t experienced anything that would reduce my social capital within Virtual Motorsports, but I know people that have. Occasionally there is a racer that spoils the race for another racer by driving irresponsibly, by that I mean deliberately crashing other people. In result, someone files an incident report, it gets reviewed, and someone suffers the consequence.
0119
ReplyDeleteSuler explains that on the internet you can be anybody you want to be. I would have to concur with him on that, especially with all the freaks out there pretending to be certain people. I also concur on his statement “people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldn't ordinarily say or do in the face-to-face world.” My online identity doesn’t change from social networking site to social networking site, but in face to face I am quite shy and I fit directly into the previous statement. There are things I would say to people online than in person because I have this security and what some people would call confidence behind a computer screen. For example, everything I am saying in this blog posting I probably wouldn’t have the confidence to say to any professor in an actual class. This correlates to what Suler says about benign disinhibition because people, like myself, reveal secret emotion, fears, and wishes online. The reason so many people have this security/confidence is because behind a computer screen and a screen name people don’t know who you are or what your background is. Since everybody can keep everything about themselves that they want hidden people everywhere can have this same experience. Myself, I tend to keep the same profile on every social network and I try not to post or say negative things, I also try to not run my mouth or talk a lot of smack because I don’t know who other people are and what they know about me.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I would have to say authority in an online community depends on who your actual focus group is on, how many followers you have, or how many people actually read/“like” your status’. What it truly means to have authority in a online community is to have followers who listen to what you say and those followers share your ideas. Also to be able to make something new in your online community, such as starting new topics and or new ways to do something is another way to gain power in that online community. Ways to gain power in an online community are to post interesting, unique, witty things that people in that online community like to see. You’re not going to post cat pictures on a blog about dogs and gain authority. You have to make things relatable and interesting. Not boring and completely off topic. Personally I would say that I don’t have authority in an online community but I do have some followers in online communities so you could say that I do have some power just not any significant amount. I have stayed in the same amount of authority throughout my years on online communities. So I haven’t done anything to rise or fall in my online communities.
0M08
DeleteI agree with your statements about having an almost alter ego online, there is comfort in knowing that your audience doesn't know who you are and you won't have to face them the next day of class. I also must say that you have a good policy about not saying negative things for the sake of not causing drama. Just like you don't know exactly who your audience you also dont know how much they know about you.
0037
ReplyDeleteSuler says in “The Psychology of Cyber Space” that people can assume whatever identity they want online, and he is absolutely correct. But that identity often changes as people go through different stages of their life. I can at least say it was that way for me. The first experiences I had in an online community were on Xbox live. I went to my half-brother’s house to visit for a week when I was about 10 and I saw he had Xbox live, something I wanted to try for a while. When using Xbox live, you communicate with a headset so people hear your voice. This takes away from people being unable to hear what you sound like and other users can guess at your age by the sound of your voice. At first, this made me very shy and unwilling to talk into the headset. But as I played a few games of Halo, I started to loosen up. I realized that even if people knew my age, they still didn’t know my name, where I was from, or what I looked like (invisibility, dissociative anonymity). I begin to talk trash to the other players and they all were laughing because I was using such strong language at a very young age. I never talked like that before and I was even surprised at the profanity coming out of my mouth. I became a completely different person when online. After this, I really didn’t have any contact with online communities for few years. I was never allowed to have a MySpace because my mom was worried I would get kidnapped or something like that. Instead, I made a YouTube account behind my mom’s back. I would watch all kinds of videos and leave comments on each one I watched. If I didn’t like the video, I would personally insult the maker of the video and would often get into heated arguments with others where the winner seemed to be whoever had the largest vocabulary of profanity. I wasn’t afraid to say anything on YouTube because I knew the other users didn’t know my real name, what I looked like, how old I was, or how I sounded. The next time I had an experience in an online community was at age 14, when I created my Facebook. The reason why I joined Facebook at first was just to play the games offered. My dad let me create an account because if I was playing the games with him, he would receive bonuses. For the first couple of months, I only used Facebook for the games and didn’t have any contact with others. But then my friends started getting accounts and I added them and started to interact with them over Facebook. I didn’t really change my identity in this community because all the people I added knew who I was. This caused me to post things that would have been ordinary for me to say in reality. In the present, I am still a part of the Facebook and YouTube online communities, but not as an interacting member. However, now I am much more responsible with what I say and post. I only use YouTube to watch videos and rarely leave comments; those I do leave are always respectful and uplifting. If I don’t enjoy a video or think it was a waste of time watching it, I don’t waste even more time commenting and bashing the video and its maker like I did when I was younger. I just use Facebook to check up on my close friends from time to time and see how they are doing or to look at funny memes or videos people I am friends with post. I rarely post anything myself, but if I do I make sure it is responsible and isn’t going to get me in trouble down the road.
0037 (cont.)
ReplyDeleteTo have power on an online community, you must have a lot of people viewing and contributing to your page or profile. For example, on a blog if a user has many people posting responses to their blogs, reading their posts religiously, or just viewing their blog daily, than that person has power in that community. A powerful individual will have a group that will read whatever the powerful individual posts on the blog and probably take it to heart or reply to it even if the post has no value. In effect, the powerful person will create their own small community with active and contributing members inside of the larger online community.
Travis Badall - 0037
ReplyDeleteMy sense of disinhibition happens to be a very close resemblance to how I act in real-life, face to face interactions. The major online community that I'm a part of is Facebook, and how I act or say things on there would be very similar to how I would act in person. The only minor difference is that I tend to be more open when communicating through digital media, such as Facebook, texting, etc. compared to in face to face scenarios, where I may considered to be shy or socially awkward in some situations. I would face a scenario which Suler would call, in his article, "The Psychology of Cyberspace", the inhibiting self. This is where one is able to express what he/she feeling over a digital medium, while he/she might not able to express the same discourse in a face to face situation. An online community that I, as well as many others, have greater disinhibition would be over Xbox LIVE game chat, particularly in the Call of Duty game series. A lot of people tend to get very vulgar and very aggressive. Suler would describe this as players feeling a sense of "dissociative anonymity" and since other players can't easily find out who they are, they are free to act differently than they would in real life. A couple years ago, around when I was a freshman in high school, I used to be one of those serious gamers that would get really aggressive when I would get killed a lot and yell at other players in gameplay. Now that I'm more mature and have come to realize that all in all, it's just a game, I don't get upset as often, and if I do, I usually just take a break and do something else. I've noticed that many of the friends that I play online with have also experienced the same transition as I have.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Through Facebook, one would have authority if they have authority in real-life. For example, if teacher/professor or manager/boss added their students or employees, they would have more authority as individuals. Although the playing fields are more level through this medium in the aspect that anyone is able to voice their opinions, the authoritative figures still have more power. If a manager/boss saw that an employee wrote something negative against them, that may lead to consequences in the workplace possibly leading to a write-up, suspension, or even termination. You may also have authority if you start a group on Facebook and get a lot of people to join. Since you have the authority to post information that you want people to know about.
I personally have not done anything on Facebook that would increase my social dominance. Again, I see Facebook as a place to catch up with old friends, keep people up to date with what's going on, etc. I dont like to view as a place to get a lot of friends and followers to get attention just to climb up the social ladder or to gain authority. Honestly, when MySpace was around, that was pretty much the goal, and it got really annoying, really fast. When I switched over to Facebook, it was a very nice change because people starting acting more mature, stopped posting totally irrelevant and pointless information and it was less annoying. All in all, I don't have any authority in this digital media, and I don't really plan on changing that.
0037
ReplyDeleteMy online identity is a more relaxed, yet still very sarcastic persona. I think that Suler was right when he said that people like communicating online because you dont have to worry about the disapproval of other while you are saying something. Online it definitely helps you get past being nervous or what others think of you because in the end you can just say, "I dont care what you say, you dont know who I really am." Since this is true I usually love sounding intelligent on the internet. I can express what I'm feeling and not have to worry about the reactions. I love posting statuses on Facebook that will strike an intellectually stimulating conversation or even debate. This is fun for a lot of people because you have time to think, sometimes even time to look up or challenge a statement made. While talking on the internet you have every resource right there with you to back you up. It is very calming knowing that you have all the time you need to respond and all the knowledge you need right there on the internet. I don't think this necessarily defines the true you. The only problem with Suler's article is that he never really defines self in order to prove his point. If self is defined as who you are when no one can judge you and you can be completely open then yes Suler would have a point. But since that is not always the way how we could communicate it drives you to develop a more broad definition. There are just so many factors that come into play with the online-self argument that it is hard to come to a real, widely accepted theory.
________________________________________________________________
In my online community (Facebook mostly)I am more of the intellectual type. I hate when people post statuses about their feelings or how they don't want anyone to talk to them because they're in a bad mood. I feel like that isn't what Facebook should be used for. Facebook is really just an online community where you can spread news or the latest "hot topics" going on. It is like a huge newspaper accept it changes every second instead of every day and there are real time arguments going on while you are online, but like a newspaper it has the crap that no one reads and everyone thinks is a waste of time (the statuses about how people's lives are so sad, the people who share a million pictures per day, or even the invites to different applications that, lets be honest, no one really accepts). Anyways, my authority that I am labeled with on Facebook is the true, but also very sarcastic remarks or statuses. Everyone always expects me to lighten the mood when something awkward or serious goes on. Like I said earlier in this posting I usually love starting debates or things that could be argued, sometimes commenting on something said on a debate or stating an opinion that obviously can be argued. I think utilizing Facebook this way really gives me knowledge on other topics, other opinions, and really helps me connect with other outlooks on certain topics because I am constantly debating with someone who has a different opinion than me and ,if their argument is well put together then i usually end up understanding how they feel about it but also stick to my own opinions unless i am blatantly proven wrong.
I try not to post things that would hurt my persona as the sarcastic, intellectual conversation starter but that is just because any other type of statuses aren't very interesting to me.So i guess my online persona works out for me because those are the only statuses that would be entertaining for me to engage in.
0119
ReplyDeleteI do not actively participate in any online communities, so I would say I am more inhibited. Suler would describe me as "guarded and suspicious about cyberspace." I feel this way because I would rather not have a different online identity. I am not uncomfortable being myself in face-to-face situations. In addition, I do not want to embarrass myself in online communities by being disinhibited because this could affect my reputation and future opportunities.
Many of my Facebook "friends" exhibit embarrassing behavior. Vague posts and rants seem pointless to me. I do not post things like this because I don't want people to think of me as an overly emotional person. My sister is a good example of one of these people. One of her recent Facebook posts read, "I hate girls who post everything they do with their boyfriend and it seems like they hang out every day and they talk about how much they like their bf while i'm over here like yeah i like food!" This rant reflects badly on her personality because she seems like a jealous person. Another example from my sister's timeline: "When he's dating someone else! :(." This is vague and annoying. My sister likes to mimic what she sees other people posting on Facebook, so she is representative of the community that I am (sort of) a part of.
Another reason I do not enjoy participating in online communities is because of the minimizing of authority that Suler talks about. If everyone is equal in online environments, then why should people care what I think and why should I care what other people think? I see everything in a scientific way; therefore, I will believe information from reliable authorities. Online environments that provide anonymity are not good sources of information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is difficult for me to answer this question because I do not participate in any online discourse communities. I feel like a broken record since I have said this for the last few blog posts. It seems very unfair that the reading response questions assume everyone is part of an online community.
I am very indifferent about online communities, so I have very little authority. To have any authority you must be an active participant, which I am not.
0119
ReplyDeleteIn Suler's "Psychology of Cyberspace", he talks a lot about the identity people use on the internet. Many people use fake personalities to make themselves sound better to others. My sense of disinhibition is pretty accurate of my actual personalty in real life. On Facebook and twitter, I speak my mind. I post what I want to post and I don't really need approval from anyone about what I post on social media. There are days where all I do is post about how great my day is, but there are also days where I post how bad it is. One of the major differences between my actual personality and my online personality is that I say things online that I wouldn't say in person. Whether it's me telling someone off, or opening up to a friend who lives in Massachusetts. My online persona allows me to communicate with others much more openly than in face to face contact simply because it allows us to express ourselves without the fear of ridicule from others. There are also certain events in which everyone on the internet decides to take part in. Whenever a controversial play in a game happens, or something like a presidential debate occurs, everyone on the internet decides to voice their opinions on it. When the Seattle Seahawks won the game against the Green Bay Packers a couple of weeks about because of a crazy call by the referees, everyone (even people who don't watch sports at all) decided to voice their opinions as to whether it was a touchdown or not. This shows how many peoples disinhibition changes from posting about what they ate for lunch to something that everyone else is talking about simply because everyone is talking about it.
_________________________________________________________
In my eyes, authority in an online community is the amount of people who see and watch what you post. If you have less than 20 followers on twitter, you don't have much of an authority in the sense of an online community. But, if you are famous in some way and have thousands of followers, you have a little bit more online authority than others. Whether people agree with what you post or not, the fact that people see what you post gives you more power in an online community than those who don't have any followers. A powerful person in an online community has the ability to spread their opinions almost instantaneously to many others through social media and other sources using the internet.
Blake Anderson
ReplyDelete0119
As I began to read John Suler’s “The Psychology of Cyberspace” only one thing came to mind; a song, by Brad Paisley, called Online. In this song, Paisley sings about how he is a forty year old, pizza shack employee who still lives with his mother. But, on the internet he is “6'5 and I look damn good, I drive a Maserati, I'm a black belt in karate, and I love a good glass of wine.” All of this of course isn’t true, but online it is hard to discover if anything is true or even if people are acting the way they really are. Suler’s piece breaks down the psychological aspects of the internet into easily relatable categories.
As an individual I am one who doesn’t like to conform to common social practices, but, I have to admit I fit in quite well with a lot of what Suler says. I spend a lot of time on the computer and most of this time is connected to the internet, therefore I have experienced almost all of the disinhibitons Suler mention. Two of Suler’s categories that I felt a strong connection to are toxic disinhibiton and It’s Just a Game, also called dissociative imagination.
A frequent online gamer, I commonly step into an environment which is completely different than the real world, it also changes me, for the worst I must say. Whether it is in the real world or online, I am not a fan of, for lack of better words, stupid people or people with no common sense; but online, I handle these people very differently than I do in real life. If I pull up to a red stop light and it turns green but the person in front of me doesn’t move because they’re on their cell phone, I’ll honk, shake my head and drive on. If online, someone who is playing on my team makes an extremely idiotic move and causes the team to lose, I along with the rest of my team may end up saying some vulgar things depending on our aggravation level. This is where I fall into the toxic inhibition classification; I become something that I am not, just because I know I may never see this person again and it is such a social normality online.
The points I have to analyze my toxic disinhibiton are also very easily related to the It’s Just a Game factor. When I become vulgar, it is because I am losing and I always have someone else to blame it on, but, when someone blames something on me, my response is always “It’s just a game bro…chill”. No one likes to take the blame for something stupid they do, nor do they admit that they are just blaming someone else for their potential screw-ups. I, on the other hand, am not afraid to admit that I do this; is it always entirely someone else’s fault? No but it is easiest to pin the fault against the person who is doing the worst.
The online gaming world is full of hypocritical asshole and you will never be able to escape from them, but honestly, I wouldn’t want it any other way, even if I can be titled this sometimes.
Now don’t think that my psychology is only affected in the online gaming community. As a teenager, I am very involved in texting. Considering my online identity today, I believe I am my own person as I text; everything I say or do, I would do in real life. But it wasn’t always this way. During middle school I was the epitome of benign disinhibition. I’m middle school I, Blake Anderson, was quite the ladies’ man and my phone was beeping with text messages “all damn day long”, my friends used to say. I understood that girls love it when guys are able to open up to them, vent to them and show a sensitive side, and I tried my best to accomplish this. I had never been that man to play sports, hit the gym every day, tell everyone about that girl I hooked up last week; I always had a sensitive side, but it wasn’t visibly noticeable in person, it revealed itself in text. I would tell people some of my hidden secrets and the negative feelings I had towards the way some of my guys friends were acting. I came to the conclusion that girls loved this, and since I enjoyed the company of girls, I kept doing it. Was this phenomenon because of benign innocence or was it because or benign disinhibiton? Either way, my personality changed when my physical form wasn’t involved, and that is what is significant.
ReplyDeleteGoing through all of these experiences, I can say that my online self and real-world identity are two very common people, but have their extreme differences. It could be because I need to take my anger out in an environment where I believe it is okay, or it could be because there is a part of me that it trying to break free. Suler helped me put words to me actions and understand them a little better, but a person’s entire psychology, can never be fully understood.
Authority in an online community can come from multiple different things. Probably the most obvious one is if someone actually has power over the community such as admins or site creators. Power can also come from different aspects of a person influence on a community as well. Relating to previous posts, people can obtain authority in other communities, such as the online gaming community by being experienced.
ReplyDeleteOne community of such that I believe I am involved in is the specific game called League of Legends. This is a massive community and millions of people play it each day. This game has a website which consists of forums. I am a frequent poster in the forum and I have come to notice that they are monitored by admins. A few months ago, an admin noticed my contributions to the game and the website and befriended me. This gave somewhat of an artificial authority. If I run into people who are abusing the rules or harassing other players, I simply tell me new found powerful friend and they take care of it. In this sense, I have the power of an administrator.
Another authority that I see frequently in this community comes from experience, one of which I do not have. I believe I am an experienced player, which means other players should take my advice, but there are other players out there who are much better than me and know much more about the game than I do. These players often hold live streams to teach other people who to play and almost no matter what they say, people listen to them. This is a kind of authority that is more inferred than direct.
As a common poster and player, few people have come to notice my name and respect me; this gives me a small amount of authority within this community. My consistent positive actions towards the community will hopefully one day bring me to the position of an admin or even a live streamer or pro player.
I completely agree with the points that Suler’s made in his article. People on social networking sites take full advantage of the invisibility factor when they are putting their thoughts out there. There are occasionally those few brave people who have the courage to put their name with their opinions, but usually people post rude and cruel things when they can hide behind their computer screens. It was around the eighth grade when I finally joined onto my first social networking site, MySpace. I recently looked back at the messages and comments I had and it really took me by surprise how much I have matured over the years. First off, my grammar was atrocious and I sometimes used numbers in place of letters. I was so embarrassed of the younger version of myself. I also did not recognize a majority of the people I had conversations with. This was over five years ago and many things have changed since then but I was really alarmed that I was brave and stupid enough to talk to random strangers. Now that I am older, I have moved on to different websites such as Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest. I have access to these sites on my phone so I am not constantly spending hours staring at a computer screen like I did back in the Myspace days. I treat these sites as a way to keep in contact with friends that have moved away and to see what I am missing out on back home. I would not dream of talking to a random person that added me on Facebook like I use to do on Myspace. The websites that I use today are much more personal then the websites I previously used.
ReplyDelete-----------------------------------------------------------------
To have authority within an online discourse community you need to have a lot of people who tune into you have to say. If nobody follows you on Twitter then you will not have much of an impact in that particular online community. Celebrities who have millions of followers have the most authority because their fans are constantly waiting to see their next tweet. Whatever they chose to say will be viewed by many people and may even have an influence on them. I basically just use Facebook as a virtual photo album because I hardly ever post anything on there. I am much more into Twitter where I post my thoughts on an hourly basis. I use to have my Twitter off of private and this made me more popular to this site because people would retweet my postings. After an incident with administrators from my old high school looking at different students Twitter accounts, I decided that putting it on private was a good idea. By doing this I gave up trying to gain more followers and I realized that it really was not that important to me anyways. My friends all follow me and those are the only people who truly matter and understand what my tweets are about anyways.
0037
DeleteOMO8
DeleteI agree with the authority statement. That it matters who tunes into what you have to say.. Without follower who really cares who you are or what you have to say. In that case who is your online identity. And who can make their own opinions? Main question: Why are you on this community? Like you said the celebrities have the most authority, because they have the most attention and spot light. They have become influences of thousands.
My opinion on Facebook is its going out of style it has too much to worry about. Your status, picture, info, profile, friends, and the list continues. Twitter is just words and instagram is photos.
0037
ReplyDeleteI am not part of any online communities besides facebook. So i will be using that as my only example. I dont feel like i have a high level of disinhibition when it comes to the way i am online. I try to be myself throughout because the way the internet is nowadays, it takes five seconds to see everything i have ever said on facebook and see how my "personality" changed. So in order to remain myself on facebook, i try to be myself as much as possible. If i am commenting on something i dont change for the people reading the comment. I say what i feel and that is all. I dont make a scene and act out and talk shit to someone or anything, i just say what i need to say and move on. I would say that i dont take on another "persona" when i am on facebook and stick to myself. When it comes to those posts about God and "like" if you believe in god, "scroll" if you worship the devil. I dont even bother. Those pictures of the sick children or whatever, i ignore. But i do not ignore them because i am a different person on facebook. I care about those kids and the diseases and sicknesses they have, but me liking something on facebook doesnt do anything. When the time comes and i am older with money, then i can make a difference and make donations and what not, but for me to say i "care" about a cause on facebook with a "like" to me seems like a waste of time. I feel like most people dont even care they just like it because everyone else did. My friends, for the most part, are the same way as me, atleast my close friends that i pay attention to their posts. They usually dont post much on facebook. For example my best friend and i seem to never posts things on facebook unless it is important to us. We dont get sucked into the vacuum of advertisements or those stupid "like" for this or that posts. We go on to do what we have to do and get off. There is no point to us in taking on a new personality on facebook when your real friends that you hang out with can see how fake you are online to how you are in person. I am personally very relaxed and laid back. I dont let my emotions get the best of me and i dont let them get too high or low. So if on facebook i decided to lash out and act like a mad man all the time, someone is going to call me out on it eventually and i am gonna look bad. I dont see the point. Just be yourself and dont worry what others think.
On facebook, i would say that authority is not very big at all. You can kinda say and do whatever you want. You can act out and comment on everything, posts statuses every second, or be like me and just not do much on facebook just check up on some old friends, maybe post something and then move on. I think i have authority when it comes to facebook because, it gives you options on so many things now that you can control most everything. I can control who sees my posts and who doesnt. I can control who shows up on my news feed. I have control of alot of things when it comes down to it. I use these things affectively to not allow my family to see what is going on lol. But in the end there is not much authority going on on facebook, if you want to call that authority then i feel i have authority to control alot of stuff on facebook.
0119
ReplyDeleteSuler’s article has many good points and I think the most relevant one to our generation of youth is how you can create and say what ever you want in an online community with no responsibility or constraints. When I enter an online community or space there is a subconscious knowing of how open or revealed I am.
For example, Facebook is very open and whatever I say and publish on it has direct accountability towards my name and corresponding information on my page, which everyone can see. Open Identity.
Another example is g35driver.com, a forum for people to post anything about G35’s (a car), and is a moderately revealing website because you have a username and profile where you post pictures of your G35 and have other information that identifies your car in the community, which is then linked to yourself. Slightly open identity.
The third example is Youtube, where you can remain completely anonymous and have a username that does not link to you. Closed Identity
The reason for using these examples is to show how when in each community your identity can change and be completely open, or completely closed. Behavior in these environments are all different, In facebook I am very careful with what I say and I think most sensible people guard what gets put on facebook very careful as it represents themselves in a digital way. I don’t post many things, I tend to just browse for interesting things my friends are doing. Many times it seems people forget that they are representing their name and post inappropriate things, are trying to gloat and raise their online status. I think maturity on facebook determines what gets said and I like to have a professionalism associated with my identity online and don’t post jokes that may offend people or be rude in political arguments.
-------------------
I am going to use the G35 forum website for an example of authority online. Members of the community have rankings or are sponsored members. So what the guys with higher ranking and such post is taken more seriously as they are considered to have more knowledge. So they have more authority in the community as to information being spread and credibility. My role in the community is average, I’m not new so I’m a mid level member and have had a lot of posts and comments, I learn from the forums and don’t have a higher level of expertise to teach. I have improved my social capital by posting “do it yourself” DIY modifications and have gained respect from other members for sharing helpful information and contributing to the website. Ways to lose that capital would be to badmouth other peoples cars and disrespecting other peoples taste, which I try not to do.
0037
ReplyDeleteWhen I engage in communication via online communities I feel a bit more liberated from regularly present social norms. I feel more relaxed voicing my opinion and saying things that I would not say otherwise, that might seem controversial or inappropriate. The internet provides a sort of shield. It allows people to feel protected while running head first into something stupid or sometimes even dangerous. Personally, I feel more confident when I voice my opinion on the internet because people reading them are not influenced by factors that keep people from taking me seriously in real life. I completely agree with Suler, that the internet allows us to be whoever we want to be or, more importantly, allows us to not be certain things also. On the internet, my age, my race, my gender, isn’t so obvious, so when people read my writing on my blog they are more apt to take it seriously than a peer. I have had many people brush off my political opinions because I am considered “too young” for them to be valid, and while I still occasionally encounter that on my personal blog it is not nearly as often.
On my blog, I have a few different identities because I blog about a variety of different things. I’ll occasionally blog about politics, but sometimes, and by that I mean often, I blog about some of my favorite television shows. So those to identities are very different because my goals are different and, likewise, the responses I get from people are different. When I post something political I may end up in a sort of altercation or I might receive replies from people agreeing with me. The responses are usually the same though, all of them are pretty serious, very informational responses with a set tone of formality.
When I blog about my favorite television shows, however, the responses generally have a sort of humor attached to them and everyone’s tone is generally relaxed.
----------------------
In the Tumblr community authority is generally decided by how many followers you have. However, authority varies depending on the ‘type’ of blog you might run. Some people run specifically and exclusively fandom blogs while others run blogs dedicated to politics. If a blogger has 20,000 followers, they are considered to have more authority than a blogger with on 20 followers. But it is important to note that a fandom blog with 20,000 followers is not considered to have much authority about politics or literature.
Other factors influence authority as well, however not to the degree of follower number. How informed you appear on the topic, how immersed in the topic you are, is also important. People take your authority on a subject if you provide evidence that you know what you’re talking about. For example, when I’m engaging in a discussion about politics, using facts, citing sources, they all help impose my authority on the subject. When talking about a television show, people accept your authority if you make it known you’ve seen every episode or own some sort of paraphernalia. It varies from clique to clique how you have to earn your authority.
OMO8
ReplyDeleteIn "The Psychology of Cyberspce" by Suler, it details his background and how he's been researching websites that use imagery to make their point. After imagery he got into text communication, online behaviors, addiction, and psychotherapy. He touches base with imagery. Suler explores how the online users hide behind this identity which is a profile picture. This picture speaks character and gives the person an online appearance.
My online identity can be described through my tweets and mainly instagram. Instagram expresses who I am through photos. My identity is really uninvolved on twitter so people don't see me really. If anything its quotes or pictures I posted on instagram throughout the week. Now on instagram people can see who I am, what I like to do, and who I hangout with. So my identity is clearly shown there. I'm a country girl, who loves being with her boyfriend, and sharing beautiful photos. My friends and I behave a little differently in online environments. Sometimes they post relationship problems or things considered inappropriate but I like to keep my personal life personal and not put everything out there for anyone to see. My twitter identity is vary vague mainly for the fact i find it boring and no one needs to know my business. My instagram identity differs because I can express myself through photos and you can see the person behind online community. A picture can speak a thousand words. My online "text communication" is focused on quotes, I let them say whats on my mind. I would say I'm far from addicted.
--------------------------------------------------------------
To have authority in an online community, is to be known. For instance maybe on Facebook it's that you posted a status and got several people to comment or like what you posted. Or maybe on twitter its having a checkmark by your name and having thousands of followers. On instagram maybe its making your photo n the popular page. The authorities are made by the online users. I would not consider myself an authority in those cases but I am in authority over my own personal postings. i honestly haven't taken any actions, unless requesting followers and being followed back can count. Nothing has reduced my capitol unless I un-followed, posted something they didn't like, or stopped being friends with a certain follower.
0119
ReplyDeleteMuch like the rest of my school body at age 14, I had an account on MySpace. Since my parents forbade me to have this account, my profile remained on private and my last name was nowhere to be found on this page. Unlike those dissociating themselves from their online account, I took full ownership of my behavior online. The reasoning for my partial anonymity was solely based on my parent’s disapproval of MySpace. I just wanted to stay connected in cyberspace with my close friends and classmates. My “about me” section on MySpace looked much like a job application consisting of my date of birth, contact information (my AIM screen name), education information, and first name. I accepted friend requests only from friends or acquaintances at school. Since I’m a shy person I mainly kept to myself on MySpace by accessing it only to read what others had to say or converse with friends on my profile. This is pretty much the same way I use my Facebook account with the minimal time I have for it. Unless I get a notification to my phone or have free time, I’m usually on Twitter instead. My Twitter account is not private and I do provide my full name so friends and family can find me. I don’t tweet often but when I do I make sure it does not contain anything explicit for the sake of my education and job. When I read my timeline on twitter, I do sometimes read tweets that are too personal for my taste and I wonder what the reasoning was behind the tweet. I assume that they have a histrionic personality that Suler discussed since they are more open and emotional than others in cyberspace. I am the complete opposite of this type of personality when I’m on social networking sites because I am aware of all the misinterpretations people can get from this. I’d rather others believe I am a reserved person from social networking and find out otherwise in person.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
The only community I would say I have any sort of authority in would be Tumblr. In senior year, homework was the least of my worries and this website took up most of my time after school. I started off at the same level as everyone else does, which made me equal to the other beginning bloggers with zero followers. I became hooked on reblogging and blogging my own pictures of what was trendy at the moment. My Nikon D3000 assisted me in posting clear and high quality pictures that appealed to other bloggers similar to myself. These posts resulted in a flood of followers almost every time. When becoming a popular blog, I found myself monitoring what I chose to blog by which kind of posts got the most likes and reblogs. I began putting what my followers wanted to see before my personal needs for the blog. This improved my social capital by maintaining the followers I had and increasing them at the same time. As I transitioned into college, I realized Tumblr could not be one of my top priorities. I stopped blogging for about 4 months and found that my social capital had been reduced. In other words, my follower count decreased dramatically. Suller discussed that persistence is key when influencing others. Clearly, my lack of persistence was an influence on one third of my followers who no longer followed my blog.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete0M08
ReplyDeleteWhile reading Suler’s article about the Psychology of Cyberspace there were a lot of ah-ha moments about my involvement in online spaces. Upon reflection I realized that disinhibition that is apparent on my twitter and tumblr accounts. By reading some of my past post there are definitely some things that I would never say in person. I think this is due to the fact that the internet seems faceless and I really don’t know the people on the other side of what I am posting. I think this helps me to freely express myself because of the dissociative anonymity and the invisibility concepts that Suler explains in his article. Along with Wardle’s points on identity in ones community, I have seen that over time my post have shifted in the way they are composed. The shift can be attributed to me learning the lingo from the communities that I have been apart of. I found it interesting how in the story of Alan he didn’t adapt to his community because he felt that he was above them and they were simply subservient to him. In her article she also talks about an adaption period that all newcomers are allotted when they enter a new community, I have also noticed this with different communities that I am apart of at a certain point they all want to help the newbie to the group but after about a three days they are no longer a newbie and they are slammed for misuse or complete ignorance of certain terms. I think the principles that Suler talks about are exactly the reason that people use online communities they want to be able to express themselves freely and in a way that doesn’t present real immediate threats, if you send a tweet saying your mad at someone then you know with almost certainty they aren’t going to see it or that they aren’t going to think its them and call you out on it. You have the invisibility so the affected party doesn’t know who you are but you still have to forum to express you anger. Online spaces make communication both harder and easier, its weird the same things that make them bad also make them good.
------------------------------
An online community that I am apart of would be the various pop music fan groups on twitter. Authority in this community is strictly based on who knows the most and who has the most information wise. So the top dog can change frequently among certain situations. Its really changes on the day and for certain artist, if you know where they are or have an in to a certain event you are seen on higher authority than other members of the group, but as soon as your information is old or outdated or even common knowledge you are knocked off your pedestal and are with the rest of the fandom. As for myself I tend to stay mid way up the later, never peaking to high which is where I like to be. As soon as you know too much everyone wants a piece of you and if you are too low on the ladder no one sees you as an essential which could count you out of the community altogether. To improve one social capital in this online community I read articles about the artist pertinent to the community that I am trying to gain capital in. Money is no good on twitter, well virtually no good. If I am trying to gain status with Justin Bieber fans on twitter then I would need their type of currency information pertinent to Justin Bieber. You exchange your information for others, so that you can gain more but you never fully give away what you have as in any good trade. Things that would reduce your social capital would be not buying a CD and tweeting about how much you love it, not knowing headlining news and not being nice. Mean, rude and unknowledgeable people are always voted off the island first. The rules are very simple stay current, stay positive and stay friendly. Although these rules might not always get you on top they will keep you in the good graces of everyone. By being a midway person on the Justin Bieber fan scale I have gotten countless favors from other such as CDs, tickets and fan related merchandise. And you have to do is follow the three simple rules.
Catherine Rucker
ReplyDelete0M08
When it comes to the internet and online communities, I prefer to remain invisible as much as possible. However, I do believe that there has always been a sort of drive to be seen while being invisible on the internet, if that makes any sense. I think it stems from the fact that I’ve been able to accomplish it before in reality, that I strove to behave the same way online. When I say I wished to be “seen while not being seen”, I mean grabbing attention while not having to exert a large amount of effort on my part. In real life, I’ve been able to pull this off fairly well because it’s pretty hard to miss me if you happen to see me walking on the sidewalk. I’m just different. An African American girl with naturally red hair and that’s just not something people see every day. And I do receive stares; both curious and condescending. I don’t pretend to have the best confidence in the world; I’m very shy. So I feel as though all of this transfers into what and how I post things online. I’ve found that the “seen-unseen” method doesn’t work as affectively as I thought it would, at least not in the beginning. I joined Twitter in my junior year of high school, and just like everyone else, I followed those celebrities I was interested in at the time, those who seemed connected or close to them, and of course other individuals who were fans just like me. Strategically I only followed those who would follow back or had many followers themselves, so that I had more followers and less people I followed back. It was a big game, but now I don’t really care. I’ve lost many followers, and gained many others who see my interests in music, and have me promote their songs (in a small, fan-based way). It’s interesting, because what started as a popularity contest so to speak ended up as a sort of nonchalant call-and-response towards music and those who appreciate it as much as I do.
____________________________________________________________
I think that authority on the internet could come from the amount of followers or the amount of people who have something in common with you, your personality, and your interests. I don’t believe that I have a lot of authority on the internet because I don’t really bother too much into everyone else’s lives. Whatever followers I have, automatically found me whether through interest searches or following friends of other friends. Some artists follow me because they see my interest in music and they see it as an opportunity to market their product, and to create a larger fan base. And I’m more than happy to help out if I become interested in their sound.
I think your idea of being seen without actually being seen is very interesting. One of the things Suler talked about in his piece was disinhibition, which is typically when the individual in the online community is still displaying this shyness due to the fact that they were only able to express themselves more openly when hidden. I liked that you linked that with the popularity many hope to gain online. I too experienced something similar. Normally, I was very shy in person and did not have a lot of friends in middle and high school, which is when I got into MySpace and Facebook. Though I had a lot of friends in these communities, it did nothing to get me noticed by other people. Also, I think your completely right about authority on the Internet. Many times, when you can relate to a group of people or you can represent the characteristics of that community, you get a lot more respect, therefore, the community grants you authority.
Delete0119
ReplyDeleteBack in middle school, I spent most of my time playing World of Warcraft; although I've forgotten how I acted back then, I know for a fact I was much less mature and exhibited many of the characteristics that Suler describes. I act quite a bit differently online now that I haven't played WoW in 4 years, and aside from YouTube, I am not one to post very often on social media sites. On Reddit, I post occasionally, but mostly lurk; despite the anonymity of the site which allows me to say literally anything I want without repercussions. On Facebook, I post very little because people there actually know me and I don't want to say something stupid. (Plus I don't have anything to say to most of those people.) The most posting I do online is on YouTube. I have my own channel where I post videos and associate with companies specializing in my interests. Because I am trying to keep a professional and knowledgable image of myself on YouTube, any videos I post or comments/replies that I make are thoroughly planned out. I feel as though I am the exact opposite of what Suler describes in "The Psychology of Cyberspace." I do receive an onslaught of comments daily and have to filter though a large amount of hate and trolling. These disrespectful comments aren't just directed at me, but at others within the community that watch my videos. Many of these channels don't have any videos of themselves or information posted at all and only use their channels to troll.
I do have a lot of friends on Facebook and YouTube and most likely Reddit (although we don't share our usernames to anyone), who don't care as much about personal image online. Even though almost everyone on their Facebook account is a personal friend, they still post useless or random crap every day which they would never say in real life. They also "like" and share inappropriate material which they wouldn't bring up in a face to face conversation, but could possibly harbor inside but feel safe saying online.
________________________________________________________
I'm going to continue on with my YouTube channel to explain my online authority in an online discourse community. I've been posting meaningful content on YouTube for about three and a half years. I started as a nobody browsing videos that interested me, and began posting videos of my own in an effort to share my knowledge on those topics. It took me eight months to reach my first thousand subscribers, and then another three months after that to hit two thousand. By this time I had a substantial presence in my community of choice and what I said held a decent amount of weight with my fans. A step forward which solidifies the authority of anyone trying to turn a hobby into a job or at least something self-sustaining, is the acquisition of a sponsor. Whether it be through free products, payment to advertise, or from hosting my videos on their site, a sponsor on the YouTube community is a symbol that "you've made it", especially if few other people have that sponsor. I currently have over fifteen thousand subscribers, associate with two sponsors on a regular basis, and have several others that I deal with intermittently.
For the most part, any decline in my channel that I have seen has been because of things out of my control such as YouTube changing the algorithms of their related video or subscription systems, or from seasonal changes (people going back to school or work after summer and winter vacation). The only things I have done recently which have reduced the authority I have are posting videos a little bit later than I said I would (because of school work), or posting sub-par videos due to time constraints.
0037
ReplyDeleteJacob Carter
In this article Suler explains that people seem to take on a different persona while online compared to in face to face conversations. People often change how they interact online with people drastically compared to everyday actions because they can. There is no punishment for doing so in an online community. The chances of people actually finding out your real identity or how you really act is slim to none. Speaking of myself I am actively involved in only one internet communities, Xbox live gaming. To start with, the Xbox live community there is absolutely no question in our minds that my friends and I take on alter egos. This is not because I feel who I am isn’t good enough or a need to change myself but instead it just comes with the territory. The language and conversations in this community tend to take on a more aggressive tone and to keep up I need to alter my tone accordingly. I’m am normally a very calm mannered and do not seek out altercations yet on Xbox live I always find myself getting into verbal altercations with other players. So how I see it is that most people like me don’t go on and completely change their identity but instead alter it to fit in and be accepted. If you don’t modify your identity you will not be accepted or prominent in this community. Though I do feel l like many users do this because they are attention seekers and feel the need to change to fill the void in everyday life. If you don’t like who you are in real life no one is telling you that you can’t be someone else on Xbox live and that’s why a small group do change themselves. In my opinion though many people instead modify their personalities to fit in.
Part 2
Being authoritative of in these communities may mean having a bunch of friends or followers to some people but I view it as being known. Yes you could say if you have a bunch of friends you are “known” but that could mean you run around rampant adding people you don’t even know, instead if you are really known then people will recognize your gamer tag and realize who you are. In my community you may have no real power but you will have respect. If I have played against someone a lot and I know they are good then ill recognize their name and invite them to my team instead. To gain recognition in my community the only real method is just to play a lot and win a lot. You will then start showing up on leaderboards and people will know you. I have not had time recently to gain status in my community but what I have done is won the majority of games I have played be it not that many. Hopefully people will start talking about me on the message boards and threads.
0037
ReplyDeleteThrough my experience with the Internet and social media sites, I would describe my online identity as having multiple personality disorder. My level of inhibition depends on what site I am on. I tend to hold back or think twice about posting a status or commenting on someone else’s when I am on sites such as Facebook or Instagram. I believe I do this because my friends on Facebook or people that follow me on Instagram are people that I personally know from work, school, or through other friends. I worry that they might judge me based on what I post or I might start controversy if I state my opinion on a popular matter. On the other hand, if I am on a site where no one knows me, like a blog or forum, I have a lower inhibition. I can create a whole new identity, using a false name, false information, and I can be whoever I want. Therefore, I don’t care what others think of what I say. I am free to voice my opinion and debate with others about a matter and not have to worry about seeing them the next day at school. I am a perfect example of having “dissociative anonymity” and being “invisible” according to Suler.
________________________________________________________________
When I think of someone having authority, I think of a person of power or who is in charge. In an online discourse community, having “authority” could mean something a little different. A person of authority on Facebook, for example, would be a person with high interaction on their page. This is someone who posts every day, gets tons of likes and comments, and has tons of friends. This person is idolized by many and is what you would call a trendsetter. They have no real power over the website and do not control any aspect of it, but somehow have gained a social importance and respect in their online discourse community. When looking at me, personally, I do not hold up any kind of authority in my online communities. It’s mainly because I do not focus my day around my Facebook profile. When I post a status it is to catch up with friends, inform about a good cause, or maybe give some good news. I don’t have this need burning inside me to put forth the effort to improve my social capital, but I have seemed to have fallen lower in my social capital level because of my reduced interaction on Facebook and also by only adding close friends. Who you add to your friends is a big part of gaining social capital. If you look at a profile of someone with high social capital, I bet they have a million friends… I also bet that they don’t even know half of them. So is it fulfilling having a high social capital in an online community even if you do not know even a fraction of your followers?
Jayda Burkhardt
0119
ReplyDeleteOnline communities are apart of our everyday lives whether it is a post on Facebook or a group of friends playing a Xbox game. In The Psychology of Cyberspace, John Shuler talks about the differences in our online identities as opposed to our identities in the real world. I can tell you first hand that he is right about his theory but it is not complete. I played video games almost everyday growing up for hours at a time, and I have noticed that my identity does not just change from my real self to the identity I take up while playing a game such as Call of Duty; it also changes as I switch from games like Call of Duty to games like League of Legends. For example, when I play (or rather played) Call of Duty I get frustrated by simple things like dying to random grenades or being killed as soon as I respawn and if the game is a grudge match I occasionally yell at teammates on the off chance that I feel they will change their play style. However, in League of Legends my identity is usually very calm, refusing to get mad at either team and accepting the fact that we just faced better players. There is no doubt that personality and identity differs from our real selves to our online selves; almost everyday we see people who are either very funny in real life and take jokes too far online or vice versa. Other people we see are exactly the same type of people online as they are in real life. Personally, I try to watch what I say on Facebook unless it is with close friends as I normally would do if I was holding a face to face conversation with them. I often find myself in the “see you later” situation that Shuler described in his posting; sometimes when I see something on Facebook and have a response as either a grudge or just a witty reaction I want to paste it on the post and just walk away from the situation without being dragged in. Despite my continuous urge to post my response, I refuse to post my opinion on certain matters to avoid getting others mad at me. This concern for preserving identity is not covered in Shuler’s post, but I believe it is important. Depending on the community, I usually try to present myself as an either unconcerned or middle guy. I do not usually take aside if the debate is between two close friends or my teammates. I have also experienced the “it’s all in my head” perspective that Shuler talks about. When I played in clan battles for Gears of War, I met people from all over the United States whose identities ranged from an actual war veteran to one of my best friends playing his porch. Whenever we talked over our headsets I would always imagine to people talking even though the only ones I have seen a picture of or met was my clan leader and my friend. There is one part of my personality that never changes whether in real life or online though. Whenever I am introduced to a new community I tend to start out shy and quiet but as I become friends with the others I start talking more. This makes me believe that it is not our whole identity that changes online, only certain parts of it. Other parts only change through time.
____________________________________________________________________
part 2 0119
ReplyDeleteAuthority in an online community is dependent on the community you are talking about. For instance, authority on Facebook is held ultimately by Mark Zuckerberg but if you look for the authority on your friends list it would not be held by the person with the most friends but usually the person with the most likes on statuses. If you are looking for the authority in a video game, it depends on the game presented. For example, in a game like Gears of War the authority is held by the best player because he is the strongest in the team. However, in a game like League of Legends the authority is held by the player who thinks strategically and can lead the team as a whole to victory. The only gaming community I have ever had the authority in was way back in the World of Warcraft days because I was the healer and had the most sense of the team. Nowadays authority holds too much pressure for me to handle in competitive play. To be honest, I usually try to make sure I am not the leader nowadays except for when I need to be. This comes somewhat naturally to me in communities like Myspace and Facebook; because I do not post much on my wall, there is no reason for me to try to hold authority. Usually I am just in groups to meet new people or enjoy what the community has to offer.
0119
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading “The Psychology of Cyber Space” by John Suler, I could relate to most of the factors discussed in the article. From the first sentence “It's well known that people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldn't ordinarily say or do in the face-to-face world”, Suler elaborates on how people can alter their identities in any way they want to depending on various factors. The first three made me think of my behaviors as part of online communities. Facebook is the first one that came to mind as I read about the factors. They are all things I usually do, but this article gives my actions a name. When updating my status and posting on different “group pages”, the disinhibition effect, mainly caused by the dissociative anonymity factor, comes into play as I may be posting in a group that is not familiar with my real-life identity. This gives me more freedom to post more opinions that I would not even think about bringing up in a conversation with friends or family for different reasons. Depending on the person I am having a conversation with at the moment, the power of invisibility plays a great role. When meeting a new person through a social network, there is more freedom to write whatever I would like without worrying about how I really look when writing. Although it sounds great, it is a disadvantage when you want to know what the other person is really thinking. Because body language and facial expressions are important to communication, there is part of the true message that is never received. In addition, asynchronicity allows me to continue a conversation at a different time if I do not wish to respond to a person at the moment. Now, before I even had Facebook, MySpace created an atmosphere where I would talk to people but maybe not in the same way as I do now. The reason is that MySpace was popular during my middle school years and I believe that age has a huge influence on the way you act online. In middle school, I talked mostly with my closer friends online. I also remember using e-mail to communicate with friends rather than just professionally. This created a greater degree of asynchronicity since e-mails took a longer time to reply to than instant messaging, making it be further from “real time”. Instant message provides us with more real time although we can also ignore messages when preferred.
Furthermore, no matter what my identity is, I am aware that I always need to be careful with what I post online because I do not want a stupid mistake ruining a job opportunity later in the future.
0119 continued
ReplyDeleteHaving authority means others will listen to you, follow you, and pay attention to your posts. You can influence what your friends or followers do or “like” in a certain page. Now, some people seek attention by posting inappropriate or awkward pictures or updating their status with stupid things but I do not like to do any of this. I do not seek attention and do not think of myself as an authority figure in online communities. I think that in order to do this, you have to be really engaged and become very popular in a specific site.
0037
ReplyDeleteSuler’s article about the psychology of the internet brought many things to light about how individuals use the internet to tweak their personality. I agree with Suler when he states that the internet helps people to “express who they ‘truly’ are inside.” Many people can change the parts about themselves that they don’t like when they are on the internet. The anonymity and self-regulation of the information you share allows you to control who others perceive you as and (partially) how they respond to you.
After reading Suler’s article, I noticed that I do this too. As I enter into my online community, I take on new roles that differ with every site I am on. On Facebook, I am quiet and reserved; I post more pictures than statuses (and when they are, they are carefully structured so that one does not misinterpret what I say), but I mostly keep to myself. I’m that one person who always “likes” things, but never comments on them unless absolutely necessary. However, on Twitter, I am almost a complete 180 of that. I tweet non-stop about nonsense, post pictures, tell stories, and tell my followers about my friends and family. It turns out I am more comfortable being myself around complete strangers than the actual people I know. No matter what site I am on, I try to stay true to who I actually am, but I just control how much and to what extent I express myself.
I will say however, that who I am on the internet is different than how I act face-to-face. I still stay true to myself, but I have more inhibitions that come into play in the real world than on the internet. Even though my personality is laid back, partially anxious, and cheerfully sarcastic, people who interact with me day to day may only see parts of that. On the internet, I have no problem with talking to people and initiating the conversation; in contrast, if you wanted me to ask the waiter for another glass of water, I’d freeze and not be able to form a coherent sentence. Almost always, I will not be the person to start a conversation. Within my discourse community, I’m always making light of situations or trying to make my timeline more cheerful, but if you saw me in person you wouldn’t know that. According to some of my friends, my face either looks sad or angry unless I’m smiling, but I digress. In these cases, I would agree with Suler 100%. I wish I could change my face-to-face personality to the one that I have when I am expressing myself on Twitter. I wish I was able to talk to people without freezing up and show them that I am not perpetually angry/sad.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Within my community, being an authority figure does not mean much. Essentially, we are all equals; although follower count and how many favorites you receive are important, everyone realizes that we are all people and no one is better than anyone else. We (mostly) follow the same bands and listen to the same music, so to us that is more important than individual popularity/authority. Some members of the community are better known than others, but most are open to making new friends all the time. If you make things (art, music, etc.) you will be known for that within the community, but no one gives ranks based on skills.
There is not a whole lot you can do to fall out of the graces of the community. Everyone is different and has different opinions; there is a good chance that you are pissing off someone at any given time, but those people just get over it. (We recognize that everyone is different and we just continue with our lives.) But, if you were to insult a band/band member directly or purposely get into a fight with another person, almost everyone will join into the fight and no one will leave unscathed. The person who started the fight will lose some friends/followers, but in the end, will continue ranting about music and going about their daily lives. Collectively, we are a tranquil community and the fights do not happen often and everyone stays together.
As part of only one major online community, Facebook, it is easy for me to censor myself; I do not put anything on the web that I do not want to be public. Many people believe that being on Facebook means that they can share pictures, posts, or even message others in a private forum, however that is not true. I think whenevr I login to Facebook, I always login with a sense of privacy. I do not like to think of my life as something for the world to see or judge. However, Facebook is an online forum in which I have written rude comments or posted unsympathetic statuses. Sometimes I think that a post on Facebook, a statement made online, would not have as much of an affect as a face to face discussion would. Information that I am always very wary of sharing is personal information. I do not like to discuss my family, my address, or my personal history with people online. When in online environments, I think it is important to realize that your actions can still have repercussions in the real world; you are not always protected by your computer screen. This leads to interacting appropriately with others in this online community. To improve upon your social capital, you must be aware of the various opinions or responses to the communication you involve yourself in on the Internet. If I wanted to interact with more groups of people I would need to adapt to the changing environments and adopt the new ways of communicating, like Wardle discussed in her piece "Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces.". I think what defines most of the differences between real world interactions and online interactions is the security people feel they have while on their computer. Many of my peers are more comfortable with discussing personal values, information, or sharing pictures while engaging in online forums than they would while having face-to-face conversations. This reminds me of a movie called Gamer. In this movie, people could subscribe to a system in which they could control another human being. In this movie you could do anything you wanted while controlling the other person because you never have to face your actions. I think this behavior arises because when you sit on the computer, you think of your interaction as a normal part of your everyday routine instead of thinking about how your actions could affect future prospects like finding a job or being hired for a job.
ReplyDeleteENC 0119
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I feel like I am the same in the social networking world as I am in real life. I am blunt, I am very funny, I am inappropriate, and I am strong minded. But in analysis of my friends and peers I feel like in the social networking world everyone becomes a lot more outspoken, blunt, opinionated, judgmental, and somewhat immature. People feel the need to put things on Facebook they would never express in real life whether it is what they are up to, what they did last night, who they don’t like, their political beliefs, or whatever. People want to be socially accepted so they will go to pathetic levels on the book of faces to get acceptance and attention. It is ridiculously annoying especially now during the prime time for politics. Bitches are constantly updating statuses of their parentals political beliefs for badum for they can seem involved and smart I guess? Not to mention they get retardedly extremist about it and yet if you were to put them on the spot for it they would honestly not know what to say because they don’t know a thing or two about politics. Same goes for sports as well, people, especially girls, feel the need to constantly make statuses informing the world they watched “the game”. I feel like girls feel like guys will think they are hot shit if they are attractive and also interested in sports? I can see that as being a valid idea but from talking to my guy friends they all agree it’s honestly annoying and unattractive because they can tell that girls are faking their sports knowledge. People now a days also feel like its socially okay to updated how stoned or wasted they are on social networking websites which probably isn’t the smartest idea if they are in school or employed. Lastly, people constantly down talk others on Facebook and say the meanest things about each other, especially high school girls. They feel like they can say whatever and it doesn’t matter because they are not face to face fighting and it’s pathetic. All of this relates to Suler’s invisibility factor. People feels as if they can say and update whatever and that nothing bad will come of it or that there will be no repercussions. People use Facebook as a way to show people the side of them or show people the person they want others to think they are. People thus try to show others that they like to have a good time, that they are smart and involved, and that they are not to be messed with but I feel as if there are better ways to do this than the ways my generation is doing so.
In the classic definition of authority, I do not think that I have much authority in online environments. This is because I am not a major part of online communities; very rarely do I command attention from others on the Internet. As you have conversations with people on a public forum, you should be aware of the many people that may come across your opinions and react to them. If you are wanting more authority you should elicit positive reactions to your posts rather than negative reactions. To improve your social capital you must be willing to change your ways of writing on the Internet so you, as a person, can appeal to larger audiences; you have to sell yourself.
ReplyDeleteI feel like authority within in an online discourse relates to popularity. For example, having many followers and many likes on one’s posts. It makes one seem very accepted and very in control of others. They seem like what they say/post goes and is what the majority of one’s generation’s society thinks. I would say the actions I have taken to improve my social capital is I have tried to post the funniest statuses possible on Facebook, and I have posted the most interesting pictures to instagram. I also make to add new people I have met right after I have met them that way I can have more friends and followers. I wouldn’t think that my social capital has been reduced honestly. Maybe I have lost a few people here or there with a few crude or inappropriate jokes I have posted, but nothing to make me notice a significant change.
ReplyDeletePart 2 ENC 0119
DeleteKyle Michalski
ReplyDelete0119
John Suler’s “The Psychology of Cyberspace” has provoked in me a real interest in human-to-human interaction on the Internet. One of Suler’s main points is the invisibility factor. This invisibility factor can transform the smallest of people into the biggest of bullies or someone who has no knowledge of a subject into an expert. Have you ever noticed whenever there is a big event, twitter and facebook become full of newscasters giving their own opinions? For example the other day when Mitt Romney made a comment on his “Binder full of women” everyone was eager to jump on him and chastise him. The same goes for Obama after the first Presidential debate. Even though his performance was poor he obviously had the qualifications to get to that point. When someone can hide behind a computer, his or her confidence rises. They think that no one can judge them or hurt them because they can hide in the Internet.
The Invisibility Factor doesn’t apply to just politics either. For example, every person was eager to judge Miley Cyrus for cutting her hair short. When I went on twitter there were nasty comments that were made towards her that I would never repeat or direct towards a woman. If those people had seen Miley Cyrus face to face I am sure they would never have the guts to saw what they said on the internet to her face.
0037
ReplyDeleteThrough deep reflection and analysis of John Suler’s The Psychology of Cyberspace, I have come to realize that often times individuals assume multiple identities depending on the specific environment that are involved in. Suler’s reference to the idea of ones “true self” was the aspect in which I found most appealing. He showed that the internet or “cyberspace community” allows people the chance to freely express themselves without having to deal with the stress and pressures of face-to-face interaction. There was a faction within this discussion that was very interesting in terms of when he questioned the situation of when an individual is actually truly expressing themselves. He noted that the online identities in which we assume can either be an accurate or false illustration of who we truly are. I believe this makes it very hard to decipher when someone is truly being themselves or putting on a front of some sort. There’s as aspect of the online identity that eliminates the visual element of an actual person that ultimately allows people to interact in a way they normally wouldn’t. They are only putting out the information and expressions that they want which gives them the option to restrict or hide anything that they don’t want people to know.
In terms of trying to connect my own personal experience with the topics that were discussed by Suler, I had some difficulty. Although I am well involved in online communities I have realized that the illustration of my personality is very much the same. I like to believe that I show a pretty solid reflection of who I truly am by the way I choose to express myself. Never do I find myself sharing information that I would not openly share with people in a face to face situation. I am perfectly okay with my on shell and, for the most part, have a careless outlook to how people judge me. So I never really try to portray anything other than who I truly am.
When trying to formulate a definition to the meaning of an “online authority” of a specific community I have realized that the most common acquisition of authority lies within one’s ability to effectively communicate creative and abstract ideas. The people who seem to have the most power are in most cases the individuals who are able to display ideas that people deem as most interesting. Another sign of authority is feedback. The people who are getting the most feedback tend to have more authority in the online communities. This shows that people are paying attention to what you have to say. With my recent participation in the Great American Sports Fan I have taken the role of an audience member. Rarely do I ever chose to write back or respond to an issue unless I able to pose a new outlook of the situation. I don’t like to get involved in the chaos of these biased fans who are always voicing there opinions based on what team they follow.
ENC 0119
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with this! I feel like authority resides within how many likes and followers one can get and how much attention they are raise. Also, I don't really add too many people ESP if I do not know them so I feel like we can relate to eachother on the book.
0037
ReplyDeletePart I
Considering what I have learned from “The Psychology of Cyber Space” by Suler, I’ve realized that social media plays a prominent role in the development of one’s online identity. With that being said, there are many other factors, which can altar the way individuals interact on online environments. An important idea to note is the disinhibition effect, which reveals that people express themselves more openly in cyberspace, rather than in the face-to-face world. For many social media users, online interactions demolish psychological barriers in a way that allows them to discuss personal topics, which they would never dare to do in person. For others, the endless power of the Internet guides them on a dark path of explicit content, horrible places they would never visit offline. As for myself, I am very cautious about posting information on Facebook, due to the fact that all of my friends and family have access to it. In response to this inhibiting effect, I seldom post status and/or comments to Facebook. But, my friends are a different story. On multiple occurrences, I have noticed acquaintances using vulgar language, making harsh criticisms, and expressing outlandish ideas that do not reflect their normal personality. This situation, among others, reveals the fine-line between reality and the online world. As I have stated before, I use a “laid-back” approach when using Facebook. Instead of commenting on every pointless post on the main feed, I will browse only for funny photos and memes for pure enjoyment. What I have concluded from both positive and negative experiences with online communities is that less input equals more enjoyment in the long run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Authority in online communities can be different amongst diverse social media platforms. On Facebook, there is no visible chain of command besides creator Mark Zuckerberg himself. Personally, I see myself as a commoner in heavy-populated world of Facebook. Those who obtain authority in this community have many friends, likes, and are always adding new, appealing information. Occasionally I will post cool photos to improve my social capital within this community. On the other hand, my social capital has been reduced due to the fact that I’m not heavily involved in the social media program. In some cases, authority belongs to the individuals who allow online discourse communities to take control of their life. With that being said, authority in an online community might not be such a good thing.
0037
ReplyDeleteJohn Suler simply defines the different types of behaviors that exist throughout the World Wide Web, in his article “The Psychology of Cyberspace.” I believe everyone should be able to relate to at least one of his types of personalities or disinhibitions, the way someone portrays himself/herself online. Personally I see myself as someone who does not feed into issues that evolve through social media. I have noticed people tend to become advocates for certain issues through social media and this causes the issue to become “trending” or hot topic that everyone has a say so in. An issue could be health care and how the presidential candidates view it. Individuals will make statues and tweets about their opinion which can cause a long debate over facebook about which candidate has the more reasonable plan. I do not participate in those discussions on Facebook and Twitter because I prefer to discuss something that serious face to face, and when things are being said through written words the meaning can be flipped upside down, taken the wrong way, and misunderstood. I think putting on the politician hat online is the most common type of disinhibition because people can form an opinion based on what others say, even when they have no idea about the issue they can sound like the best advocate by piecing together statements made by others. In closing words people may come across as being more educated in certain issues online because it is very easy to put on a disguise that no one can see.
Pt. 2
I would say that I am not one to have online authority even though I and other would agree that I have very much authority in the real world. Having online authority means having a voice and being one that individuals look to online. People who possess this are the ones who make life changing statuses or give inspirational sayings of the day. Their Facebook pages and blogs are ones that people can study to help them with their life or as a resource when it comes to current issue in the world. I never post statues that I expect people to get something out of it. My expectations are not to influence and affect someone’s life over the internet and through social media; therefore, my authority stops when it becomes viral. Some people in the world are made to have online authority because they can express their thoughts and give better advice by typing it in a blog, for example. I would not say that I have done much to improve my social capital. I joined groups when I came to the university and I joined a group from a summer program that I attended last summer, but those were only to keep up with old friends and make new friends.
Being a leader in an online community is very different then being a leader out in the world. There is a different skill set required, such as being vocal and assertive. Being in several different online communities, a leader is someone who gets communication started. However, when you are communicating with the group you have to talk positively and not negatively. If you communicate negatively it will make for negative ideas and no good will come of it.
ReplyDelete0119
DeleteI agree with you, there are authoritative figures in online communities that would not be able to lead in real life. To extend on your definiton I think a leader not only get communication started but and organized communication working toward a common goal. A team of followers if you will, that spread the ideas and principles the leader is endorsing. The point of positive thoughts and communication being synonymous with a leader is also very interesting and makes me think of political campaigns at this time of yea, which is a good example.
My online identity does not greatly differ from my persona in real life, it is however more refined and prudent. My collective behavior in social networks is consistent and not meant to produce a different online identify but to conceal and protect my personal life. I would be categorized under Suler’s description of being “guarded and suspicious about cyberspace”. I acknowledge the grave importance to keep a clean online identify and profile in order to avoid negatively implicating myself in the future. In an information-driven society, quick judgment can be made from online profiles. Participation in social networks is ubiquitous in today’s society. This results in a reduced need for personal face-to-face interaction and judgements are made much faster as a result based on the few or plenty of information made publicly available. Many people do not realize the importance of an online identity in the real world and often neglect the necessity to be mindful. More often now employers request access to an applicant’s Facebook and other social networks in order to perform a quick assessment of the potential employee. If you lack in prudence with what is posted online, you can negatively implicate yourself in the future.
ReplyDelete_______________________
Online authority varies depending on the context and the social forum you partake. This authority simplifies to a person’s credibility in the social community they participate in. In this social community, I sense no heightened authority. As students, we all are equally “ranked” but this rank can escalate based on performance and feedback from someone with a greater educational background—a professor. Acknowledging my authority in this online forum, I gain credibility by demonstrating prowess with online posts and other forms of discourse among my peers.
* Section 0119
DeleteBrandon Jones 0037
ReplyDeleteJohn Suler starts his piece off saying, “It's well known that people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldn't ordinarily say or do in the face-to-face world.” This statement is one on which I definitely agree and which sets the basis for my online identity. My online identity consists of trying to stay true to myself online and giving the best representation of how I present myself in person. When entering discussions on Facebook and Twitter I stick true to my beliefs, but when something is very controversial it is harder to voice this opinion with fear of what your friends will think. Many times when your views are unpopular online you get treated worse or threatened more than you would in real life. A concept that Suler briefly describes as Toxic disinhibition. Suler also describes how the internet gives users a medium where they are not often seen or they are not required to post pictures of themselves. Many times you are interacting with people who you never seen in real life. When considering how my friends act in these online spaces, it is safe to say they act in a totally different manner. They seem to have the need to portray a tougher and “cooler” persona, something even I get caught up in portraying online. All this to achieve acceptance in these communities, via more Facebook friends or Twitter followers. I believe the internet allows us to be the person who we can only dream about being in the real world. Often times online, no one knows how much money we make, what kind of car we drive, or how many kids we have unless we offer up that information. For the most part, we can recreate ourselves as a different character. Through the creation of these other-worldly identities and alter egos that we construct we gain the subconscious, natural human needs of companionship and acceptance. Suler explains it best when he discusses self-constellations across media, where people’s identity expressions are being altered. These online communities permit the angry man to release his anger online with no consequence and allow the shy woman to be more outgoing in her online social space.
I believe the definition of authority within online spaces can be expressed in many different ways. It depends on the genre, or the specificity of the community. Having authority on a blog may be expressed as the number of reads or comments you attain through your postings. I know for a fact that having authority on Facebook is gauged by the number of friends you have and the amount of likes you garner on your status updates or pictures. I envy these people who attract almost 250 likes per picture, I envy those people who draw 75 likes for the same status I posted earlier where I only earned 4 likes. On Twitter, your authority can be gauged by your number of followers or your number of “retweets” on a particular status update. People who are in essence, “Facebook famous” and “Twitter famous” are often looked up to in these spaces, where otherwise in the real world they would become an afterthought. I found that posting the most popular beliefs and most attractive status updates and pictures compensated the most social capital. What is deemed attractive and most popular is determined by your friends or followers in these spaces but it is safe to believe that it coincides with what society believes is beautiful and attractive and what is “the right way to do things.” While it takes a while and it is not easy to build up your social capital, all it takes is one mistake to lose it all. Discussing controversial issues that don’t follow what your followers or friends think can damage these relationships built within the community. I was a witness to a personal friend of mine posting an unpopular belief and being shunned away from a community that once warmly accepted them. This property often forces users of these communities to conform to what others believe and think is right, effectively adding on to an identity which a person does not assume in the real world.
0037
ReplyDeleteWhen I go online and enter discussion forums, I find that I most closely align myself with the dissociative anonymity disinhibition. The forums online that I am a part of are music based; a place for internet artists to post their work and interact with others that share their passions. For me, I’m much more uncomfortable with the idea of talking with total strangers about my passions than I am with the thought of typing to a stranger about my passions. Online forums give me the opportunity to interact with others when and how I want, versus face to face conversation which forces me to respond and talk every 3 seconds. Being anonymous to the other forum members gives me fewer fears about posting my real thoughts and passions about music; I don’t feel judged or pressured by someone I don’t even know. The “You Don’t Know Me” disinhibition works well for me to open up to strangers. What accounts for me to change identities would be would setting the forum was in. A well-run music forum is stereotyped as for educated, calm, level-headed people, versus a MMA forum or sports forum where lunatics run wild. Were I in a sports forum, especially a basketball one, I would change from this level-headed music lover to an impassioned fan and I would defend my team and players to the death. This is also due to the “You Don’t Know Me” disinhibition, because I would never act like that to strangers. If I was in a group of friends who shared similar sporting interests, hell yeah I would yell and shout to argue my point. But with strangers, I change my identity to seem like this, when in reality I would never yell at a stranger face to face.
-continued-
0119
ReplyDeleteThe Psychology of Cyberspace explains how people can go about acting however they wish whether it fit their character or not. The article explains this act by calling it the "disinhibition effect. John Suler noticed this behavior and writes how these people act out of their normal character; they do things that they would never do on face to face confrontation. Suler goes on to explain that many factors such as the feeling of being invisible and anonymous allows for this act to take place. On a personal level I do agree with the statement in which the cyberspace allows me to act out of character. Couple of examples would be when I was in middle school I would go into chat rooms and swear at people. Today I do less swearing and more bashing on rival soccer teams. When my brother or myself play video games online, we taunt our opponents because they don’t know us, only by “XxWildBoyzxX”. However, on other sites like Facebook I do try to portray myself in a way I would normally do face to face because my identity is exposed. On Facebook I don’t swear, taunt, or do anything that would enrage the Facebook community. I use to be known for my bible and inspirational quotes I would post daily (the irony) and posting pictures with friends or family pictures that show what a wonderful person I really am.
____________________________________________________________________________When it comes down to having authority online is when you are supported by people who praise you for certain characteristics you may hold. Wenger’s theory explains that one achieves authority by expressing it through institutions. On Facebook authority can be portrayed through the amount for friends you have, or by the amount of comments or likes you may get on certain picture or status updates. Authority grants you power to never be wrong because your popular and everyone hopes to get authority through authority (become popular in high school if you hangout with the popular crowd.).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete-continued-
ReplyDeleteWhat it means to have authority in an online community is to be recognized and followed. For my music community, the members with the authority are the ones whose videos are the most popular and get the most comments. In an online forum, what other way is there to judge power than by a physical tally of support? A new user like myself gains authority, or recognition, by starting small and gaining views and comments on their work. Once I start being a recognizable name in the forum, my work would be assumed to be good (a video with 300 views is automatically, by society, deemed better than a video with 100 views), and by the power of views I would gain respect and therefor recognition. For me personally I am still small time, working on gaining more viewers and recognition. I have little to no authority in my forum. The things I can do to improve my social capital are to 1) keep producing video after video and hope to achieve gradual recognition, 2) to comment and ask for advice on others’ work to keep throwing my name around the forum, 3) talk to members with authority and ask for advice about how they gained their followings and how I could hope to imitate them. I am currently just doing number 1 and 2, but soon, if still dissatisfied with my lack of authority/recognition, I may begin contacting other members for advice. I have not done anything that has seemed to reduce my capital.
0119
ReplyDeleteI chose to do my Discourse assignment on a poetry community where I can post my poetry and read poems from other people. Although I haven’t picked a specific web community yet, I have been part of a poem group on Facebook. The identity I assume on Facebook and Twitter is different than the one I assume in my poetry community. I post poems in the poetry community that deal with my emotions and my inner thoughts. The reason I post poems dealing with those factors is because as Wardle has pointed out, I do this to fit along with the stylistic of the community and to create a sense of belonging. If I don’t feel as though I fit into the community, I would feel uncomfortable and shy to post such personal poems and have other people comment and critic on them. Going along with Suler’s concept of altering self- boundary, this community does the opposite for me. In real life I wouldn’t dare speak out personal thoughts, but in the poetry community I feel comfortable doing so. I wouldn’t post in the Facebook community as I would post in the poetry community because it has different audiences. The Facebook community will judge you, and the poetry community will not. As a result, my writing in the poetry community is a little less censored.
_________________________________________________________
To have authority in an online community means to have power and, in some cases, popularity. For example, on Twitter if you have a lot of followers you are deemed more popular, social, and “cooler” than a person with less followers. As a result more people pay attention to what you tweet about. When I first entered the twitter community I was prized on how many followers I attained, but after a year of having it, that excitement soon weared down. Actions that I have taken are to follow the people with a lot of followers because maybe people would associate me with them, and as a result, follow me as well.
0M08
ReplyDeleteMany online users can probably relate their own behaviors to what Suler refers to as disinhibitions, which he defines in “the Psychology of Cyber Space,” as a sort of emotional/mental release advocated by the protection felt from the Internet’s “dissociative anonymity”. When I studied my own online behavior, I did notice a few similarities to a few of Suler’s points. One of the things Suler touches on is asynchronicity, the online behavior that takes place when an individual, still “protected” by the anonymity, does an “emotional hit and run. This is usually when we may type or post something emotionally revealing or even delaying a response, a privilege granted by communicating online rather than face-to-face. When I looked back on a few Facebook messages I sent, I noticed that I did this quite often. If someone asked a personal question, I never responded right away (and sometimes would leave the message unreplied for days before I was able to answer). Because I am generally uncomfortable having these conversations in person, I experienced “invisibility”. As for other users, my Facebook friends, I notice a lot of disinhibition caused by this senese of anonymity. Quite frequently, I will come across a post froma friend that “subtly” portrays distressed emotions over a breakup. Or even more interesting are the indirect threats to other indiduals (i.e., “wow, some people should just shut the hell up and mind their own business. Grow up! Smh). Normally, these certain indivduals would never approach anyone this way if the communication had been physical.
Wardle defines authority in communication as “an intangible quality granted to persons through institutions, which renders their pronouncements as accepted by those in that institution’s communities of practice , but which must be maintained through individuals’ speech and action”. In other words, there is the rhetor and audience must establish a trust between each other, demonstrated by the community’s (audience’s) respect for the writer and the writer’s knowledge of the community he/he writes for. For this to work, there must be a sense of belonging. Wardle breaks this down into three modes; the first is engagement, the stage at which both sides must try and find a common ground or “mutuality”. In my own online community I rarely engage with anyone outside of tight group of friends and therefore have no need to try and establish this because it is already there. Wardle also notes imagination, in which we must extend our own personal identities to accept the views of others in the community. I notice I do this mostly when I make new friends online. I have not really participated in my online community lately, and therefore my credibility/authority is quite weak in this comm
I don't have any anonymous online presence. Everyone wishes they could be someone else at some point, but I've never found cyberspace to be the setting for a new persona. I may act slightly differently on Facebook than I do in real life, but I never take any action that would be considered out of character for me. I use Facebook mainly for the connection it provides between my friends and me. I like the idea that no matter where I go or if my phone breaks, I still have a way back to the people I care about. In addition to seeing what my friends are up to, I enjoy posting a joke or something that will remind them of me, and using Facebook's "likes" system, photo albums, favorite quotes, and about me section as a personal collection. Whenever I utilize one of these functions, I'm usually doing it to protect myself from my forgetfulness. It just happens to be on a website dedicated to social networking. I like when others post things about whats going on in their lives, but rarely do I give post in a log or journal format unless I'm posting an event or place I'm at with friends so we can come back to the post later and reminisce the good times. I'll also use Facebook as a means to RSVP to an event or help plan events. I find this much simpler than communicating through group texts or going through the hassle of finding out everyone's e-mail addresses.
ReplyDeleteI do like to observe how others use the anonymity of the internet. Although reading through Youtube comments and web article comments usually makes me angry or upset with the average user's ignorance, I always find myself going through them. Often times it's worth it for that one clever or humorous comment. I also see friends and strangers use the internet as a means of releasing anger without the physical consequences they'll encounter in the "real world." As much as these online arguments about politics, religion, or a film review disgust me, I recognize its something that people need. Everyone has something they want to say to the world, and a lot of those things are easier to say with a figurative mask on. I purposefully shy away from the anonymity the internet brings. As much as I'd like to have a "screenname disguise", I like the idea that my presence in cyberspace hardly differs from my regular behavior.
_________________________________________________________
A person with authority is in the position to enforce a law, settle a dispute or acting as a trusted source of information. Considering that Facebook is the only online community I'm currently a part of (excluding this blog), I don't find myself in any position of authority. Facebook has the ability to create groups and events, allowing users to become a moderator but that's the closest to online authority that I have gotten. Acquiring a large amount of likes for a status or post may seem like authority over your friends or the people who liked the post, but it doesn't necessarily make you a trusted source of information. You may be able to garner the respect that is typically associated with an authority position, but that isn't authority by its very definition. I always try to post something that won't waste a viewer's time. I'll usually post a quote or something humorous I feel with have a positive effect on my viewership. I'm never directly concerned with improving my respect or "social capital" within the Facebook community.
0M08
ReplyDeleteThe internet or cyberspace presents a very unique opportunity for people to represent themselves. There are endless ways a person can portray their identity and I think each way has its own appeal. I think I have represented myself in numerous ways throughout the time I have spent on the internet in my life. I think it is important to understand that cyberspace itself is made up of many different environments, which allows people to assume different identities depending on the situation. I think this line of thought aligns with what Suler says about Self Constellations across media. The environment can influence what part of the emotional constellation shows through, and I think this is true for me. Which aspects of my personality show through vary depending on the environment.
_____________________
What it means to have authority in a cyberspace community really depends on what community that is. Authority in certain communities might mean more control or influence than authority in others. I spend a good deal of time on Reddit.com. The only people who have actual authority on Reddit are moderators and to some degree OPs (Original Posters). Personally, I do not feel much sense of authority on reddit; however, I am not a "lurker" and do contribute to the community through commenting and my own posts. Reddit has a system for voting on content and even comments (Up votes and Down votes). Receiving more up votes than down votes can gain you karma points, which can contribute to a false sense of authority because karma points are useless. However, the more karma you have the more important you feel as a redditor. As far as lessening my "social capital" goes, you can be down voted into negative numbers on reddit and that never feels too good.
0119
ReplyDeleteIn “The Psychology of Cyber Space”, Suler explains how people form new identities when they are online. The internet gives people a sense of confidence which they would not normally have in real life. This usually tends to allow people to express how they feel and many times act ignorant because they know there will not be any consequences. This is seen regularly on sites like Youtube and Facebook, when people post comments or statuses that purposely anger others. When I see things like that I tend to ignore them because it is not worth my time to get angry or upset about what someone said online. My online identity is not much different than my identity in person. This is because I am not as involved in online communities as others, but there are certain circumstances that are disinhibiting. One is where there is a delay in between messages that allows for deeper expressions of what I’m feeling. Suler described this as asynchronicity because it is like an “emotional hit and run”. Unlike me, my friends tend to be heavily involved with twitter and when they show me their tweets I see that they post something almost every thirty minutes. This made me think of the personality variables Suler stated because the people that tend to post the most are the ones with histrionic styles. Lately I have been suspicious about cyberspace especially when I get so many friend requests from people I have never seen in my life. There are many scams out in the web so I tend to be careful of how I do things because I can’t trust anyone particularly when I don’t know who is there.
____________________________________________
Having authority within an online discourse community means getting attention from what you post. On Facebook it might be how many likes and comments, on twitter it might be how many retweets, and on Reddit it might be how many upvotes. For example, anything that shitty_watercolour posts on Reddit has potential to make it to the front page because he has an immense fan base making him have higher authority than other members. Also, celebrities on Twitter can get myriad amount of retweets even if those tweets do not make any sense because they have authority over this discourse community. I see myself as having not that much authority on Facebook because I rarely post anything. On Instagram my pictures have improved my social capital recently because I have been getting a lot of likes due to the fact that they are more unique than others.