nemorathwald (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
nemorathwald) wrote2005-10-10 10:46 am
nemorathwald) wrote2005-10-10 10:46 am
Entry tags:
Error Correction Vs. Pleasant Social Spaces
The different social rules that apply to different settings have occupied my thoughts for the past several days. It has been noticed that I tend to be much more gentle and conciliatory face-to-face than in the written word. One has gone to far as to describe my words as "socially feral." That would only be true if I had spoken the words while hobnobbing at a party or a church. That's where people come together for pleasant experiences and fellowship, and so the rules of the social setting are whatever facilitates that.
The reason I am so seldom combative in person is that those I know from the above social settings seldom come together for the purposes of getting something done effectively. When someone suggested Orson Scott Card as a Guest of Honor for a convention, I made my views clear and did not pull punches for the sake of politeness. It was not a party where we don't want to spoil the mood; it was decision-making time. It's well and good to try to speak the truth in a pleasant way, but they sometimes don't fit together.
David Brin has an article here that is astonishing in its insight into this matter and inspired many of these thoughts. A different set of social rules apply in competitive spaces which exist to test adversaries against each other: the courtroom, the free market, and the scientific peer-review/conference are some examples. These arenas are soaked in the blood of ideas that have been tested against each other. It has partially replaced evolution; ideas now die in our place.
It sounds unpleasant, but we all benefit from it. Not only do we lose if error goes unchallenged, we stifle in mind-controlled oppression when our entire world is a place where we are not allowed to call each other on our bullshit. For instance,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
saramichigan commented to my recent thread to say "Dang, Matt. You've got some balls. You say the things I only think." Within the appropriate social space, this is a compliment. From this comment, it appears brendand is in full possession of the social skill of detecting when he is in one social setting and when he is in another.
There is no doubt however, that many in fandom think the entire world should be in cocktail-party courtesy at all times. They offer a bare description of the state of their mind, with no sense that it might actually be good to support it; then smile at each other and disperse having gained nothing. We form a haven for our fellow geeks, nerds and other outcasts, and so we cherish the tolerance of eccentricity. I cherish it as much as anyone. When I play a role-playing game, chat at a party, or do other activities, I judge the behavior of my companions only on whether it serves the purpose for which we came together during that time. I set aside differences that we had in an error-correction setting. I will not ever allow that tolerance to infringe on the effectiveness of error-correction systems.
As of today I'm changing the title of my Livejournal to "CITOKATE, Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote To Error." This is labeling this social space, to make clear the discussion rules that I have always applied to the territory over which I have domain.
The reason I am so seldom combative in person is that those I know from the above social settings seldom come together for the purposes of getting something done effectively. When someone suggested Orson Scott Card as a Guest of Honor for a convention, I made my views clear and did not pull punches for the sake of politeness. It was not a party where we don't want to spoil the mood; it was decision-making time. It's well and good to try to speak the truth in a pleasant way, but they sometimes don't fit together.
David Brin has an article here that is astonishing in its insight into this matter and inspired many of these thoughts. A different set of social rules apply in competitive spaces which exist to test adversaries against each other: the courtroom, the free market, and the scientific peer-review/conference are some examples. These arenas are soaked in the blood of ideas that have been tested against each other. It has partially replaced evolution; ideas now die in our place.
It sounds unpleasant, but we all benefit from it. Not only do we lose if error goes unchallenged, we stifle in mind-controlled oppression when our entire world is a place where we are not allowed to call each other on our bullshit. For instance,
saramichigan commented to my recent thread to say "Dang, Matt. You've got some balls. You say the things I only think." Within the appropriate social space, this is a compliment. From this comment, it appears brendand is in full possession of the social skill of detecting when he is in one social setting and when he is in another.There is no doubt however, that many in fandom think the entire world should be in cocktail-party courtesy at all times. They offer a bare description of the state of their mind, with no sense that it might actually be good to support it; then smile at each other and disperse having gained nothing. We form a haven for our fellow geeks, nerds and other outcasts, and so we cherish the tolerance of eccentricity. I cherish it as much as anyone. When I play a role-playing game, chat at a party, or do other activities, I judge the behavior of my companions only on whether it serves the purpose for which we came together during that time. I set aside differences that we had in an error-correction setting. I will not ever allow that tolerance to infringe on the effectiveness of error-correction systems.
As of today I'm changing the title of my Livejournal to "CITOKATE, Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote To Error." This is labeling this social space, to make clear the discussion rules that I have always applied to the territory over which I have domain.
no subject
I'm *very* glad you've chosen to label your journal as what I will shorthand as a critical space; that seems to be a minimal form of fair warning. I've not run astray of misunderstanding the tenor of this space, but I've seen several others do so. Labeling should help.
And I'm going to give thought as to how to encourage the creation, labeling, and possibily differentiation of the critical and social spaces within fandom. You're right that, to a certain degree, we are short of fully acceptable critical zones. But they *must*must*must* be well-labeled. It would be bad for community cohesion to create innocent bystanders taken out by essentially friendly fire.