- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: [Air-l] students on lists
by Suzana Sukovic 17 May '07

17 May '07

Intimidation factor is most often in a too visible authority and patronising attitude. Sometimes it's worth remembering that PhD students, especially in the humanities and social sciences, are often middle-aged people with lots of professional experience. I agree that AoIR is a welcoming association on-line and off-line. Cheers, Suzana At 11:32 AM 18/05/2007, you wrote: >I'm sure you're right, and it is regrettable. It does tend to suggest, >however, that poor treatment of students probably isn't correlated with >whether or not a list permits pseudonymity, and that the intimidation >factor may well be negatively correlated. >Best - Julie > >-----Original Message----- >From: air-l-bounces(a)listserv.aoir.org >[mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Mary-Helen Ward >Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 9:06 PM >To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org >Subject: [Air-l] students on lists > >I know from my PhD project that many students feel quite inadequate >in the presence of Real Academics. Whether they should or not is >another matter, but many have been treated quite badly in academic >forums (or seen other people so treated). It can be really difficult >for them to trust these forums, and it sometimes doesn't take much to >send them scuttling for cover. > >This list always, in my experience, works hard to provide a safe and >welcoming space. > >M-H

2 1

Trolls
by Julie Cohen 17 May '07

17 May '07

(warning: this is longish - blame the 119 bluebooks...) I'm interested in this discussion for three reasons: I'm a list member; I'm a list member with some outider-ish attributes; and I've just finished grading a long seminar paper on patent trolls and how to define them. I'll take these in reverse order: On definitions: Among folks who care about such things, how to define a patent troll is hotly disputed. Some say trolls are unproductive rent-seekers who exploit the US patent system's lax standards of obviousness to hold up legitimate market participants. Others say that by identifying and resuscitating poorly-performing assets, parties labeled trolls perform a valuable market-clearing function analogous to that performed by, say, ASCAP or the Copyright Clearance Center. The right answer seems to be a little bit of both: some "true trolls" are mere exploiters, while other "market-clearers" are moving the market for intellectual property licensing in a direction that, 10 or so years from now, will seem wholly unremarkable. It seems to me that the same might be said of trolls on lists: some are "true trolls" while others are trying to move the discussion in a legitimate direction, albeit one that many list members find a tiresome hobbyhorse or otherwise want to avoid. [This should be obvious but in case it isn't, I intend no comment on which characterization fits the present controversy.] Some potted etymology: My dictionary lists roughly three definitions for "troll": to sing over and over again, as a round; to fish with a long line; a creature that lives in a cave. Patent trolls and list trolls present an oddly apt merger of the three definitions, which can be framed in a relatively neutral fashion: they fish with the same bait over and over again for a particular "catch" of interest to them, and many find them unsightly. (yup, way too many bluebooks!) On list outsiders: How do we decide what counts as trolling for AOIR purposes? Discussion of this question has mixed two distinct subquestions. The first subquestion relates to what counts as "internet research." This list's membership is diverse, and that's a good thing. I joined it because I had had my fill of "law and economics"; I figured a group of humanities and social science scholars would be more eclectic and openminded. That's true -- oy, except when it isn't. I've met a number of you and thought you were all very nice people, but you do tend to close ranks in a hurry when there is a whiff of crass commerce in the air. Whatever our faults, lawyers tend to be made of sterner stuff, and fwiw I think that behavior is worth reconsidering. These days, the age-old wall between "pure" academia and crass commerce is anything but. Foundations with agendas, partisan think tanks, corporate research centers, and even - gasp - for-profit educational centers are everywhere. The way most of us were educated, the old world made more sense, but the new one is rife with the sorts of hybridity and slippage that excite intense interest to list members when they crop up in other contexts. It would make more sense to consider the interesting questions before rushing to condemn whatever it is. The second subquestion relates to what counts as appropriate behavior on this list. I agree that bad behavior can poison even what ought to be a good topic. But it seems to me that blame is more equally distributed here than many acknowledge. I'm with whoever (Suzana?) suggested a fundamental distinction between calling someone a troll, forever and for always, and accusing someone of trolling. As I'm lawyering today, let's take the facts in the light most favorable to the "accused": someone who believes that he is an internet researcher and that list membership will assist him in pursuing his professional interests, and who wants to stop trolling and conform more closely to the etiquette of the list, might feel that he had done himself such irreparable harm the first time around that pseudonymity is the way to go. Unless you are someone who believes that trolls are trolls, forever and for always, that ought to be defensible. That doesn't make it the smartest choice; for myself, I would have preferred an apology to the list and a statement of intent to try harder not to insult people and waste their time. Two caveats, though: It's amazing how often otherwise-fully-functioning adults have difficulty doing this. It's also amazing how unforgiving other adults can be. Which brings me, in a roundabout way, to my last point: One fairly reliable way of distinguishing between "true trolls" and (trollish) market clearers seems to be that true trolls thrive on attention for its own sake. Whether they receive it, however, is one thing that is not within their control. So enough already about WRC. Please. Julie Julie E. Cohen Professor of Law Georgetown University Law Center jec(a)law.georgetown.edu http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/jec/

4 6

Re: [Air-l] Doctorow on Dealing With Trolls
by Suzana Sukovic 17 May '07

17 May '07

James, I like Boring's view. It is poetic and dramatic, there is a tragic hero and a dull pragmatic in the story, and we can all find real examples for comparison. I am not sure how the theory explains people from textbooks like Copernicus. And, whose textbooks? Tesla was certainly in my textbooks, but not in everyone's. Maybe the devil is in the detail (again!). How do we define trolling and scientific controversy? Latour's approach may help here - whose authority and where, what is controversial and why? Mary-Helen has mentioned aggression. Maybe one difference is in argument vs emotional tone. Cheers, Suzana At 10:13 AM 17/05/2007, you wrote: >"After much thought about the matter, I have come reluctantly to the >conclusion that scientific truth, like juristic truth, must come about by >controversy. Personally this view is abhorrent to me. It seems to mean >that scientific truth must transcend the individual, that the best hope of >science lies in its greatest minds being often brilliantly and >determinedly wrong, but in opposition, with some third, eclectically >minded, middle-of-the-road nonentity seizing the prize while the great >fight for it, running off with it, and sticking it into a textbook for >sophomores written from no point of view and in defense of nothing >whatsoever. I hate this view, for it is not dramatic and it is not fair; >and yet I believe that it is the verdict of the history of science." >Boring, Edwin G. (1929). The psychology of controversy. Psychological >Review, 36, 97-121. [Boring's 1928 APA Presidential Address about past >controversy in psychology.] > > Suzana Sukovic PhD Candidate _________________________________________ Information & Knowledge Management Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney PO Box 123 Broadway NSW 2007, Australia www.hss.uts.edu.au/research/research_students/suzana_sukovic.html

14 22

Re: [Air-l] ICA
by Bates, Benjamin J 17 May '07

17 May '07

I'll be there 23-27 as well. Ben Bates, SJEM, UT Knoxville

1 0

research on factors driving traffic to web sites
by Cristian Vaccari 17 May '07

17 May '07

Hi all, I am doing research on factors that drive traffic to political (parties' and caniddates') web sites. Can anyone point me to some previous research in this field, e.g., studies that highlight some key variables that can account for a web site's amount of visitors, page views, etc.? Does not have to be about political web sites (though I could not find any kind of this research on political sites and would be curious to discover there is some), but also on commercial, news, social-networking, or other kinds of sites. Thanks, Cristian Vaccari www.cristianvaccari.it www.comunicarepolitica.it

5 4

Doctorow on Dealing With Trolls
by Alex Halavais 16 May '07

16 May '07

Given a recent definitional discussion over the evolution of the meaning of troll, I figured I would point folks to a column by Cory Doctorow in Information Week entitled "How To Keep Hostile Jerks From Taking Over Your Online Community." It begins: """ The Internet Tough Guy is a feature in all Internet social forums. These are people who poison discussions with anger, hatred, and threats. Some are malicious. Some are crazy. Some are just afflicted with a rotten sense of humor. Whatever their motives, they're a scourge. It takes precious little trolling to sour a message-board. A "troll" -- someone who comes onto an online community looking to pick fights -- has two victory conditions: Either everyone ends up talking about him, or no one talks at all. And where two or more trolls gather, they'll egg each other on, seeing who can anger and disrupt the regular message-board posters the most. """ The rest is here (with apologies for the ads): http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199600005 It provides an interesting exploration of the art and science of maintaining online discussion-based communities, and what to do with the trolls, including employing a "troll whisperer." Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [X] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais // Social Architect // http://alex.halavais.net //

3 4

FW: Updated estimates about the wireless-only population
by Graham Longford 16 May '07

16 May '07

Alex et al, For those interested in recent stats on wireless-only households, the latest Canadian numbers were released last week by Stats Canada. 5% of Canadian households have given up their landlines and are now wireless-only. See the report here - http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/070504/d070504a.htm Graham -- Graham Longford, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Canadian Research Alliance for Community Innovation and Networking (CRACIN) Co-investigator, Community Wireless Infrastructure Research Project (CWIRP) Faculty of Information Studies University of Toronto 140 St. George St., Rm 310 Toronto, Ontario CANADA M5S 3G6 email: graham.longford(a)utoronto.ca +1 416-978-4662

1 0

Leonardo Electronic Almanac - CFP: Dispersive Anatomies Special (final call!)
by Charles Baldwin 16 May '07

16 May '07

**REPOST: SUBMISSION DEADLINE 5/31 (see below)** **Apologies for cross-posting. Please distribute widely.** *Dispersive Anatomies* http://leoalmanac.org/cfp/calls.asp#dispersive ** *Guest Editors:* Sandy Baldwin, Alan Sondheim and Mez Breeze leadispersive(a)astn.net ** *Editorial Guidelines:* http://leoalmanac.org/cfp/submit/index.asp *Discussion Group: *leadispersive-subscribe(a)googlegroups.com <leadispersive-unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com> *Deadline: *31 May 2007 *Call for papers - LEA Dispersive Anatomies* *------------------------------------------------------------------- *The Leonardo Electronic Almanac (ISSN No: 1071-4391) is inviting papers and artworks that address dispersion - dispersion of bodies, objects, landscapes, networks, virtual and real worlds. A fundamental shift in the way we view the world is underway: the abandonment of discrete objects, and objecthood itself. The world is now plural, and the distinction between real and virtual is becoming increasingly blurred, with troubling consequences within the geopolitical register. This shift is related to a cultural change that emphasizes digital deconstruction over analog construction: a photograph for example can be accessed and transformed, pixel by pixel, cities can be taken apart by gerrymandering or eminent domain, and our social networks are replete with names and images that problematize friendship, sexuality, and culture itself. One issue that emerges here: Are we networking or are we networked? Are we networks ourselves? LEA is interested in texts and works that deal with this fundamental shift in new and illuminating ways. Specifically, anything from essays through multimedia through networks themselves may be considered. We're particularly interested in submissions that deal with the incoherency of the world, and how to address it. *Key topics of interest --------------------------------- *Topics of interest might include (but are not limited to): - Networked warfare in real and virtual worlds. - The wounded/altered body in real and virtual worlds. - Transgressive sexualities across borders, sexualities among body-parts, dismemberments and groups, both real and virtual. - Critical texts on the transformation of classical narrative - from its emphasis on an omniscient narrator and coherent plots/characters, to literatures of incoherency, dispersed narrations, and the jump-cut exigencies of everyday life. - Deleuze/Guattari, TAZ, and other phenomena at the border of networking. - Internet visions and their abandonment or fulfillment. - The haunting of the world by ghosts, virtual beings, dreams and nightmares that never resolve. - The geopolitical collapse of geopolitics. - Military empires as scattershot entrepreneurial corporations. Dispersion has two vectors: the breakup or breakdown of coherent objects; and the subsequent attempt to corral, curtail, or recuperate from this breakdown. How do we deal with networks that are constantly coalescing and disappearing? Where are we in the midst of this? In an era of pre-emptive culture, is guerilla warfare to be accompanied by guerilla culture as the order of the day? *Want to be kept informed?* *------------------------------------------* For the latest news, updates and discussions, join the LEA Dispersive Anatomies Mailing List. Email: leadispersive-subscribe(a)googlegroups.com <leadispersive-subscribe(a)googlegroups.com+> ** *Publishing Opportunities ---------------------------------------* ** As part of this special, LEA is looking to publish: - Critical Essays - Artist Statement/works in the LEA Gallery - Bibliographies (a peer reviewed bibliography with key texts/references in Dispersive Anatomies) - Academic Curriculum (LEA encourages academics conducting course programmes in this area to contact us) LEA encourages international artists / academics / researchers / students / practitioners / theorists to submit their proposals for consideration. We particularly encourage authors outside North America and Europe to submit essays / artists statements. Proposals should include: - A brief description of proposed text (200-300 words) - A brief author biography - Any related URLs - Contact details In the subject heading of the email message, please use *Name of Artist/Project Title: LEA Dispersive Anatomies Special - Date Submitted.* Please cut and paste all text into body of email (without attachments). Editorial Guidelines: http://leoalmanac.org/cfp/submit/index.asp Deadline for proposals: May 31, 2007 Please send proposals or queries to: Sandy Baldwin, Alan Sondheim, Mez Breeze leadispersive(a)astn.net and Nisar Keshvani LEA Editor-in-Chief lea(a)mitpress.mit.edu ____________________

1 0

Re: [Air-l] ICA
by qCentral/Mary L. Gray 16 May '07

16 May '07

that would be great! i'm there friday-monday morning (i can't recall what dates correspond to those days). mg ________________________ Mary L. Gray, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Communication and Culture Affiliate Faculty Gender Studies Department and American Studies Program Indiana University Mottier Hall-Ashton Center 1790 East 10th St. Bloomington, IN 47405-9700 ph. 812/855.4379 fx. 812/855.6014 email: mLg(a)indiana.edu http://www.indiana.edu/~qcentral On May 16, 2007, at 4:14 PM, air-l-request(a)listserv.aoir.org wrote: > Message: 9 > Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 10:02:40 -0400 > From: Rhiannon Bury <buryrc(a)rogers.com> > Subject: [Air-l] ICA > To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org > Message-ID: <464B0F00.4070001(a)rogers.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi everyone > > Any folks presenting at/attending ICAand interested in trying to > organize an AOIR meet up? > > Rhiannon > > Rhiannon Bury > Women's Studies > University of Waterloo > rbury(a)uwaterloo.ca

1 0

Profile of a Spanish Second Life resident
by Fernando Garrido 16 May '07

16 May '07

Hi folks, We've just finished a study about the Profile of spanish second life resident. You know... i think this can be an interesting study for some folks, Best, Fernando Garrido ----------------------- Profile of a Spanish Second Life resident <http://www.kzero.co.uk/blog/?p=578> Profile of a Spanish Second Life resident: Victor Gil from the Cocktail Analysis <http://www.tcanalysis.com>(a Spanish MR house) has kindly given me the findings from a recent market research exercise they carried out. The findings support the ‘Early Adopter’ profile of a typical user across any country. Here are the main findings: *48% of Second Life users in Spain access the virtual world on a daily basis* The cocktail analysis has presented today the results of the first study ever conducted on the visibility and profile of Spanish Second Life users. Second Life (SL) is a virtual world platform that’s already surpassed 6 million residents, 3% of whom are Spanish, according to Linden Labs. The profile of the Second Life user from Spain is a male (65%), avg. 33 years old, with a college degree (54%), and employed (69%) . It’s a user profile markedly different -mostly because of its older age- to the average users of both videogames and other virtual worlds. The study: “Knowledge, valuation and experience of Spanish users in Second Life. Opportunities for Spanish brands” focuses on assessing the current position of this virtual world in Spain through 2 surveys, one directed towards web users and the other towards Spanish users in the largest Spanish community in the virtual world: secondlifespain.com (http://www.secondlifespain.com) The results of the survey manifest a consolidation in the access habits of a considerable number of Spanish SL residents. Almost half of the respondents access Second Life on a daily basis. One out of four (20%) remain connected for more than three hours. Once connected the majority of residents (68%) pays dedicated attention to the experience, which can be now defined as truly “immersive.” Other results from the study: 62% Of the Spanish residents heard of Second Life through mass media. The majority (65%) acknowledges they initially entered SL out of curiosity. Only 22% of respondents created accounts with the explicit intention of meeting other people. Even though 76% of user-residents are satisfied with the experience so far, the volume of the most enthusiastic users –those for whom SL has exceeded their expectations- is very similar to the volume of disappointed users: 22% and 24% respectively. The great majority of users (73%) spend most of their time wondering and exploring different locations of the virtual world. Interaction with other residents is the other main activity for approximately half (55%) of users. The personalization of the avatar -3D representation of the user- is the third activity to which users devote the most time. The study confirms the importance of the social dimension in SL. Interaction with other users is not only one of the most extended practices, but also one of the most demanded when users are questioned about the kind of future evolution they would like to see the virtual world take. Furthermore the study shows that the utilization of Second Life as a space for social interaction becomes more and more important as the user’s “second life” consolidates. Additionally the study spans consumer behavior analysis and the relationship of the residents with brands and advertising in the virtual world. More than half of the respondents (58%) have Linden Dollars, the official currency of Second Life, used for commercial transaction in the platform. However, only 30% have purchased the currency using real money. The great majority have obtained the Linden Dollars through methods internal to the system. Most of the users´ expenses are devoted to improving the appearance of their avatars (62%) through the purchase of clothes, physical attributes, or animations and movements. According to Felipe Romero partner of The Cocktail Analysis and responsible for the study “Beyond the media noise and the expectations created around the Second Life phenomenon our objective was to try to understand what Second Life means and what it represents in the lives of its users. Many Spanish companies are considering entering the platform in order to take advantage of some of the commercial and marketing opportunities that this new environment theoretically offers. We’ve tried to assess whether this opportunities are real at the present time in terms of Spanish consumers and always from the perspective of second Life as an environment with a limited audience and whose future direction has yet to take concrete from.” In order to deepen in the possibilities offered by Second Life to Spanish brands the study has carried out an extensive survey of user’s attitudes about the increasing presence of commercial brands in the platform, as well as the results in terms of exposure that the companies already present are harvesting. The data shows, on one hand, a latent rejection by users of any brand initiatives that don’t contribute with some sort of added value for the residents. On the other hand the study found a high receptivity among residents for brand initiatives based on exchange. For example 68% of respondents were willing to watch advertising from the brands in second Life in exchange for some sort of incentive payment “in kind” as a reciprocal consideration. When asked to explicitly state what types of incentives they would value the most the principal demand was for “entertainment and cultural contents” (theaters, concerts, shows…) Since many of the large Spanish companies that already have a presence in second Life –or are considering one- are searching for data on its impact beyond SL residents, the study has also explored Second Life’s visibility among Spanish Internet Users. At the time of the study 40% of Spanish Internet users had heard of Second Life, however less than half (40%) acknowledged understanding “very well, or well enough” what the virtual world was about. METHODOLOGY The study was comprised of two online surveys: Online survey on Internet Users. Individuals of both sexes, between 18 and 55 years old, representative of Internet Users. Sample size: 1170 individuals. Fieldwork: February 26th and 28th, 2007. Online survey of Second Life residents from Spain. Online survey among SecondLifeSpain.com, the largest Spanish community in Second Life users. Sample size: 651 individuals. Fieldwork: March 28th and April 2nd, 2007. ABOUT THE COCKTAIL ANALYSIS The Cocktail analysis is market research and strategy consulting agency specialized in consumer, communications and new technology trends. For more information contact Felipe Romero / Víctor Gil +34 91 567 06 05 info(a)tcanalysis.com http://www.tcanalysis.com Second Life Offices: http://slurl.com/secondlife/novatierra/81/26/61/ or the coordinates: Novatierra 81/26/61.

1 0