The entire message wasn't aimed at you or your advice per se, but more so the discussion in its entirety. Also, I'm not speaking of or referring to self-censorship. Yes I agree that some of our own thoughts are censored when writing. Though the issue at hand revolves around censorship of others, not oneself. But perhaps much more self censorship should be exercised given the totality, or quality of the full conversation. Re: Behavior - researching requires application of an open mind, also acceptance of views from those which opinions differ. Re: Academia - I have known no professor to discourage pursuit of a volatile subject, or to refuse to even listen and/or accept ideas within it regardless of their personal agreement. This is how we cultivate talent - how we grow. This too requires and open mind. Thank you, Thomas Jones @othertomjones http://about.me/othertomjones Sent from my iPhone On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:19 PM, "Dave Karpf" <davekarpf@gmail.com<mailto:davekarpf@gmail.com>> wrote: Well, I offered the same advice here that I offer to my graduate students. I'm fine with making that public and having it affect my credibility. All writing is a form of self-censorship. The author makes decisions regarding which thoughts are worthy of expression to a given audience, and the author makes decisions about the manner in which those expressions should best be communicated. Plenty of ideas are "censored" in order to achieve clarity in writing. I'm not sure what "behavior antithetical to the discipline of research itself" you're referring to. I'm also not sure what you consider "the entire purpose of academia" to be. But if it can be so easily subverted by a few words of cautionary advice, then it must be a brittle thing indeed. Regards, DK On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Thomas Jones <tajone02@syr.edu<mailto:tajone02@syr.edu>> wrote: I personally don't plan to have a career in academia. Further, I value standing up for oneself and one's beliefs substantially more than bowing to naivety or censorship of "seniors", especially in the presence of behavior antithetical to the discipline of research itself. My character and value, personally and professionally, is not so frail as to be dictated by the opinion or approval of others. I hope you understand that your credibility too is just as subject as mine as these discussions evolve. Oddly, the behavior demonstrated throughout this discourse closely aligns to cyber bullying, and on an email list of professional academics and researchers no less. This is not the solution; this is the problem. Do not make the mistake in assuming that because I am a graduate student that I am not already established in my career. Such assumptions, like many others presented in this discourse, are no more favorable to the credibility or reputation of established researchers either, regardless of their tenure. Given the email responses on-list thus far, I see little professionalism or reputation reflective its spirit or purpose. Perhaps that is the problem, too much concern for reputation first, substance second. Given the numerous off-list emails I've received in this conversation from others, I now understand their testimonials - why so many are discouraged from using the list, or have stopped participating altogether. I take this time to acknowledge them, bring this issue to light, and thank them for their support. Perhaps I'll act on their recommendation to follow their lead. My time is too valuable for such behavior. But let's hope I need not remind you and everyone else - you too were all graduate students once. I hope your own faculty didn't censor your thoughts as much as you attempt to do here. If so, you have defeated the entire purpose of academia, an unfortunate shame in my opinion. I accept that not all will agree. Thank you. Thomas Jones IT Consultant @OtherTomJones http://about.me/othertomjones http://theothertomjones.com Sent from my iPad On Aug 5, 2012, at 9:10 PM, "Dave Karpf" <davekarpf@gmail.com<mailto:davekarpf@gmail.com>> wrote: Without engaging with the substance of this debate, I'd like to offer up a simple cautionary observation: AoIR is a community of professional researchers/teachers/academics. People develop reputations within that community. Those reputations cast a shadow upon future interactions, as all reputations do. Particularly for members of the community who are earlier in their career and don't have a body of work that they are otherwise known for (read: graduate students), it's worth keeping this in mind when contributing to the list. Someday you will be applying for academic jobs. People will see your file and remember you from your contributions to AoIR. That can either be an asset or a burden. Regards, DK On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Thomas Jones <tajone02@syr.edu<mailto:tajone02@syr.edu>> wrote: Elijah, Calcanis doesn't need to pass muster as "research", nor was his observation about such behavior referenced as such. You act as if only researchers are privy to make socio-technological observations. That is disappointing. You say that: "Having one person with a loud-ish voice compare internet behavior to Aspergers syndrome is highly obnoxious. Having people who should know better repeat the statement is just unconscionable and bordering on 'vile'." Interesting... Researchers been doing this since the the dawn of time, and too, have been labeled as "obnoxious", "unconscionable", and "borderline vile". Though such assertions have usually come from the ignorant and close-minded, more telling of yourself than of me, or Calcanis. No one has "flattened / construed" the issue down to trolling as being "Aspergers-driven". Such a lack of attention to detail is concerning from a researcher, especially when conveyed in such a condescending tone. Had you bothered to not only read, but attempt to understand the basic premise of Calcanis' assertion, you would have understood what he was saying - a tragic misstep in your response. Calcanis asserts that people who do most of their communicating online end up *mimicking* Aspergers because they are imposing, by the vehicles of CMC (keyboard, monitor, text, etc), many of the same disadvantages of those with Aspergers, on themselves due to the inability to recognize non-verbal queues through said vehicles. In short, text lacks context - this shouldnt be a terribly prophetic to anyone on this list. The recognition of non-verbal queues is an issue that computer/software/internet engineers have been striving to add to CMC since the computer/email/internet's inception. What, exactly, do you think the point of emoticons was for? Why, exactly, do you think we have evolved from emoticons, to audio and video in online communications? We have moved, in a non-inclusive pseudo-chronological list, from Usenet, message boards/IRC, instant messaging, blogging, photo-blogging, video blogging, tweeting, and now rolling them all into collaboration apps such as Skype, WebEx, etc,, and now vocal AI queues like Siri. Aside from the technological maturity of the infrastructure, it was to add context to communication. When context is removed from communication - nonverbal responses, facial expressions, etc, - so is recognition of, and/or use of empathy. Lack of empathy in social/digital communications is evidence of, and/or often categorically described as the behavior we understand as "trolling". Some engage in this behavior willingly and cognitively, others are oblivious - the results however are still the same - that person is a "troll". This is not a catch-all explanation for the vast spectrum which is trolling, nor was it ever intended to be, but it is an observation with merit. Regardless of the "validity" of Calcanis' status or quality of work as a "researcher", categorically rejecting the notion that he may have a point is absent traits of any sound researcher. Investigating such claims is the point of research, and there has been no clear consensus on this particular issue. Interestingly enough, you rush to judgement. As far as engaging my faculty, there are no need for straw polls where open minds exist. Thank you, Thomas Jones | Graduate Student | School of Information Studies http://about.me/othertomjones Syracuse University Hinds Hall Syracuse, New York 13244 t 919.809.9454<tel:919.809.9454> e tajone02@syr.edu<mailto:tajone02@syr.edu><mailto:tajone02@syr.edu<mailto:tajone02@syr.edu>> ischool.syr.edu<http://ischool.syr.edu><http://ischool.syr.edu> THE CAMPAIGN FOR SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY campaign.syr.edu<http://campaign.syr.edu><http://campaign.syr.edu> On Aug 5, 2012, at 5:59 PM, Elijah Wright <elijah.wright@gmail.com<mailto:elijah.wright@gmail.com><mailto:elijah.wright@gmail.com<mailto:elijah.wright@gmail.com>>> wrote: Clearly I should have paid attention to this thread a while ago! That being said, I'm going to [safely] assume that neither of the two previous respondents have heard of what Jason Calcanis coined as "Internet Asperger's Syndrome"? While it is still an ongoing, vibrant discussion of diverse perspectives, its underlying premise is certainly feasible. This should get you started: http://calacanis.com/2009/01/29/we-live-in-public-and-the-end-of-empathy/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=59a_1247115195 Calcanis doesn't pass muster as "research" , in my honest opinion. He's in the venture capital, startup, yell-loudly-at-people and get a story posted on TechCrunch-or-whatever, scene. Having one person with a loud-ish voice compare internet behavior to Asperger's syndrome is highly obnoxious. Having people who should know better repeat the statement is just unconscionable and bordering on 'vile'. Thomas Jones | Graduate Student | School of Information Studies http://about.me/othertomjones I think you should take a straw poll of the faculty at Syracuse and see how many of them will agree that it's okay to flatten / construe internet trolling down as being Aspergers-driven. This is one of those things where even *asking the question* is likely to get you a very hostile reaction from many folks... The results should be entertaining. --elijah _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ -- Dave Karpf, PhD Assistant Professor George Washington University School of Media and Public Affairs www.davidkarpf.com<http://www.davidkarpf.com> davekarpf@gmail.com<mailto:davekarpf@gmail.com> Author of The MoveOn Effect: The Unexpected Transformation of American Political Advocacy<http://www.amazon.com/The-MoveOn-Effect-Unexpected-Transformation/dp/0199898383/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_t_1> (Oxford University Press) -- Dave Karpf, PhD Assistant Professor George Washington University School of Media and Public Affairs www.davidkarpf.com<http://www.davidkarpf.com> davekarpf@gmail.com<mailto:davekarpf@gmail.com> Author of The MoveOn Effect: The Unexpected Transformation of American Political Advocacy<http://www.amazon.com/The-MoveOn-Effect-Unexpected-Transformation/dp/0199898383/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_t_1> (Oxford University Press)