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
Suzana, Ah! You encounter the same paradox. Aggression as defined by who? Invariably you wrap back to the speaker/actor diad. The only resolution, for a scholar, is to reject the jargon and to operationally describe the behavior. Fact, premise, conclusion. Then you can test the fact/claim. IMHO, the fear of being labeled is greater that the fear of disputation. A classic "avoidance/avoidance conflict" that resolves to "lurking or leaving" in listserv behavior. This sounds like a hypothesis for a research project. James Suzana Sukovic <suzana.sukovic@uts.edu.au> wrote: 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 _______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
Aggression seems to be defined by other list members based on someone's expressions of views (not only on views). The norms are defined by the majority and/or the most vocal members. For research, it is important to take into account that 'lurkers' and 'trolls' are words with strong connotation. They may describe some behaviours, but what else is in it, needs to be unpacked and probably labeled differently. Otherwise, we may keep using the same word when talking about different things. I apologise if I repeated what someone already said. I haven't read the whole thread (one of the benign reasons for lurkers to remain in the shade). Mary-Helen sent her response while I was writing this. Verb or noun? Maybe being a 'troll' means that's who you are, 'trolling' is something you've done, maybe once. It's like saying to children that something was unacceptable behaviour, not that they are unacceptable people. Suzana At 01:21 PM 17/05/2007, you wrote:
Suzana,
Ah! You encounter the same paradox. Aggression as defined by who? Invariably you wrap back to the speaker/actor diad. The only resolution, for a scholar, is to reject the jargon and to operationally describe the behavior. Fact, premise, conclusion. Then you can test the fact/claim.
IMHO, the fear of being labeled is greater that the fear of disputation. A classic "avoidance/avoidance conflict" that resolves to "lurking or leaving" in listserv behavior.
This sounds like a hypothesis for a research project.
James
Mary-Helen sent her response while I was writing this. Verb or noun? Maybe being a 'troll' means that's who you are, 'trolling' is something you've done, maybe once. It's like saying to children that something was unacceptable behaviour, not that they are unacceptable people. Suzana
And what do we call a troll who, once booted off of a list, then resubscribes under a pseudonym, only to be booted off again - but then who manages to resubscribe under still another pseudonym, but this time, despite being recognized as the original troll by many members of the list (because of similar argumentative and rhetorical moves, writing style, etc.), just barely manages to avoid getting booted because he largely remains within the boundaries of proscribed behavior - although he also manages to spam the list with adverts for his own conference? curiously, - charles ess
Charles, IMHO, this hypothetical person can no longer be considered a troll since a troll by definition operates outside the norms of the group. By your own statement, "he largely remains within the boundaries of proscribed behavior." Unless you mean, "once a troll always a troll", without the possibility of redemption. You weren't suggesting that were you? Secondly, spam has a legal definition and if the conference is a non-profit activity it is considered a "public service announcement", not advertising, and it is excepted from the law. This exposes a possible imprecision in the application of another web jargonistic term. Since spam is legally defined, a responsible person would report this person to authorities. Also if a mechanism for a person to unsubscribe is part of the mailing and he has complied to the requests then again, no foul. Assuming he is using an pseudonym, the use of a pseudonym is not unusual even in AIR-L. where many people are known only by their email address or alias. Most listservs do not require a real name for registration. I think I remember it to be true of AIR-L as well. ICBW So in answer to your question, the only name you can reasonably apply is "participant." in good standing. One could assume that he has learned to be a good nettizen. There remains the possibility that a few members of the list could flame him so as to provoke a defense that will then be considered poor netiquette and evidence of "Trolling." But of course if he is smart he will not be provoked. Wouldn't the flaming be a violation of group norms? Your question actually exposes the subjective nature of such labeling. Good job and cleverly framed. James _______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
i believe Charles is referring to this: http://alex.halavais.net/dr-w-reid-cornwell/ -- Barry Saunders http://investigativeblog.net http://blogopalypse.blogspot.com/ --------------------- PhD Candidate // sessional academic http://creativeindustries.qut.edu.au ph: 07 3138 0155 (CRICOS No. 00213J) On 5/17/07, James Whyte <whyte.james@yahoo.com> wrote:
Charles,
IMHO, this hypothetical person can no longer be considered a troll since a troll by definition operates outside the norms of the group. By your own statement, "he largely remains within the boundaries of proscribed behavior." Unless you mean, "once a troll always a troll", without the possibility of redemption. You weren't suggesting that were you?
Secondly, spam has a legal definition and if the conference is a non-profit activity it is considered a "public service announcement", not advertising, and it is excepted from the law. This exposes a possible imprecision in the application of another web jargonistic term. Since spam is legally defined, a responsible person would report this person to authorities. Also if a mechanism for a person to unsubscribe is part of the mailing and he has complied to the requests then again, no foul.
Assuming he is using an pseudonym, the use of a pseudonym is not unusual even in AIR-L. where many people are known only by their email address or alias. Most listservs do not require a real name for registration. I think I remember it to be true of AIR-L as well. ICBW
So in answer to your question, the only name you can reasonably apply is "participant." in good standing. One could assume that he has learned to be a good nettizen.
There remains the possibility that a few members of the list could flame him so as to provoke a defense that will then be considered poor netiquette and evidence of "Trolling." But of course if he is smart he will not be provoked. Wouldn't the flaming be a violation of group norms?
Your question actually exposes the subjective nature of such labeling. Good job and cleverly framed.
James
_______________________________________________ The 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/
--------------------------------- Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. _______________________________________________ The 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/
Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. if you google him you will see that he has at least 3 different institutes/centers/ foundations all related to his corporate entity, he has several conferences, which he seems intent on leveraging academic expertise to promote. To me, it sounds very much like a profit from conferences system, leveraging academic expertise, which I find distasteful. I also find it distasteful that he has appropriated the emails from the list and is spamming members. It is spam in as much as it was unrequested and there is one profit making entity involved. If you received his personal invitations, i suggest you think twice, because it is likely that everyone on the list received very much the same invitation. I personally wouldn't want to have one of his conferences on my vita, i think it would have negative mojo to some people who have been bothered by him before. Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron
After three unsolicited and unacknowledged approaches from Reid Cornwell I asked him not to write to me again. He replied politely and I haven't heard from him since. At least, not with that name. M-H On 17/05/2007, at 10:46 PM, Jeremy Hunsinger wrote:
Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. if you google him you will see that he has at least 3 different institutes/centers/ foundations all related to his corporate entity, he has several conferences, which he seems intent on leveraging academic expertise to promote. To me, it sounds very much like a profit from conferences system, leveraging academic expertise, which I find distasteful. I also find it distasteful that he has appropriated the emails from the list and is spamming members. It is spam in as much as it was unrequested and there is one profit making entity involved. If you received his personal invitations, i suggest you think twice, because it is likely that everyone on the list received very much the same invitation. I personally wouldn't want to have one of his conferences on my vita, i think it would have negative mojo to some people who have been bothered by him before.
Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu)
Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron
_______________________________________________ The 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/
Mary-Helen, You speak of a man who dealt with your request in polite and appropriate manner. I received an email that actually ask if I wanted to be removed from his (harvested) list. Hardly the behavior of a malevolent person. James Mary-Helen Ward <mhward@usyd.edu.au> wrote: After three unsolicited and unacknowledged approaches from Reid Cornwell I asked him not to write to me again. He replied politely and I haven't heard from him since. At least, not with that name. M-H On 17/05/2007, at 10:46 PM, Jeremy Hunsinger wrote:
Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. if you google him you will see that he has at least 3 different institutes/centers/ foundations all related to his corporate entity, he has several conferences, which he seems intent on leveraging academic expertise to promote. To me, it sounds very much like a profit from conferences system, leveraging academic expertise, which I find distasteful. I also find it distasteful that he has appropriated the emails from the list and is spamming members. It is spam in as much as it was unrequested and there is one profit making entity involved. If you received his personal invitations, i suggest you think twice, because it is likely that everyone on the list received very much the same invitation. I personally wouldn't want to have one of his conferences on my vita, i think it would have negative mojo to some people who have been bothered by him before.
Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu)
Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron
_______________________________________________ The 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/
_______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
Actually I had to email this guy several times to get myself off his list. It took 3 attempts for him to respect my wishes. Monica Dr. Monica Whitty Queen's University Belfast School of Psychology David Keir Building Northern Ireland BT7 1NN Phone: +44 (0)28 9097 5654 Email: m.whitty@qub.ac.uk http://www.psych.qub.ac.uk/staff/teaching/whitty/profile/ -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of James Whyte Sent: 17 May 2007 17:05 To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] Doctorow on Dealing With Trolls Mary-Helen, You speak of a man who dealt with your request in polite and appropriate manner. I received an email that actually ask if I wanted to be removed from his (harvested) list. Hardly the behavior of a malevolent person. James Mary-Helen Ward <mhward@usyd.edu.au> wrote: After three unsolicited and unacknowledged approaches from Reid Cornwell I asked him not to write to me again. He replied politely and I haven't heard from him since. At least, not with that name. M-H On 17/05/2007, at 10:46 PM, Jeremy Hunsinger wrote:
Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. if you google him you will see that he has at least 3 different institutes/centers/ foundations all related to his corporate entity, he has several conferences, which he seems intent on leveraging academic expertise to promote. To me, it sounds very much like a profit from conferences system, leveraging academic expertise, which I find distasteful. I also find it distasteful that he has appropriated the emails from the list and is spamming members. It is spam in as much as it was unrequested and there is one profit making entity involved. If you received his personal invitations, i suggest you think twice, because it is likely that everyone on the list received very much the same invitation. I personally wouldn't want to have one of his conferences on my vita, i think it would have negative mojo to some people who have been bothered by him before.
Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu)
Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron
_______________________________________________ The 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/
_______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. _______________________________________________ The 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/
Has anyone in this organization actually made the attempt to get to know Reid Cornwell. His telephone number is on his emails. If so, what did that produce. Is he a jerk devoid of valuable qualities? What? Is everyone willing to accept the assertions unquestioned? From a scholarly point of view, one would think this malevolent character would be the object of curiosity as the poster child for Internet deviancy.IMHO true scholarship demands that one interrogate the accusers and the accused and determine for oneself what is the truth. Is it possible that WRC has been labeled a troll and the accusers are reifiying the label so that they don't have to be accountable? I'd be willing to bet Reid Cornwell would be willing to talk to anyone that called (friend or foe). It seems he is too up front to do otherwise. E.G. Boring nailed this whole drama 79 years ago. James. Jeremy Hunsinger <jhuns@vt.edu> wrote: Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. if you google him you will see that he has at least 3 different institutes/centers/ foundations all related to his corporate entity, he has several conferences, which he seems intent on leveraging academic expertise to promote. To me, it sounds very much like a profit from conferences system, leveraging academic expertise, which I find distasteful. I also find it distasteful that he has appropriated the emails from the list and is spamming members. It is spam in as much as it was unrequested and there is one profit making entity involved. If you received his personal invitations, i suggest you think twice, because it is likely that everyone on the list received very much the same invitation. I personally wouldn't want to have one of his conferences on my vita, i think it would have negative mojo to some people who have been bothered by him before. Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron _______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids.
I think that you are now trolling. i did not present him as malevolent, i presented my interpretations of his situation. I personally think there is going to be a difference between his portrayal of his actions and his perceived actions. I am just skeptical of his position given prior actions. I am sure that everyone would agree that he is attempting to do something, and where we might disagree is how to interpret that. again, phrases such as 'true scholarship' might be considered derogatory. My sole point was to say to fellow members of the list that you should investigate the situation more fully before you commit to working with someone. If they do investigate this situation more fully, I expect they will come to worrysome conclusions. That is my opinion of people who I suspect have a well developed capacity for judgment. It is not scholarship, they can do that on their own.
All, In the absence of direct dictated and enforced rules on list behavior or some sort of filter, as in the CRTNET list for the National Communication Assoc., list norms are emergent and negotiated by participants. Research shows these emerge over time (taking longer than f2f) but are resilient in mixed f2f2/cmc groups. In my experience in activist and academic lists, troll behavior is defined on the fly and can only be mitigated by group consensus that the behavior is unwarranted or disruptive. As lists have become more popularized (less geeky) and/or larger and/or populated with participants who lack long term interaction experience in that particular forum, troll behavior becomes harder to communally police. List members complain to the admin instead of taking action themselves. The Reid episode was a perfect example of this and having an admin step in always invites charges of censorship. As another example, I had emailed someone off (an activist) list to tell them that calling another participant a "f*cking idiot" was not productive. He responded by stating he had known that person for years and he then not to take the comment personally. The context and community norms are everything. The old axiom of "not wrestling with pigs because you get dirty and it annoys the pig" fits the troll issue. In the past many communities have simply refused to respond to any posts or added the troll to their bozo filter (as I did with the Reid spam after my second unsub attempt). IMO, what a list needs to do these days (and we should do) once it gets to be large is to have a process observer. Concerns about behavior should not be voiced in private emails but publicly by the PO. The PO can also recommend a time-out (act like a 6 year old and get treated as one). Normally, this role is taken by a senior list member who commands everyone's respect. Again, the larger this list, the less effective this traditional control becomes. Just my thoughts, -TED Ted M. Coopman Department of Communication University of Washington On Thu, 17 May 2007, Jeremy Hunsinger wrote:
I think that you are now trolling. i did not present him as malevolent, i presented my interpretations of his situation. I personally think there is going to be a difference between his portrayal of his actions and his perceived actions. I am just skeptical of his position given prior actions. I am sure that everyone would agree that he is attempting to do something, and where we might disagree is how to interpret that.
again, phrases such as 'true scholarship' might be considered derogatory.
My sole point was to say to fellow members of the list that you should investigate the situation more fully before you commit to working with someone. If they do investigate this situation more fully, I expect they will come to worrysome conclusions. That is my opinion of people who I suspect have a well developed capacity for judgment. It is not scholarship, they can do that on their own. _______________________________________________ The 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/
Jeremy, It's easy to find out things about Reid Cornwell.He is a public figure. A look at http://focus-on-education.org will tell you that he founded the organization over a decade ago and was awarded a 501(c)(3) designation long before any of the "empire" as you expressed has grown. His publications in the Wall Street Journal predate any of this drama. His associations with people and organizaions outside this list are easily verified and documented. While his criticisms within the list are caustic they are certainly not toxic. He clearly is not a wilting lily. He is certainly not retiring.I want to know what invites the kind of vitriol that you and other have leveled against him. Is it possible that because he challenges you and is irreverent to the doxa that is so entrenched that he offends you. (plural you) I say again read Patricia's paper on flaming with a reflexive attitude. Since I wrote the statement "true scholarship" I meant it in the context of the ideal of objectivity. If you took offense I sorry, but do not recant. The intention was not to offend but to challenge objectification of the charges against Reid Cornwell As best as I can figure few people have attempted to know what he is about. Yet the judgement of "Troll" has been placed on the table and his self defence is considered further evidence of his guilt. It is clear that you don't like him, but why. Your appeal to investigate from my point of view carries with it the admonition to all to investigate the speaker/accusers as well as the actor/accused. IMHO, scholarship requires this responsibility. I have appealed to all, through citation, for logic and rationality. Reid Cornwell is not inscrutible or unknown. He is a visible as an Abrhams tank. IMHO it is immoral to condemm a person without a fair examination. Coopman's comment on having to request revoval from the WRC's list several times exposes the lack forgiveness for an action that could be explained as something other than bad intent. What could be lost by trying to get to know this person? What could be gained? Why do you think he would be anything but defensive in this community when the list moderator has mounted an ad hominem like nothing I have ever seen and then to have others quoting it in an indexed list. If you think about it WRC has actually been fairly restrained. James Jeremy Hunsinger <jhuns@vt.edu> wrote: I think that you are now trolling. i did not present him as malevolent, i presented my interpretations of his situation. I personally think there is going to be a difference between his portrayal of his actions and his perceived actions. I am just skeptical of his position given prior actions. I am sure that everyone would agree that he is attempting to do something, and where we might disagree is how to interpret that. again, phrases such as 'true scholarship' might be considered derogatory. My sole point was to say to fellow members of the list that you should investigate the situation more fully before you commit to working with someone. If they do investigate this situation more fully, I expect they will come to worrysome conclusions. That is my opinion of people who I suspect have a well developed capacity for judgment. It is not scholarship, they can do that on their own. _______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
All, James Whyte wrote: "Coopman's comment on having to request revoval from the WRC's list several times exposes the lack forgiveness for an action that could be explained as something other than bad intent." This is the relevant section of my post: "The old axiom of "not wrestling with pigs because you get dirty and it annoys the pig" fits the troll issue. In the past many communities have simply refused to respond to any posts or added the troll to their bozo filter (as I did with the Reid spam after my second unsub attempt)." This was simply an example of what I did rather than getting animated about it. I tried to unsub twice and then simply added the address to my spam filter. Simple, done. I did not imply intent on the senders part, evil or otherwise. Forgive him for what? Being a jerk? Who cares? I have no relationship with him. Reid's intent was of no interest to me. I just did not want to be bothered. SPAM is unwanted and unsolicited mass email (he described it as a mass mailing). The legitimacy (or lack of) of his other endeavors is immaterial to me. I just have no interest in what he is into. However, IMO harvesting emails addresses from a list, esp. a list you have been removed from, for your own purposes is unseemly and verges on SPAMMER behavior. If one wishes to promote something to list members then one should seek permission to use the list or use it as a list member. He could have easily sent his conference announcement to the list admin or through one his friends on this list. -TED Ted M. Coopman Department of Communication University of Washington On Thu, 17 May 2007, James Whyte wrote:
Jeremy,
It's easy to find out things about Reid Cornwell.He is a public figure. A look at http://focus-on-education.org will tell you that he founded the organization over a decade ago and was awarded a 501(c)(3) designation long before any of the "empire" as you expressed has grown. His publications in the Wall Street Journal predate any of this drama. His associations with people and organizaions outside this list are easily verified and documented.
While his criticisms within the list are caustic they are certainly not toxic. He clearly is not a wilting lily. He is certainly not retiring.I want to know what invites the kind of vitriol that you and other have leveled against him.
Is it possible that because he challenges you and is irreverent to the doxa that is so entrenched that he offends you. (plural you)
I say again read Patricia's paper on flaming with a reflexive attitude.
Since I wrote the statement "true scholarship" I meant it in the context of the ideal of objectivity. If you took offense I sorry, but do not recant. The intention was not to offend but to challenge objectification of the charges against Reid Cornwell
As best as I can figure few people have attempted to know what he is about. Yet the judgement of "Troll" has been placed on the table and his self defence is considered further evidence of his guilt.
It is clear that you don't like him, but why. Your appeal to investigate from my point of view carries with it the admonition to all to investigate the speaker/accusers as well as the actor/accused. IMHO, scholarship requires this responsibility.
I have appealed to all, through citation, for logic and rationality. Reid Cornwell is not inscrutible or unknown. He is a visible as an Abrhams tank.
IMHO it is immoral to condemm a person without a fair examination.
Coopman's comment on having to request revoval from the WRC's list several times exposes the lack forgiveness for an action that could be explained as something other than bad intent.
What could be lost by trying to get to know this person? What could be gained? Why do you think he would be anything but defensive in this community when the list moderator has mounted an ad hominem like nothing I have ever seen and then to have others quoting it in an indexed list.
If you think about it WRC has actually been fairly restrained.
James
Jeremy Hunsinger <jhuns@vt.edu> wrote: I think that you are now trolling. i did not present him as malevolent, i presented my interpretations of his situation. I personally think there is going to be a difference between his portrayal of his actions and his perceived actions. I am just skeptical of his position given prior actions. I am sure that everyone would agree that he is attempting to do something, and where we might disagree is how to interpret that.
again, phrases such as 'true scholarship' might be considered derogatory.
My sole point was to say to fellow members of the list that you should investigate the situation more fully before you commit to working with someone. If they do investigate this situation more fully, I expect they will come to worrysome conclusions. That is my opinion of people who I suspect have a well developed capacity for judgment. It is not scholarship, they can do that on their own. _______________________________________________ The 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/
--------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. _______________________________________________ The 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/
Jeremy: I respect your work and your intellect, but I actually took you up on your challenge and found Cornwell to be quite reasonable and fascinating. I had found some of his points to be valid in the past but I had never talked to him, and I think that it would be prudent for a person as gifted as you are intellectually to keep and open mind and be receptive to ideas from those who may differ in approach from you. Even Larry Flynt and Jerry Falwell found that they actually liked one another once they reasoned together despite their two polar opposite views on morality and politics. I believe that the guest list from his conference is impressive, and I spoke with some colleagues on Capital Hill about this conference and they are planning on coming. For example, Barbara McCombs is one of the foremost experts in the area of learner centered education and she has actually created guidelines for APA's National Headquarters in Washington. This is why there is a buzz going on about this conference in Washington because she has a following in the DC metro area, and so do many of the other speakers. There are others who are equally well-known individuals who will be participating at this conference and I do not agree with you that it will make their vita suspect. In fact, I think that it may be benefit those who participate because of the number of other great minds who will be presenting. One could call this guilt by association in a positive sense rather than the negative one that has been suggested. Many of the presenters are in high demand and they are usually compensated because they are the best. I know that you are not suggesting that the leading scholars in academia should not be compensated well because that is an idea that led academia to lose their best minds to the business world because of financial reasons like the dying of tenure. Academia can learn one thing from business: the customer, or the student, is the reason that the institutions of higher learning exists. Therefore, it is imperative that each of us as scholars dedicate ourselves to increasing graduation rates, embracing low-cost digital and open-sourced publishing and developing our human capital especially with lower-social economic groups and minorities. These students are competing in a global economy and this will require new approaches that may differ from traditional education as your colleague in Madison Dr. J.P. Gee has been suggesting for several years. The fact that any academic conference may be profit driven is not disturbing to me as long as the conference is learner centered and geared towards assisting scholars in becoming better communicators and learner centered. All education begins with communications, and unfortunately as a communications professional and a scholar, I find that this is the problem in education in general: too many of us did not embrace, perfect or even study communications and therefore we talk at our students and one another and not to our students and one another. At the end of the day its your choice, but you are brilliant, do not major in minors because frankly it is beneath you and you are capable of so much more based on your vita and your talks on this board alone. Name calling is one of the tenets of propaganda that each of us should try to avoid because it usually has a boomerang effect. Keep up your great work! Chris -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of James Whyte Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 12:51 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] Doctorow on Dealing With Trolls Has anyone in this organization actually made the attempt to get to know Reid Cornwell. His telephone number is on his emails. If so, what did that produce. Is he a jerk devoid of valuable qualities? What? Is everyone willing to accept the assertions unquestioned? From a scholarly point of view, one would think this malevolent character would be the object of curiosity as the poster child for Internet deviancy.IMHO true scholarship demands that one interrogate the accusers and the accused and determine for oneself what is the truth. Is it possible that WRC has been labeled a troll and the accusers are reifiying the label so that they don't have to be accountable? I'd be willing to bet Reid Cornwell would be willing to talk to anyone that called (friend or foe). It seems he is too up front to do otherwise. E.G. Boring nailed this whole drama 79 years ago. James. Jeremy Hunsinger <jhuns@vt.edu> wrote: Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. if you google him you will see that he has at least 3 different institutes/centers/ foundations all related to his corporate entity, he has several conferences, which he seems intent on leveraging academic expertise to promote. To me, it sounds very much like a profit from conferences system, leveraging academic expertise, which I find distasteful. I also find it distasteful that he has appropriated the emails from the list and is spamming members. It is spam in as much as it was unrequested and there is one profit making entity involved. If you received his personal invitations, i suggest you think twice, because it is likely that everyone on the list received very much the same invitation. I personally wouldn't want to have one of his conferences on my vita, i think it would have negative mojo to some people who have been bothered by him before. Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron _______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. _______________________________________________ The 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/
On 17/05/07, Jeremy Hunsinger <jhuns@vt.edu> wrote:
Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. i
<snip> Just a note to say that Reid Cornwell has recently 'infected' another list of which I have been a long-time member (concerning interaction design). He bizarrely attacked the list for discussing ...the very subject matter of the list. You couldn't make it up. Louise Louise Ferguson
Louis, Come on now, I lurk on that list and there is more to the story (as there usually is). He had posted a call for participation in an education conference for interactive designers for the purpose of HCI in education and the thread went merrily along on "gas pump design." I love the characterizations of "infected". His attempt was to infect with social conciousness. It is bizarre, when you can get interactive designer in India for an inflated $7.00 per hour. James Louise Ferguson <louise.ferguson@gmail.com> wrote: On 17/05/07, Jeremy Hunsinger wrote:
Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. i
Just a note to say that Reid Cornwell has recently 'infected' another list of which I have been a long-time member (concerning interaction design). He bizarrely attacked the list for discussing ...the very subject matter of the list. You couldn't make it up. Louise Louise Ferguson _______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
omg, can we please move on and talk about something else?!!!!! This is ridiculous. -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of James Whyte Sent: May 17, 2007 5:31 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] Doctorow on Dealing With Trolls Louis, Come on now, I lurk on that list and there is more to the story (as there usually is). He had posted a call for participation in an education conference for interactive designers for the purpose of HCI in education and the thread went merrily along on "gas pump design." I love the characterizations of "infected". His attempt was to infect with social conciousness. It is bizarre, when you can get interactive designer in India for an inflated $7.00 per hour. James Louise Ferguson <louise.ferguson@gmail.com> wrote: On 17/05/07, Jeremy Hunsinger wrote:
Yes, I think we should be very wary of getting involved with dr. reid cornwell. his empire is expanding of course. i
Just a note to say that Reid Cornwell has recently 'infected' another list of which I have been a long-time member (concerning interaction design). He bizarrely attacked the list for discussing ...the very subject matter of the list. You couldn't make it up. Louise Louise Ferguson _______________________________________________ The 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/ --------------------------------- Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. _______________________________________________ The 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/
T. Kennedy wrote:
omg, can we please move on and talk about something else?!!!!! This is ridiculous.
Agreed. If the goal of the troll is control, this list has most certainly been hijacked. I simply have set my email program's filters to shunt posts from certain email addresses straight to trash. It makes life on the list abundantly more pleasant, except when I must manually delete all of the notes in which my friends rise to take the bait. -- Mark D. Johns, Ph.D. Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Communication Studies Luther College, Decorah, Iowa USA http://academic.luther.edu/~johnsmar/ ----------------------------------------------- "Get the facts first. You can distort them later." ---Mark Twain
I am going to filter out this discussion, now that Mark mentions it. I've heard enough... On May 17, 2007, at 3:48 PM, Mark D. Johns wrote:
T. Kennedy wrote:
omg, can we please move on and talk about something else?!!!!! This is ridiculous.
Agreed. If the goal of the troll is control, this list has most certainly been hijacked.
I simply have set my email program's filters to shunt posts from certain email addresses straight to trash. It makes life on the list abundantly more pleasant, except when I must manually delete all of the notes in which my friends rise to take the bait. -- Mark D. Johns, Ph.D. Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Communication Studies Luther College, Decorah, Iowa USA http://academic.luther.edu/~johnsmar/ ----------------------------------------------- "Get the facts first. You can distort them later." ---Mark Twain _______________________________________________ The 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/
Bonnie A. Nardi Donald Bren School of Information and Computer Sciences University of California, Irvine Irvine, CA 92697-3440 (949) 824-6534 www.artifex.org/~bonnie/
And what do we call a troll who, once booted off of a list, then
resubscribes under a pseudonym, only to be booted off again - but then who manages to resubscribe under still another pseudonym, but this time, despite being recognized as the original troll by many members of the list (because of similar argumentative and rhetorical moves, writing style, etc.), just barely manages to avoid getting booted because he largely remains within the boundaries of proscribed behavior - although he also manages to spam the list with adverts for his own conference?
curiously, - charles ess
I can't speak specifically for email lists, but on LiveJournal they would be called 'sockpuppet' accounts. I'm not sure where the term was created. -Ellie
Precisely! Nicely said. Suzana Sukovic <suzana.sukovic@uts.edu.au> wrote: It's like saying to children that something was unacceptable behaviour, not that they are unacceptable people. Suzana --------------------------------- Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
participants (14)
-
Barry Saunders -
Bonnie Nardi -
Charles Ess -
Ellie Wix -
Heidelberg, Chris -
James Whyte -
Jeremy Hunsinger -
Louise Ferguson -
Mark D. Johns -
Mary-Helen Ward -
mwhitty -
Suzana Sukovic -
T. Kennedy -
Ted M Coopman