Entering a synchronous chat space, called "College Chat," I came across a group of individuals spending their Friday afternoon chatting in a room filled with "college" students. The first thing I noticed when I was brought to the site was the rules which I have listed below:
College Chat Rules
- This college chat room is totally free. Simply enter your nickname and press connect. There is no registration required.
- By entering, you agree to be at least 16 years of age.
- Absolutely no phone numbers, emails or instant messaging IDs are allowed to be posted in public.
- Any suspicious activities relating to the exploitation of chat users, report it to a mod or admin immediately.
- Do not flood the chat room or disrupt other users in any way. You will be banned if you do.
- Although we do staff moderators in this chat room, they cannot be on every minute of the day.
- Do not give out any personal information to anyone, no matter how much you think you can trust them.
- Hack/exploit of the chat is a punishable offense by law. We have logs and will report to ISP/Police anyone who does.
- PERMANENT server bans will be placed to users who attempt to exploit/hack our college chat rooms.
The rules seemed straigtforward and rules #4 and #6 clearly expressed that the Leviathan, or anointed moderator, was present to reprimand and censor those who did not conform to the rules set forth. Wallace would have called these rules placed discreetly for all chatters to see a virtual "sign at the door," forewarning members that there are rules and one is expected to follow these rules.
As I began to chat with members in the group, I saw that indeed, many chose to follow the social norms and conventions set forth in the usual chat room environment, as well as conforming to the rules laid out by the website administration. Everyone was careful to not use any sexually explicit terms and only discussed superficial topics such as school and what everyone enjoyed doing. It seemed sexual soliciting was actually only occurring when people "pm'ed" one another. In order to test if this "Leviathan" really existed, however, I chose to experiment on my own. I began typing in sexually explicit words such as "sex", "d*ck," etc. and was immediately booted from the site. Low and behold, the moderator had done it's job and kicked me out for breaking the rules and not following the norm. When I re-entered the chat to talk to the same individuals as before I explained what happened and was immediately told by "conni" that "Yeah, they'll kick you out for saying things like that." I was curious if I would be kicked out again if I repeated the same offense, so I started typing in those words and...nothing happened. I was not kicked out of the chat room like I had five minutes before. However, this time I was warned by people within the chat. They said, "You better not do that or you'll get kicked out." and "If you don't stop I'll report you to the Committee."
My experience seems to support Wallace's theory of the Leviathan pretty clearly. To start off, people in the chat did conform to the social conventions or rules set forth by the site which restricted their own freedom of expression in order to be a part of the chat room. This explains why many immediately wanted to "pm" as soon as they got on the chat, they knew that if they were to make sexual comments in the large chat room they would be punished. However, there was no moderators in private chat. In addition, the Leviathan enforced the normal rules quite well because as soon as I broke one of the rules, I was booted from the chatting space.
In addition, Wallace discusses the fact that "...human willingness to conform and our eagerness to preserve an online group environment. (p. 70)" would lead to the emergence of a Leviathan if one were not officially present and a reproach may be forthcoming as well. In my case, this is exaclty what happened when I continued to use the sexually explicit terms and was warned by members of the chat room that they would report me if I continued using terms which were not allowed.
Therefore, it seems in the College Chat room, members were made aware of what the social norms should be due to the rules set out by the chat room itself. The Leviathan placed by the chat room is present throughout most of the day, but when it is not present, it seems members will continue to enforce the rules and take the Leviathan's place to maintain order. Therefore, in this online space, it would seem that there is always a Leviathan present, ready to censor and reprimand those who do not follow the social norms set out by the chat room and fellow members.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=7532310520884376725
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=4292794472630435976
Friday, September 28, 2007
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
#5 she goes to the school the furthest from me!
Long distance relationship is tough, especially when we are teenage college students living on the opposite sides of the continent. Of course it wasn't planned that way, but that's how it was. My first serious romantic relationship started at high school prom. We already submitted acceptance letters. I was worrying about infamous Cornell weather while he planned on enjoying the perfect 70's in San Diego. But there were attraction and naivety. We spent the summer together. We thought we were in love and there was nothing better. For the next year and a half we talked starting at 12pm EST and 9pm PST every night. I spent my breaks with him. But it was tough. The most challenging part was we couldn't physically be there to share our lives.
Wallace lists attraction factors including proximity, attractiveness, similarity, humor and self-disclosure. Proximity is determined as intersection frequency. Geographic distance plays less hindrance in interactions. Mediated communication is challenging for romantic partners moving from face-to-face interactions. Talking on the phone and sharing similar network in facebook.com didn't feel fulfilling enough.
"I can't go to sleep, because you didn't say you love me."
"I just wish you could put your arms around me and tell me it's going to be okay."
Similarity is another factor that influenced this relationship. We wanted to pursue same careers. We ate the same cereal. In the beginning we thought "love" made up for cultural/religious differences. His parents didn't agree. Transition from a small Catholic high school students to college students at universities with drastically different environments and groups of friends changed us. Mediated communication methods allowed continuation of relationship despite the geographic distance. However, talking on the phone every night about walking up the slope is not the same as sitting in classes together.
Wallace lists attraction factors including proximity, attractiveness, similarity, humor and self-disclosure. Proximity is determined as intersection frequency. Geographic distance plays less hindrance in interactions. Mediated communication is challenging for romantic partners moving from face-to-face interactions. Talking on the phone and sharing similar network in facebook.com didn't feel fulfilling enough.
"I can't go to sleep, because you didn't say you love me."
"I just wish you could put your arms around me and tell me it's going to be okay."
Similarity is another factor that influenced this relationship. We wanted to pursue same careers. We ate the same cereal. In the beginning we thought "love" made up for cultural/religious differences. His parents didn't agree. Transition from a small Catholic high school students to college students at universities with drastically different environments and groups of friends changed us. Mediated communication methods allowed continuation of relationship despite the geographic distance. However, talking on the phone every night about walking up the slope is not the same as sitting in classes together.
Assignment #5
Around April of last year, my apartment had a party. I met this girl, CC, who was a mutual friend of a friend of mine. We instantly hit it off, anyone who might have seen us would have thought we had been friends for months. After our initial meeting, there was a bit of awkwardness as to what will happen next. She ended up “friending” me on facebook and the day after, we spoke through AIM for a few hours. Once we got a little more comfortable with each other, we saw each other again and again until we were official. It helped that we happened to be the same major (and didn’t know it at the time), so as finals came around, we spent a lot of time together. But more cumbersome than finals was the onset of summer, I had an internship in
Connecting my experience with McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors, removal of gating features played an important role in our initial meeting. Even though we had a great time meeting each other, the next day was still a bit awkward. Therefore, our mode of contact thereafter was through CMC (ie. facebook and AIM). CMC removed any awkwardness that most likely would have occurred in an FtF meeting because of the control over what and how you speak online and the lack of nonverbal cues such as body language. CMC removed these “gating features” from affecting our relationship. It is interesting that our meeting had aspects of both online dating and traditional dating because we were initially physically attracted to each other and therefore met. However, we got to know each other better through subsequent CMC interactions.
Connecting to similar others and interaction control also facilitated our relationship. Over the summer, we spent many hours talking on the phone, webcam, and instant messaging. With these lean media, we had much more control over our words (phone calls and AIM) and appearance (on webcam) which made our interactions more comfortable. Also, since we are the same major, she took an interest in my internship and I helped her with her summer classes. Because we had similar academic backgrounds, we were able to connect and interact with each other much better.
#5: "I wish you were here... but not really."
“I’ll talk to you later… well, not really talk… but you know what I mean! TTYL!”
This was something that my ex and I got used to saying (I mean, typing) back and forth on countless occasions. Many of my peers and friends find it difficult to comprehend the fact that as a 19 year old I was able to maintain a stable relationship for over a year… with somebody who was 1,800 miles away for over eight months of the relationship.
My ex and I had met at a mutual friend’s party while I was home in Colorado for winter break of my freshman year. We instantly hit it off; all seemed great! However, there was one minor issue facing us—I was to return to Cornell only a few short days later. Intrigued and yearning to know each other more, we both agreed to contact each other in the near future. Before leaving the party I had expected to receive a phone number; but to my surprise I was handed a piece of paper… with an AOL screen name instead of a phone number. This felt like a total blow. Honestly, who gives screen names to somebody they claim to really have an interest in?! I tried to not think much of it as I gave my screen name in return. To my surprise, I received an instant message the day following the party. We chatted for hours that first day. I know it sounds a bit rushed, but we met up in person a few times later that week and by the end of the week we were an “unofficial item” (as my mother likes to call it).
Even though we eventually exchanged phone numbers, it is surprising how little we actually spoke on the phone. Sure, we spoke on the phone at least once a week. But it seemed as though we spent a plethora of hours chatting via AIM. I feel a majority of our relationship was developed through those countless hours spent chatting online. Why was this? Why did we feel most comfortable resorting to instant messaging as our primary medium of communication? You may be thinking that it would have been just as simple to pick up the phone and dial those simple ten digits. Though it is arguably true that using the phone would have been just as simple, would it have been just as effective?
I believe McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors help explain and played a major role in the development of my past relationship. One primary factor is identifiability, which pertains to the importance of disclosing information about oneself. My ex and I were clearly identifiable to one another which, according to McKenna, lead to an increase in self-disclosure. In return, this increased the development of the emotional bond between us. Instant messaging enabled us to present information that made us more identifiable as an individual, rather than just a screen name.
Another relationship facilitation factor suggested by McKenna is connecting to similar others; this is essentially the common ground principle. McKenna explains that one finds it easier to identify with, as well as connect with, others who have similar interests as one. Instant messaging allowed my ex and I to relay different stories and experiences to each other, expressing our interests and likes. Our CMC conversations also consisted of debates and discussions regarding favorite foods, music tastes, interests in books, movies, and the liking. This clearly allowed us to examine the qualities and characteristics we had in common. This factor of McKenna’s also suggests that a relationship can develop over time and space. In the example of me and my ex, this was clearly the case. For months we instant messaged, discussing and discovering endless commonalities (as well as differences).
I honestly do not think our relationship could have developed as greatly if we would have relied on telephone conversations versus instant messages. Even though the phone is thought of as a richer medium, we both felt more comfortable discussing deeper issues and details in text instead of relaying them verbally. We were able to truly identify and connect with each other due to the wonders of technology.
And just in case you are wondering, the relationship ended during the winter break of my sophomore year. When we met up in person during that winter break, there was something lacking in our face-to-face interactions. We both ironically felt our online relationship was much more exciting than our face-to-face interactional relationship. And more ironic, our instant messaging has nearly ceased… but we still call each other every now and then.
Weird, right?!
-Joshua Navarro
My Comments:
This was something that my ex and I got used to saying (I mean, typing) back and forth on countless occasions. Many of my peers and friends find it difficult to comprehend the fact that as a 19 year old I was able to maintain a stable relationship for over a year… with somebody who was 1,800 miles away for over eight months of the relationship.
My ex and I had met at a mutual friend’s party while I was home in Colorado for winter break of my freshman year. We instantly hit it off; all seemed great! However, there was one minor issue facing us—I was to return to Cornell only a few short days later. Intrigued and yearning to know each other more, we both agreed to contact each other in the near future. Before leaving the party I had expected to receive a phone number; but to my surprise I was handed a piece of paper… with an AOL screen name instead of a phone number. This felt like a total blow. Honestly, who gives screen names to somebody they claim to really have an interest in?! I tried to not think much of it as I gave my screen name in return. To my surprise, I received an instant message the day following the party. We chatted for hours that first day. I know it sounds a bit rushed, but we met up in person a few times later that week and by the end of the week we were an “unofficial item” (as my mother likes to call it).
Even though we eventually exchanged phone numbers, it is surprising how little we actually spoke on the phone. Sure, we spoke on the phone at least once a week. But it seemed as though we spent a plethora of hours chatting via AIM. I feel a majority of our relationship was developed through those countless hours spent chatting online. Why was this? Why did we feel most comfortable resorting to instant messaging as our primary medium of communication? You may be thinking that it would have been just as simple to pick up the phone and dial those simple ten digits. Though it is arguably true that using the phone would have been just as simple, would it have been just as effective?
I believe McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors help explain and played a major role in the development of my past relationship. One primary factor is identifiability, which pertains to the importance of disclosing information about oneself. My ex and I were clearly identifiable to one another which, according to McKenna, lead to an increase in self-disclosure. In return, this increased the development of the emotional bond between us. Instant messaging enabled us to present information that made us more identifiable as an individual, rather than just a screen name.
Another relationship facilitation factor suggested by McKenna is connecting to similar others; this is essentially the common ground principle. McKenna explains that one finds it easier to identify with, as well as connect with, others who have similar interests as one. Instant messaging allowed my ex and I to relay different stories and experiences to each other, expressing our interests and likes. Our CMC conversations also consisted of debates and discussions regarding favorite foods, music tastes, interests in books, movies, and the liking. This clearly allowed us to examine the qualities and characteristics we had in common. This factor of McKenna’s also suggests that a relationship can develop over time and space. In the example of me and my ex, this was clearly the case. For months we instant messaged, discussing and discovering endless commonalities (as well as differences).
I honestly do not think our relationship could have developed as greatly if we would have relied on telephone conversations versus instant messages. Even though the phone is thought of as a richer medium, we both felt more comfortable discussing deeper issues and details in text instead of relaying them verbally. We were able to truly identify and connect with each other due to the wonders of technology.
And just in case you are wondering, the relationship ended during the winter break of my sophomore year. When we met up in person during that winter break, there was something lacking in our face-to-face interactions. We both ironically felt our online relationship was much more exciting than our face-to-face interactional relationship. And more ironic, our instant messaging has nearly ceased… but we still call each other every now and then.
Weird, right?!
-Joshua Navarro
My Comments:
http://comm245purple.blogspot.com/2007/09/time-away-meant-more-time-together.html
http://comm245purple.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-5-long-distance-doesnt.html
12 hours' difference
Last year, when I stepped on the flight from Beijing to New York, I could hardly resist myself from crying, because I had to say goodbye to my boyfriend. I got accepted as a transferred student to Cornell, and would spend two years there till my graduation, while he would stay in Beijing for the rest of his BS degree. This relationship was 1 year long at that time, and we really liked each other. Both of us were aware of the fact that there would be 12-hour time difference between us, but it’s just too hard for us to give up. I had never been through a long-distance relationship before that, and neither could I imagine how we could work it out. But after all, we decided to give it a try, since we were lucky to have all those modern communication media: E-mail, telephone, and instant messengers…And the good news is: a year has already past, and we are still in a relationship. =)
Though hard for the first couple months, we quickly get used to communicating though asynchronous ways. We email each other back and force and leave offline messages on instant messengers. Also, over the weekends, when we are both awake, we webcam and chat. Sometime we even watch the same movie together (I mean…at the same time), though he cant hold my hinds, we can always chat and laugh at those funny stories as we always did when we were together.
I can’t tell this long distance did a bad or good thing to my relationship: we are physically separated, but we are emotionally closer than before: we have never quarreled again. In terms of McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors, I think the most applicable factors are removal of gating features and interactional control. When we come up with some problems, which in the past would always be the start of fights, we become more open about what we are thinking , we are more willing to talk about the it and that’s obviously helpful for solving problems. This also reminds me of O’Sullivan’s model which suggest that people tend to choose mediated media in communication while the valence is negative. It feels much easier to fix problems though instant messenger than FtF…And we obviously get more control over interaction. We can choose when and where to reply to an email and a message…and for the most cases…a webcam connection request… I found it most useful because I no longer have to spend 1 hour to check my hair and makeup before we go to library to study together, and I can always reject the request when I was staying up late for an unfinished paper or blog post wearing my glasses with dirty hair…which is also the most possible reason for us two to be online at the same time…(remember the 12-hour time difference?)
Though hard for the first couple months, we quickly get used to communicating though asynchronous ways. We email each other back and force and leave offline messages on instant messengers. Also, over the weekends, when we are both awake, we webcam and chat. Sometime we even watch the same movie together (I mean…at the same time), though he cant hold my hinds, we can always chat and laugh at those funny stories as we always did when we were together.
I can’t tell this long distance did a bad or good thing to my relationship: we are physically separated, but we are emotionally closer than before: we have never quarreled again. In terms of McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors, I think the most applicable factors are removal of gating features and interactional control. When we come up with some problems, which in the past would always be the start of fights, we become more open about what we are thinking , we are more willing to talk about the it and that’s obviously helpful for solving problems. This also reminds me of O’Sullivan’s model which suggest that people tend to choose mediated media in communication while the valence is negative. It feels much easier to fix problems though instant messenger than FtF…And we obviously get more control over interaction. We can choose when and where to reply to an email and a message…and for the most cases…a webcam connection request… I found it most useful because I no longer have to spend 1 hour to check my hair and makeup before we go to library to study together, and I can always reject the request when I was staying up late for an unfinished paper or blog post wearing my glasses with dirty hair…which is also the most possible reason for us two to be online at the same time…(remember the 12-hour time difference?)
5- My experience with long distance
At the beginning of my senior year in high school, I finally managed to win the heart of the girl of my dreams. I had been pining after her for over a year, so when we decided to start a romantic relationship, I was thrilled. All of Wallace’s attraction factors came into play in the beginning of this relationship. I was physically attracted to her, and I spent literally almost all of my time with her, during and after school. We had plenty of common ground, as we shared the same group of friends and hung out together all the time before we were dating anyway. As we were used to spending so much time together already, disinhibition effects rapidly took place, and we engaged in the deepest levels of self-disclosure.
The most significant factor of attraction, however, turned out to be proximity. When we lived only a few short minutes from each other, and spent all of our time together, we were both convinced that we were completely in love. We felt as if our relationship was invincible, and it would be forever. As these factors of attraction began to change, however, so did our relationship.
When I left for Cornell, and she left for
Despite our best efforts, the decrease in our proximity, combined with the lack of common ground as a result of no longer being in the same social circle, led our relationship into a downward spiral. We no longer felt the attraction for one another that we once had, and our relationship came to an end.
Wallace’s attraction factors truly form an accurate depiction of how attraction is formed between two individuals. I never would have believed back in high school that anything could have broken apart our relationship, so powerful was our bond- however, when the factors of attraction were no longer present, our passion began to slip away.
5 - EA Sports Not Just About Games But About WHAT?
A person with whom I have had a substantial amount of mediated communication would have to be my online friend VazzyFresh. We met while playing Madden for Xbox 360 a few years back. Madden is a video game developed by EA Sports based on professional athletes of the National Football League that is very popular among the gaming world and can be recognized worldwide.
Madden allows the fans the opportunity to take ownership of their favorite team and even become a star player on the same team. The video game has every player, team, and stadium currently in existence with the league as well as Hall of Famer’s from years before. You don’t just play Madden, you become the game. Every tackle made and every touch down thrown is all because of you; only you can control your team’s destiny.
This experience brings together millions of fans, as well as allowing us to meet new people with similar interest, like VazzyFresh. He lives in New Jersey and is a college freshman. We have never met before, but we consider ourselves to be friends over the “Madden Nation” network. We talk on instant messenger every now and then and always chat about what’s going on in the world of Madden.
Video games aren’t just about playing against the computer now; it’s more of a social interaction with other people around the world. Whether you meet online randomly or through a friend, the ability to interact with new people is very easy. This is due to the common ground principle. Through Madden we are able to identify with people because of their interest with Madden and football. Classification can now be put into different groups whether it’s based on the likings of a player, team, or just the game in general. McKenna describes this as “connecting to similar others.”
Another one of McKenna’s theories that relates to “connecting to similar others” is “getting the goods,” or the ability to receive information about others before meeting them. In online gaming you might not ever meet the person on the other screen, but you do know much about them due to their profile from EA Sports. Interaction occurs also through blogs, facebook groups, chat rooms, and through websites as well. These interactions are what I like to refer to as “MADDEN NATION.”
Madden allows the fans the opportunity to take ownership of their favorite team and even become a star player on the same team. The video game has every player, team, and stadium currently in existence with the league as well as Hall of Famer’s from years before. You don’t just play Madden, you become the game. Every tackle made and every touch down thrown is all because of you; only you can control your team’s destiny.
This experience brings together millions of fans, as well as allowing us to meet new people with similar interest, like VazzyFresh. He lives in New Jersey and is a college freshman. We have never met before, but we consider ourselves to be friends over the “Madden Nation” network. We talk on instant messenger every now and then and always chat about what’s going on in the world of Madden.
Video games aren’t just about playing against the computer now; it’s more of a social interaction with other people around the world. Whether you meet online randomly or through a friend, the ability to interact with new people is very easy. This is due to the common ground principle. Through Madden we are able to identify with people because of their interest with Madden and football. Classification can now be put into different groups whether it’s based on the likings of a player, team, or just the game in general. McKenna describes this as “connecting to similar others.”
Another one of McKenna’s theories that relates to “connecting to similar others” is “getting the goods,” or the ability to receive information about others before meeting them. In online gaming you might not ever meet the person on the other screen, but you do know much about them due to their profile from EA Sports. Interaction occurs also through blogs, facebook groups, chat rooms, and through websites as well. These interactions are what I like to refer to as “MADDEN NATION.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)