Wiki is kinda cool.

My experience with Wiki is going pretty civilly right now. So far, I haven't made any changes to the Octavarium wiki. I've been participating in a discussion with one of those people who "guard wiki" about how we can incorporate the fact that Octavarium is a concept album in the article. I learned that there used to be a section about how Octavarium is a concept album before, but it was taken down because it was all based on personal research. I've found a website that documents most of the album's conceptual themes, so I wonder if the others are the page will consider that to be "good enough"?

As for my Electronic Literature discussion, I first need to reread Hales. After that, I'll have more updates.

EDIT:

I realize no one knows this band I'm talking about, so here's an official vid that they've allowed on the net.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4iuibP4g4I

They have MUCH better material and MUCH better performances than this, but I don't want to post something with a copywrite.

Wiki's Electronic Literature Page Needs Help...

...And I just happen to have a project to do. And that's the topic that I'm doing a project on with Dan and Liz, by the way.

I have never felt the need to contribute to Wikipedia. I have no required expertise, and most of the topics I'm interested in have been covered beyond any potential significant elaboration. There are a few things, however, that I'd like to investigate- if not for the sake of making Wikipedia a better place than, at least, expanding my own knowledge of a subject. And, surprisingly, there's almost no information on the Electronic Literature page at Wiki. Where, for example, is a section about the medium's growing popularity, or critical reputation?

I don't know much about Wiki, but I've already started my first Wiki discussion. I just visited the page dedicated to the album Octavarium by Dream Theater and it's pretty sad. I haven't actually changed the article yet, but I've been discussing. I don't know want any rabid wikipediators jumping all over me.

I learned to write on the computer- not in the real world.

Of course, that's a bit of an exaggeration. During my childhood, I did plenty of writing on paper. I wrote out words three times each, practiced my cursive, and copied down prayers until I could remember them. I’ve forgotten almost all of them.

It wasn’t until I was about 12, and I discovered there was something called “the internet”, that I realized writing could be a used as a tool of communication. Things like AOL Instant Messenger and E-Mail were new to me, and so were the peculiar things called “forums” that I found on the sites with all the videogame cheats. Forums were even better. I wasn’t restricted to talking with only people I knew from class- I could now connect with anyone anywhere in the world.

My early life as a forumer was one of my first humbling experiences. On the forums, I found that sometimes people wouldn’t just talk about videogames. People my own age were on these things, talking about life’s big topics and expressing their ideas in a way that I couldn’t. I tried to join the discussions, but I just didn’t fit in.

I actually remember the first time I ever used a forum. I’d been playing a controversial role playing game named Xenogears, which my mom bought me for a good report card. The game, as I found out after I visited the forums, was actually a veiled assault on the Judeo-Christian philosophical tradition, right down to central stories bad guys- named “The Ethos”- being almost carbon copies of the Roman Catholic Church.

It sounds silly- having a religious experience which is the result of a conversation some teenagers were having about a game online- but the game was, and is, quite interesting. It’s one of those games, like Final Fantasy, where the plot and characters are more important than the actual gameplay. It’s completely story driven, and has more text and dialogue between characters than many novels I read. Someone- who I wish I could be as cool as- even wrote a novelization of the game. That's how awesome the plot is.

I tried my hand at posting at the Xenogears forums (now all but dead), and saw the narrow minded indoctrinations of my parents and my private school educators chopped down before my very eyes. It was embarrassing, and as Earth shattering as any questioning of faith and traditions can be for a young person of relatively strict Irish Catholic background. Just imagine if James Joyce had computers and videogames, for example, instead or Christmas dinner table arguments about Parnell.

Eventually, I got the hang of it. I joined several forums- communities dedicated to games I liked, or bands, or literature, ect- and subsequently was exposed to a lot of things that that my parents and private Catholic educators hadn’t yet planned for me. I started reading about politics (you mean “The O’Reilly Factor” isn’t the only political commentary out there!?) and new kinds of music that weren’t popular on the radio or with my friends (See; Dream Theater). I started watching Japanese TV shows and anime, which can be just as thought provoking as a lot of literature for a teenager.

In the end, I suppose that the internet gave me a kind of “boost” over my peers. The internet's Earth flattening technology, which is a metaphor I absolute loathe, certainly flattened the Earth for me, and allowed me to experience a type of diverse culturing that I positive couldn’t have otherwise.

Of course, this came with its own problems. I became increasingly anti-social, and by the second half of high school I realized that many of my peers and educators had “caught up” with me. I had to relearn that I could learn something from the people around me, and that I could enjoy being a part of a society in the real world. Eventually, I did, but I had to do a fair share of backtracking to get there.

That’s why I say that I learned to write on a computer before I learned to write on paper. Of course, that’s not really what happened. But the first time I did any kind of meaningful writing, I used the computer. Though this helped me awaken as someone who fancies himself as a –kinda- intellectual person, there was definitely a back draft. I’m still learning how to write for myself, for example, because all the writing I’ve ever done was meant to communicate a specific idea with a specific person. Come to think of it, I’ve never really been able to sit at a desk and write something because that what I thought I’d like to do. Everything I’ve ever written is probably published somewhere- on the net, on a forum, in a paper, etc. I write because I like to communicate ideas, and that’s the probably only reason I like to write. That’s without a doubt something I’m sure I acquired from the net.

I learned to write on the computer before I learned to write on paper.

The Literacy Draft is now a comment on the Final version. Thanks for the input, guys!

Sampling "The New" in New Literacies... but who really knows?

The article Sampling "The New" in New Literacies brings up some interesting points about how the web is changing into something Lankshear and Knobel see as being ultimately post industrial, collectivist, and decentralized. These ideas are very nice and resonate will all of us on a special kind of level, because they make the internet appear like some perfect e-world where the principles of democracy and decentralized power, which our nation was supposedly founded on, come true on the net with all the perfection of communism on paper.

I think Lankshear and Knobel are jumping the gun on this for a lot of reasons. Though the net may have started as an equal playing field, it clearly is not one. Conventional ideas about specialized knowledge and accredited sources have become, and very much are, an integral part of the online community.

Instead of trying to systematically prove my point by making boring deductions, I'll just pose a few questions.

The article implies that websites like Wikipedia are replacing ones that specialize in one area. But what would Wikipedia be without the citations of e-journals and other accredited websites? If anything, sites like Wiki make it easier for specialized websites to operate by lightening their own bandwith load and, in turn, since those specialized sites don't get as much traffic, they don't cost as much to operate.

Also, this idea that the internet is a "free zone" is one that will likely change. Net neutrality is already an issue in many countries, including our own, and a free internet simply doesn't exist is others. What is stopping this article from considering that the "free zone" of the internet is likely something that the network providers may soon (for lack of a better term) "colonize"?

Finally, despite the fact that the internet my have initially been a place where anyone can be an expert until someone else decides innovate on the original idea, the "real world" experts soon become wise and make their way to the net. What is a more credible news site, for instance- this blog or NYTIMES.COM? If you were discussing a current event with someone- even someone online- which would you use as a reference? Probably not my blog.

It's near impossible for anyone to understand the phenomena that they are currently experiencing. Lankshear and Knobel make a noble attempt, but ultimately an arrogant and optimistic one that probably has more to do with their political ideas than the all too out of reach "true understanding". Still, they offer some food for thought, and that alone makes their work worth, at the very least, discussing.

The Internet is like highschool with veils of anonymity...

...maybe because, so far, most people using the internet are highschoolers and young people. Or maybe because I'm such a nerd and most online communities I've traversed are ones dedicated to videogames and rock bands.

Anyway, point is, most online communities I've stumbled upon are cliquish, harsh on newcomers, and generally are typical examples of a highschool type of environment. Though I'm sure very little of this can be considered cyber bullying, the type of behavior you common online is just like the kind of behavior you'd find in the real world.

The people who weren't or couldn't be bullies in the real world seem to enjoy being able to have another chance online, sheilded by a veil of anonymity. Meanwhile, real world bullies are bound to use sites like facebook and myspace as places to extend their ruthlessness. As a resident assistant, I have had some unique experiences with residents who set up facebook or myspace pages dedicated to bullying others.

Unfortunately, I can't share them, because that wouldn't be very professional, would it?

Posting on Google Docs

While I like the idea of contributing to a large group project, I found Google Docs to be more or less a pain in the neck. Though my first impressions weren't bad, I'm noticing more and more, as I use it for personal things, that Google Docs is prone to crashing, deciding not to save, or sometimes not opening at all. Or, it could just be Kean's firewall. I'm not enough of a tech junkie to be sure.

Of course, it's a good idea and I understand why we're using it. But I have absolutely no place in my heart for graphs of any kind, especially ones that require me to copy and paste web addresses.

Computers are confusing. So is the internet. I like nice sites like blogger. Sites that do all the real work for you. But, even then, the web has limitations. Nothing beats meeting with someone face to face, regardless of whether it's a project or something else. When we're talking humanities, I think this rings especially true.

Something that I'm beginning to notice about myself is that, despite being somewhat of an introvert, I need to physically be with other people to get anything done. Being able to trade documents back and forth online is cool, but if I can't work in the same room as the rest of the team I'd much rather just do everything myself.