slothrop said:And it gives the place a weirdly Kafkaesque feel at times...
I can't remember, does dissensus have a terms of use agreement? Wouldn't that say that anything posted is subject to the moderators or something - basically you agree that you are participating in a public arena?
Forum Rules
Registration to this forum is free! We do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. If you agree to the terms, please check the 'I agree' checkbox and press the 'Register' button below. If you would like to cancel the registration, click here to return to the forums index.
Although the administrators and moderators of Dissensus will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Dissensus, nor Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.
By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.
The owners of Dissensus reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.
In the light of a few recent developments, which led to someone wanting their entire history of participation removed from the board... I'm struck by what an interesting idea that is.
I understand removing your current presence. But removing your past presence, that's something else again.
I'm curious what people think of the idea (NOT OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO CHOSE THIS) - what rights do you have or want to have over your web presence in various forms?
Especially things like this - voluntary participation in group discussion?
I'm curious because I think in genuine interpersonal exchange, the whole is more than the sum of the parts, but also that means removal of the part (i.e. one voice) after the fact kind of destroys the whole. In some cases, that's a shame (it depends on how valuable you think the whole/discussion is)
I realized that I just assumed if I didn't like participating in dissensus any more (enough to quit), it would not have occurred to me to try to remove my past posts. Then again, I did go through an old weblog/online journal and make "friends-only" a lot of my more explicit posts I wrote 10 years ago when the Web was smaller and less searchable.
What about y'all? if you decided you wanted to leave, would you take your past with you? would it be different for a blog than for a board?
Anyway, isn't Dissensus google-proof?
I don't think the fact that it's all public is really something that factors into peoples actions on the web -
It just becomes a problem, and rather embarassing, when who you really are changes daily, and you're confronted regularly with an outdated model of yourself which you can't alter. The lack of control over which model of yourself others are exposed to is the thing that gets me.
UFO over easy v. 1.6785030583
I agree, but I also feel slightly different about that control depending on what you're talking about. I think criminal, job-related, or insurance-related judgments should be prevented, but social judgments.. It's hard, because we are judged on lots of things we can't control. THis may be a new set (our past acts online), but is it really so different?
From my own experience I reckon people really do treat the internet as an outlet for who they imagine themselves to be truly, without social constraint, and maybe that develops slowly into the exaggerated personas you find on message boards and blogs.
I don't think the fact that it's all public is really something that factors into peoples actions on the web - it may even lead them to exaggerate their personalities more if anything.. like screaming who you really are off the rooftops to anyone that'll listen
elgato said:Also I think that there are significant implications for what I am saying created by me articulating it somewhere as public as this. But consciously at least the reason I engage with and read dissensus is to gain the insight of people with interesting and different minds on issues I want to better understand, not because I want to broadcast myself.
I think that that's an important point, my guess is that once something becomes habitual people tend to slip back to being themselves. I suspect that even if it's not difficult to maintain a persona constantly boredom is likely to set in and the norm reassert itself."...although at this point where doing stuff like this has become just an everyday habit more than anything else it's quite difficult to tell."
Also very important obviously, the only way we can judge someone really is on how they behave and presumably someone could deliberately perform contrary to their personality in actual interactions with people (although obviously it's harder than when separated by the internet)."But then how do we define who someone ‘really’ is in any case…"
I'm very interested in the misinformation angle. It's perhaps the opposite of what wikipedia is trying to achieve.
idlerich said:I suspect that even if it's not difficult to maintain a persona constantly boredom is likely to set in and the norm reassert itself.
I feel that on this board my lack of linguistic dexterity and lightness of touch means that I come across as slightly more stiff than I do in real life but I also think that I come across as quite similar in a way although that sounds like a contradiction. I've got a feeling that that's something like what you're saying isn't it?"it's still problematic though - although whilst people tell me I am fairly similar on the net and in person I don't think the net gives a particularly accurate picture even if I am attempting to get one across"
I think that what I'm assuming is that the more you go on a board the more normal it becomes to you and the temptation to pretend decreases just as the effort necessary to maintain a facade would increase.
How does one make something "google-proof"?Anyway, isn't Dissensus google-proof?
How does one make something "google-proof"?
Your search - dissensus nomadologist devil mask rapist - did not match any documents.
Did you mean: dissensus nematologist devil mask rapist