> A reality check would be going to a conference and realizing that twitter isn't a representation of the general public.
An interesting counter(? corollary? Neither?) to that is when you go to a conference and the SAME INSANE PEOPLE from Twitter are there, acting as one would consider "normal".
I don't know what to think about the immense gulf between how we as a species behave behind a screen vs face to face. And how we also react to others doing it.
I had this lesson 25 years ago. The nicest person I knew at my school was an immense asshole online. It wasn't even the anonymousness of it - it was to fellow classmates that knew who he was.
Looking at 4chan as an example, although in theory masked the discussions defaults to a specific and recognizable tone and specific ways of argumenting or joking.
Giving a mask gives you a new contextual facet of a person, but hardly the truth. Few are those who can even know the truth about themselves. I don't know if I do.
Perhaps it's more like give someone a mask and they will tell you their psychosis. Is the disinhibited mind properly functioning any more than a drunk person is their real self or a disinhibited muscle contributes the most to a person's presence?
Don’t even get me started on conferences, there are a centerpiece of the controversy. I never got into the conference groove because I always had to pay my own way and never wanted to turn down an opportunity to bill some hours.
An interesting counter(? corollary? Neither?) to that is when you go to a conference and the SAME INSANE PEOPLE from Twitter are there, acting as one would consider "normal".
I don't know what to think about the immense gulf between how we as a species behave behind a screen vs face to face. And how we also react to others doing it.