Supposedly we have less information available to judge friends met online than friends met in person. Both hyperpersonal theory and the cues filtered out theories predict this. Apparently the social scientists behind these three theories never spent time in #Wikipedia.
After connecting to irc.freenode.net and joining the wikipedia channel I spent a few minutes lurking to get the general flow of conversation. What I found was disturbing.
So the guy I observed online, let's call him WikiDude, was apparently in the middle of a long rant on the subject of human sexuality. Specifically, his.
Apparently WikiDude is seventeen. He lives with his parents. He's bisexual. And a furry.
Now personally I've always been of the opinion that a guy should at least wait until his 18th birthday before dressing up like a Pokemon and having sex with other guys. But hey, WikiDude and I just met so I wasn't about to pass judgment.
The conversation then proceeded toward his other hobbies and perseverations. Apparently WikiDude is into editing Wikipedia. No surprise. He's also into vinyl albums, baseball statistics, bottled water, his terrarium, and assorted Spanish cheeses. Fascinating. But as much as I love a good Manchego, really I was just as glad we weren't chatting in person.
Big Five analysis:
Conscientiousness -- High. He is a Wikipedia editor after all.
Agreeableness -- Suspend judgment pending further investigation.
Neuroticism -- Suspend judgment pending further investigation. Probably a good amount though.
Openness to Experience -- High. As a Wikipedia editor with a wide variety of interests it would be impossible to lack a certain innate level of intellectual curiosity.
Extroversion -- High. Online at least. It seems just as likely that he could have been a complete introvert had we met in person though.
All in all, my experiences seemed to lend most support to the hyperpersonal model. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there were cues filtered out. But my impression of him didn't feel impoverished, shallow, or underdeveloped. Rather, thanks to selective self-presentation it was disgustingly palpable. And as the thypothesis would suggest, I wouldn't be surprised if the first impressions of my "CMC partner" were exaggerated or overly intense.
Some final advice: stay out of the Wikipedia IRC channel. Don't get me wrong, Wikipedia is the best. But like laws and sausage, it's a lot better when you don't know how it's made.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I would like to open by saying how funny and creepy this experience seems. I agree that wikipedia IRC is probably not the place to be, but most channels like this have a higher percentage of creepers than normal FtF contact. This is because as you said, If I had met this "wikidude" in person, I certainly wouldn't have talked to him long without walking away or vomiting.
I feel as though your experience was hyperpersonal in that the impressions you formed seemed rather strong. I see where your coming from about them not being improverished, but I feel as though the heart of the hyperpersonal theory is that the cues are less, but certain personality ratings are more intense. I disagree with your conclusion, but I found your observations very amusing.
Don't get me wrong, either, I find that you have valuable insight and your conclusions are valid, but the person that you met was the A-type creeper, which I always find amusing, when I am not the one who has to deal with him/her.
Ah... bisexual furries.... it seems the internet is full of them, doesnt it?
Why is it that the internet is so full of people with weird sexual fantasies? Maybe the internet is not full of them, but they are certainly the loudest demographic it seems. I think its the anonymity of the internet that allows these people to feel like its okay to identify as a "furrie" or some other weird sexual sub-group.
It is interesting to note that many websites take active stances against furries and wont let them on to their site. (I.e. 4chan). They are kind of like the discriminated minority of the internet in a way.
This post was really well-written and very funny. Well done. I have to agree with you and the other two comments that you had really hyper-personal relations with WikiDude. On the other hand though, you weren’t ready to comment on his Agreeableness or his Neuroticism. Hancock & Dunham would have predicted this using the CFO perspective. So while you give some credit to them, I would argue that your experience supports both perspectives.
As for the comments on the high proportion of creepers out there on the internet: I think the proportion would match the people you see on the street. The Internet doesn’t just give users anonymity, but the ability to find people with similar sexualities. (I think I’ve heard somewhere that 40% of internet use is pornographic) I don’t know if there’s any truth to that but I wouldn’t be surprised. So perhaps there aren’t more “creepers” online than in the real world, but instead they feel they can actually be themselves.
To be honest, I end up having a particularly strange experience every time I go into the Wikipedia IRC channel. Everyone I've spoken to at length during those sessions has been completely intolerable for various reasons. I think on some level it ends up being a power issue; Wikipedia is a questionable but valued source of information for a lot of people, and I think some of those who work on the site derive some sense of prestige and status from doing so. They feel relatively comfortable being asinine as a result.
As far as furries being an internet minority is concerned: they'd certainly like to think so. I've spoken to quite a few in person, and they have compared their "fight" for acceptance to anything from the gay rights movement to women's suffrage, which is completely inappropriate. In my opinion, they incur so much hostility because they often go out of their way to announce the fetish, when it's really no one else's business in the first place.
I have to say, Alex, when I came to the point in your post where you mentioned Wikidude was a "bisexual furry," I'd pretty much pegged him a certain way. It's interesting that he chose to present that information despite the overwhelming social stigmas (online and in real life) against both demographics. I highly doubt he mentions anything of that nature in his FtF communications just because of the backlash that would occur.
Lina Lee
Your entry is very humorous and I seriously just laughed out loud after reading it. I had no idea you can converse with people through Wikipedia and I was even more surprised that he revealed such personal information about him, especially his sexual orientation. There is obviously the chance that every cue he gave you was completely false but it is very interesting that you did not feel as if your impression was underdeveloped. It is very interesting how you made the distinction between what you thought of him after conversing with him online and what you thought he was really like in person. For example you rated him high on extroversion but you also mentioned how it seems likely that he is actually an introvert in person. It would be really great if you could how you came to such conclusions and how you were able to see beyond what he simply presented to you. It also seems as if you did categorize him and judge him instantly as many would do when meeting someone for the first time, especially on the internet. You mentioned that you didn’t mean to pass judgment but it appears as if your impression of him was influenced by not only what he specifically said but also by your own stereotypes, which is completely unavoidable. It would also be very interesting to explain why exactly you wouldn’t want to chat with him in person based on the few available cues when there is the chance that perhaps his attributes were exaggerated like you said and may be misleading.
Nicely done, I really liked the humor and the way you easily applied it the the "Big Five" I would have to agree with Lina in that your stereotypes seemed to make you judge this guy more than you actually think you did, but who am I kidding I would have had alot worse things to say about somebody who is that open about their bisexuality at 17. Great post.
Post a Comment