451–460 of 555 posts
I love Stephen Fry, but I'm conflicted. On one hand, he's upset that people are offended and without a hint of irony is obviously very offended by their sensibilities. That said, celebrities (intentional or otherwise) have a very different experience on social media than the lay person.
I have a theory about FB and Twitter -- or maybe more of an observation. Anyway, back in the stone age, people had bumper stickers with little slogans on them. And in the break rooms of various places of work, there was always a bulletin board an on a corner of it there was always some faded-from-to-many-xeroxes bit of humor/racism/sports fandom/sexism/dirty joke or other us-vs.-them thing on it that people would loo…
There is no friendly way to say it, the mass market are morons. It might be derogatory jokes, but this can also include things like spreading urban legends which were debunked four decades ago. Just like Usenet and countless other online communities, what starts a a small group of fairly privileged and elite eventually degrades in to garbage as the reach increases. This is not so much an overall size issue but a rela…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been playing Clash Royale on iPad (it's a multiplayer battle game set in the Clash of Clans universe that essentially drops the base building element and concentrates on the strategic combat). Generally, competitive multiplayer games can be pretty harsh (devolving into toxic) communities. Clash Royale addresses this problem in an interesting way. You're allowed to communicate with your opponent, but only from a…
>... You're allowed to communicate with your opponent, but only from a fixed vocabulary. This is what Nintendo did, at least in online Mario Kart for WiiU, and it's great. I allow my 6 year old get acquainted with this very safe version of online play and she loves saying all the positive things to the other players.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always wondered whether you could just have a community that banned outrage. Literally: express outrage, get banned. "Signal boost" someone else's outrage, get banned. It's not welcome within the community. Would this even make sense? Or would this shove so hard against human nature that people would never be able to abide it? (Of course, sometimes you'd be outraged at the community—or its management—and that'd…
> I've always wondered whether you could just have a community that banned outrage. One of the reasons I like HN is that outrage is discouraged.
HN certainly does things (thanks, team!) that make this more likely, such as playing around with the ability to downvote replies to yourself, etc.
But I think a larger part of it is "monkey see, monkey do to fit in." If I see an angry, fact-lite comment getting grey-bombed into oblivion, I'm going to probably be less likely to make such comments myself.
Sociology has a lot of language for this, but there are few things more powerful than the disapproval of one's peers, virtual or real.
(Of course, 4chan/SA as cohesive social entities are simply fascinating too...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always wondered whether you could just have a community that banned outrage. Literally: express outrage, get banned. "Signal boost" someone else's outrage, get banned. It's not welcome within the community. Would this even make sense? Or would this shove so hard against human nature that people would never be able to abide it? (Of course, sometimes you'd be outraged at the community—or its management—and that'd…
If you ban sarcasm in addition to outrage I'll sign up to whatever thingamajig you're making there.
Sarcasm is really hard to identify, and would be really hard to ban.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always wondered whether you could just have a community that banned outrage. Literally: express outrage, get banned. "Signal boost" someone else's outrage, get banned. It's not welcome within the community. Would this even make sense? Or would this shove so hard against human nature that people would never be able to abide it? (Of course, sometimes you'd be outraged at the community—or its management—and that'd…
If you ban sarcasm in addition to outrage I'll sign up to whatever thingamajig you're making there.
Sarcasm is really hard to identify, and would be really hard to ban.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been playing Clash Royale on iPad (it's a multiplayer battle game set in the Clash of Clans universe that essentially drops the base building element and concentrates on the strategic combat). Generally, competitive multiplayer games can be pretty harsh (devolving into toxic) communities. Clash Royale addresses this problem in an interesting way. You're allowed to communicate with your opponent, but only from a…
I like using the 'Well played!' when my opponent makes a horrendously bad move.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've always wondered whether you could just have a community that banned outrage. One of the reasons I like HN is that outrage is discouraged.
I've mulled this over in watching the community. Unfortunately (for other sites), I've come to the conclusion that it's a cultural thing and therefore subject to the whims of the dominant culture at any time. HN certainly does things (thanks, team!) that make this more likely, such as playing around with the ability to downvote replies to yourself, etc. But I think a larger part of it is "monkey see, monkey do to fit…
It's also subject to the whims of dang the moderator, he's "the dominant culture". He's deservedly called me out a couple of times. Consequently I've tried to change my occasionally boorish behavior. Sometimes it only takes one person to create a culture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you explain to me how that statement is "offensive"?
Do you really not understand how telling a woman that she looks like a bag lady is offensive, even setting aside the fact that a.) this was on a television program and b.) the woman was not in a position to say anything in response?
So lets break that down.
The subject is a "cinematic costume designer" According to Sir Fry, she is a great one at that.
Then we have the other part of the statement: "She came to the awards dressed as a bag lady." This part of the statement is a bit odd/stands out when compared to a group of rather posh individuals.
When you put both parts of this together you have a really positive reference by Mr. Fry then combined with an odd/"less flattering" situation. It's ironic.
This structure matches a classic setup/punchline structure of a joke: http://www.creatingacomic.com/2009/how-to-write-a-joke-joke-...
What make this even funnier and more congratulating is: She's a costume designer. Maybe this was intended. At the end of the day Stephen Fry was pictured with the individual and there have been claims that there is no bad blood between the two.