I should really stop expecting it to be.
I find nobody on the internet is genuinely having fun. At best you have schadenfreude, e.g. trolling. It's "fun" in the addictive/bullying sense. It's not about making yourself feel good, it's about making someone else feel bad.
Nobody on the internet is genuinely trying to get work done. If something requires any real discipline, it will not occur. Self-reflection is absolutely verboten.
No wonder everyone on the internet has imposter syndrome.
What's left? Wasting time. One gigantic waste of time.
What actual games can you play on internet fora? Mafia? So, the game about lying? Great. Awesome.
You can play the ninja tower game on twitter, I suppose.
Sometimes there's pun competitions?
....and that's it. Nobody on the internet is playful. Paratelia-negative.
What projects have been launched via internet meetings? Surely there's one or two, but they sucked. I haven't heard of them and you haven't either.
It's hard to even get folks to share personal stories with the identifying details stripped. Anyone: "Tell me about yourself." Internet: "No. P.S. Fuck you."
E.g. developing a canon doesn't need a budget. A group could come together and agree on an orthodoxy. Don't though; requires discipline and self-reflection. Not to mention submitting to hierarchy. Definitely can't do that.
The exception
that proves the rule: it's not work, because you're not being paid, and
it's not play, because you have to follow a blueprint. The end product
is a video which is less than ten minutes long, and the creation has no ongoing use. Minecraft buildings are non-interactive.
Social media is anti-social. You can't even chat in such a way as to
build a relationship. On the internet, "authentic" means you're supposed
to be allowed to be as rude as possible, and it's the other person's fault for being repulsed. Hey Einsteins, consider avoiding deliberate antagonization...
Faking a society is both.
Imagine roleplaying a military group in an MMORPG. E.g. holding world-PVP events in World of Warcraft. Both play and discipline. Doesn't exactly have a high bar of entry. Never happens.
Sociological research in general has never been easier. You can experimentally test any sociological theory you like, using minimal resources aside from your own virtues.
The ""4 fun"" guys can't do it, because it requires following something other than their instantaneous impulse. (Ref: Plato. Heck, they won't even try a game that's not immediately appealing.)
The ""serious"" internet denizens can't do it, because it's all play and games; Minecraft is a good platform. Undoubtedly the highest priority for a ""serious"" person is their appearances, not their substantial actions. Clearly. How are you supposed to know they're ""serious"" if they don't spend 100% of their time signalling how ""serious"" they are? You might forget!
They're not telic either. There's no purpose here. If they define a goal they've discriminated between success and failure, and that means they might fail. Too afraid to do that. School status: well-schooled.
Though as I often mention, personnel is policy. They must already have been well-schooled or they would never have submitted to being explicitly schooled. It probably has a mere marginal effect.
A very simple game: come up with synonyms.
Oh I guess that explains why nobody can play. If you play without putting anyone down, what are you doing? You're showing off. That's why it feels good; you're displaying your own glory. If you show off, someone will Envy you. And that's not what a good Fascist does, now is it?
Personnel is policy, and the California internet is internet for Fascists.
>Not to mention submitting to hierarchy. Definitely can't do that.
ReplyDeleteLol as a lobster-appreciator of course I have to weigh in on this particular line.
That's exactly why the internet isn't fun, the lack of clear hierarchies.
The set of people you can potentially interact with on the internet is like 5 million times bigger than your actual brain can handle.
There are plenty of people who do have fun on the internet, playing video games. My buddy was the absolute best player, actual famous (people copy his username) on a certain korean MMO. I mean, he was spending 12-15 hours a day playing, but he was the best out of tens of thousands of people. And then all the mid tier players had fun trying to grief or knock him off his perch.
Or look at Runescape - everyone knew who Zezima was. You think making 150,000 wooden planks is fun? No. But he did it to be the best.
That's kind of embedded in "fun", the desire to "win", which, really, is connected in a way to "being at the top of the hierarchy".
On the other hand, the internet does offer the potential for non-hierarchical games.
Why do you think chantards used to adopt the same personality? Like 25,000 people all pretending to be the same individual. That's a fun game you can play without worrying about hierarchies, mass embodiment of the same personality.
Winning isn't paratelic.
ReplyDeleteLikewise winning in a videogame doesn't count as work. It's not profitable. You can't reinvest your winnings. Later in life you're not like, "I could never have done this if I hadn't won that videogame."
ReplyDeleteContrast the epistemic sets.
>What projects have been launched via internet meetings?
ReplyDeleteNethack comes to mind.