[1/12/2012 10:37:54 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added Jessica Moes***

[1/12/2012 10:38:00 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added kath.grace.fitzgerald ***

[1/12/2012 10:38:02 AM] jeffgwarren: morning

[1/12/2012 10:38:05 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: Good morning

[1/12/2012 10:38:06 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added kastefely ***

[1/12/2012 10:38:10 AM] codykragness: good morning

[1/12/2012 10:38:15 AM] Rebecca Richards: Good morning, Jessica, Katherine, and Kathleen!

[1/12/2012 10:38:21 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added lattahockey19 ***

[1/12/2012 10:38:25 AM] Jessica Moes: Morning!

[1/12/2012 10:38:30 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: morning

[1/12/2012 10:38:33 AM] Rebecca Richards: Hi, Kristen!

[1/12/2012 10:38:35 AM] Kathleen Stefely: Morning :)

[1/12/2012 10:38:38 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added josh.michalec ***

[1/12/2012 10:38:44 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added sky.montour ***

[1/12/2012 10:38:48 AM] Kristen Latta: Hi!

[1/12/2012 10:38:48 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added tckyrola ***

[1/12/2012 10:38:58 AM] Rebecca Richards: Hi, Josh, Sky, and Tyler!

[1/12/2012 10:39:06 AM] Rebecca Richards: We're still waiting on a few participants to sign in.

[1/12/2012 10:39:12 AM] Rebecca Richards: So everyone just sit tight for a moment.

[1/12/2012 10:39:18 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added fleming223911 ***

[1/12/2012 10:39:26 AM] Rebecca Richards: Hi, Sarah.

[1/12/2012 10:41:10 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added bartzy20 ***

[1/12/2012 10:41:16 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added joepesta ***

[1/12/2012 10:41:23 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added taylor.orr14 ***

[1/12/2012 10:41:28 AM] Josh Michalec: Dane says you shoulda check your email and add him, please haha

[1/12/2012 10:41:41 AM] Austin Bly: hola

[1/12/2012 10:41:46 AM] Andy Bartz: Hey class

[1/12/2012 10:42:31 AM] Tyler Kyrola: Hello, world! How's it going this morning

[1/12/2012 10:42:48 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Josh... He is added. He just needs to sign in to Skype.

[1/12/2012 10:42:55 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added smshahbazi ***

[1/12/2012 10:43:27 AM] Rebecca Richards: Hey everyone. Still waiting on a few to get signed in. . . hold tight

[1/12/2012 10:43:32 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added dane.price ***

[1/12/2012 10:43:37 AM] Rebecca Richards: Hi, Dane! You made it :)

[1/12/2012 10:43:42 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added jamessponsel ***

[1/12/2012 10:43:52 AM] Dane Price: 3 minutes late

[1/12/2012 10:43:54 AM] Dane Price: per usual

[1/12/2012 10:44:25 AM] Rebecca Richards: Are Taylor and James present?

[1/12/2012 10:44:32 AM] Taylor Orr: yep :)

[1/12/2012 10:44:33 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: present

[1/12/2012 10:44:36 AM] Rebecca Richards: sweet

[1/12/2012 10:44:52 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added Jon Foss ***

[1/12/2012 10:44:55 AM] *** Jon Foss can't be added until they accept your contact request. ***

[1/12/2012 10:45:08 AM] Dane Price: i am going to go yell at him!

[1/12/2012 10:45:15 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: I may come next door and visit you dane/josh

[1/12/2012 10:45:39 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Dane, are you going to go yell at Jon?

[1/12/2012 10:45:45 AM] Rebecca Richards: He's the only one we're missing

[1/12/2012 10:45:47 AM] Rebecca Richards: at this point

[1/12/2012 10:45:56 AM] Dane Price: yea

[1/12/2012 10:46:27 AM] *** Rebecca Richards added Jon Foss ***

[1/12/2012 10:46:33 AM] Rebecca Richards: Hi, Jon! Are you here?

[1/12/2012 10:47:03 AM] Jon Foss: Yeah

[1/12/2012 10:47:08 AM] Dane Price: 1 wpm

[1/12/2012 10:47:10 AM] Dane Price: bossy

[1/12/2012 10:47:19 AM] Rebecca Richards: :)

[1/12/2012 10:47:21 AM] Dane Price: (happy)

[1/12/2012 10:47:23 AM] Rebecca Richards: Wonderful! We're all here.

[1/12/2012 10:47:54 AM] Rebecca Richards: So... Good morning, everyone, on this slightly snowy day! Thank you for bearing with me through the various technical issues related to LambdaMoo and Skype. It is always an adventure when you try to plan a technological experience across various operating systems and browsers. And it is good to remember that cyberliteracy is not an end point—it is a process of discovery.

[1/12/2012 10:48:40 AM] Rebecca Richards: And part of that process of discovery is finding the limits of interconnectivity-- for better or worse.

[1/12/2012 10:48:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: Enough of that intro... let’s get to business!

[1/12/2012 10:49:20 AM] Rebecca Richards: The way that this will work is that I am going to pose a question or a topic to consider related to our class readings/experiences, and I hope that you will comment on some of the topics given.

[1/12/2012 10:49:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: Since there are 21 of us in this chat room, the linearity of this “discussion” can get problematic.

[1/12/2012 10:50:04 AM] Rebecca Richards: Are you all following me ok, if so give a smiley. If not, frown.

[1/12/2012 10:50:10 AM] Dane Price: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:10 AM] Taylor Orr: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:10 AM] Adrian Rossing: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:10 AM] Tyler Kyrola: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:11 AM] Josh Michalec: :D

[1/12/2012 10:50:11 AM] Sky Montour: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:14 AM] Kristen Latta: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:15 AM] Sarah Fleming: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:15 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: =]]]]]]]]]]]]]

[1/12/2012 10:50:15 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: (happy)

[1/12/2012 10:50:16 AM] Jessica Moes: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:20 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:20 AM] Joseph Pesta: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:20 AM] jeffgwarren: (nod)

[1/12/2012 10:50:21 AM] Kathleen Stefely: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:21 AM] Austin Bly: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:24 AM] Jon Foss: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:25 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: :P

[1/12/2012 10:50:26 AM] codykragness: :)

[1/12/2012 10:50:36 AM] Rebecca Richards: Great!

[1/12/2012 10:50:39 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: i dont know how to smile

[1/12/2012 10:50:42 AM] Dane Price: : )

[1/12/2012 10:50:49 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: : )

[1/12/2012 10:50:52 AM] Dane Price: it's okay it takes some muscle memory

[1/12/2012 10:51:04 AM] Dane Price: just without the space

[1/12/2012 10:51:12 AM] Rebecca Richards: If at any point I lose you, please give me a frown and an exclamation point.

[1/12/2012 10:51:17 AM] Andy Bartz: :)

[1/12/2012 10:51:32 AM] Rebecca Richards: Anyway, as I was writing... Since there are 21 of us in this chat discussion, the linearity of this “discussion” can get problematic. It would be good if we create a dialogue instead of unrelated comments. But how we go about doing that can be challenging, especially if we want to do it in a way that allows others to follow our ideas. So here are a few ground rules:

[1/12/2012 10:52:12 AM] Rebecca Richards: First, take a second (or more) to think about your reply before typing it. This is especially true if responding to others.

[1/12/2012 10:52:50 AM] Rebecca Richards: Second, use common Twitter abbreviations for responding to ideas and or people. For example, if you want to respond to a comment make by “Rebecca Richards,” begin your post with an "@" followed by the original poster's name. For example, “@Rebecca Richards, I disagree with your idea that…”

[1/12/2012 10:53:37 AM] Rebecca Richards: Finally, try to chunk your writing into slightly larger segments than you might actually use in traditional IM situations with your friends. Instead of breaking up a sentence into two separate posts like “@Rebecca Richards, I disagree with your idea (break) that cyborgs are ruling the world.” Post those two bits as one post. This way others cannot interject text between your ideas.

[1/12/2012 10:54:14 AM] Rebecca Richards: Anyone have any other ideas they would like to add?

[1/12/2012 10:55:27 AM] Rebecca Richards: Ok, then let’s begin. I should also disclose that I am going to be giving you a participation grade today. I am going to be looking for active and thoughtful participation. Therefore 20 “I agree” comments will not get you a good grade, neither will one long manifesto. This should be an "easy A." Just follow along and add something when you have a contribution. Try to stay plugged into the conversation. If you have to step away, change your status.

[1/12/2012 10:56:26 AM] Rebecca Richards: First topic: We’ve been playing some “games” in and out of class, reading about gaming, and watching other people “game.” But we never really defined the term. So what constitutes a game?

[1/12/2012 10:56:56 AM] Austin Bly: Couldn't we just say that it has to do with play?

[1/12/2012 10:57:09 AM] Jessica Moes: I think, in the broadest sense, it's an activity that stimulates the mind to some degree.

[1/12/2012 10:57:09 AM] Sarah Fleming: I think an important part of a game that it is entertaining for the player.

[1/12/2012 10:57:16 AM] Taylor Orr: An activity users participate in for recreation

[1/12/2012 10:57:19 AM] jeffgwarren: A game would include interaction, whether physically, mentally, or both

[1/12/2012 10:57:21 AM] codykragness: Something that requires interaction with technology

[1/12/2012 10:57:36 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: Interactivity with other users or technology itself

[1/12/2012 10:57:55 AM] Sarah Fleming: But what about a board game? That doesn't use technology...

[1/12/2012 10:58:02 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: I'd describe it as any interactive media from which you derive entertainment.

[1/12/2012 10:58:03 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @Rebecca Richards. I think the definition of a game is very broad and really just is something with a goal or purpose with some kind of media that brings us entertainment or social interaction

[1/12/2012 10:58:03 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: Interactivity would mean games covers a lot of media

[1/12/2012 10:58:05 AM] Andy Bartz: A "game" could be interaction with technolgy i.e. a video game but it could also be a sport right? Like I would call the sport of hockey a game.

[1/12/2012 10:58:35 AM] Austin Bly: @Sarah they are games after all and you can play video game versions of most board games, so I think those would count

[1/12/2012 10:58:36 AM] Dane Price: @everyone While play is usually important for a game... isn't it also necessary to have some end goal?

[1/12/2012 10:58:50 AM] Jon Foss: @Dane, I liked your definition

[1/12/2012 10:58:54 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @dane agreed. IT seems like a game has to have some competition or ending goal/winner

[1/12/2012 10:58:57 AM] jeffgwarren: one of the articles mentions board games, but I can't remember what exactly it said. Anyone?

[1/12/2012 10:58:59 AM] Austin Bly: @Dane Tetris has no end goal really, but that's a game right?

[1/12/2012 10:59:07 AM] Jessica Moes: I keep thinking about how people can play "games" with each other. You can play "games" with your head, "games" with your heart. It's not limited to positivity either.

[1/12/2012 10:59:10 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Dane. I agree. So could we say end goal and interactivity

[1/12/2012 10:59:11 AM] Kristen Latta: @Andy Bartz I agree. I think that you need to have a purpose for playing. There are set rules to any game and the user/player must oblige to those rules

[1/12/2012 10:59:18 AM] Adrian Rossing: @dane i also like that, but i think there is some structure involved too

[1/12/2012 10:59:21 AM] Sky Montour: A game is a form of entertainment that requires interaction from at least one player. A videogame is a form of entertainment that utilizes technology.

[1/12/2012 10:59:24 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @James has good point. Interactivity isn't enough, I think it needs to be created (the game) with 'play' in mind. @Austin might be onto something with just calling it play, but it also opens it up to so many things that probably won't be relevant to our discussion. Should we narrow this down to include technology? Or are we going to be talking about all games?

[1/12/2012 10:59:32 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @sky has a very good point with that

[1/12/2012 10:59:33 AM] Dane Price: @Austin Bly ... yes it does!! just because you are not good enough to beat it doesn't mean you can't win!

[1/12/2012 10:59:42 AM] Jessica Moes: @Kristen but you can also cheat. Obliging to these rules is not mandatory.

[1/12/2012 10:59:43 AM] Rebecca Richards: <Interrupting>

[1/12/2012 10:59:46 AM] Rebecca Richards: Ok,

[1/12/2012 10:59:48 AM] Jon Foss: @austin, tetris has an end point

[1/12/2012 10:59:54 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: As for tetris, an end goal can not be losing

[1/12/2012 10:59:54 AM] Rebecca Richards: you've put some good ideas here

[1/12/2012 11:00:06 AM] Rebecca Richards: Here's more context.

[1/12/2012 11:00:17 AM] Rebecca Richards: I agree that sports or board games are "games."

[1/12/2012 11:00:28 AM] Rebecca Richards: and I was hoping to unearth this base level definition

[1/12/2012 11:00:48 AM] Rebecca Richards: If I can *try* to synthesize your responses, here's what I get....

[1/12/2012 11:00:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: It involves, play

[1/12/2012 11:00:54 AM] Rebecca Richards: interaction

[1/12/2012 11:00:56 AM] Rebecca Richards: a goal

[1/12/2012 11:01:05 AM] Rebecca Richards: and rules

[1/12/2012 11:01:11 AM] jeffgwarren: @RR strategy...?

[1/12/2012 11:01:31 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Jeff, Perhaps...

[1/12/2012 11:01:41 AM] Andy Bartz: also luck is involved?

[1/12/2012 11:01:41 AM] Rebecca Richards: what else do we need to add to this list?

[1/12/2012 11:01:52 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Jeff, I would think strategy is implied by the above elements

[1/12/2012 11:02:02 AM] Joseph Pesta: @RR conflict, luck

[1/12/2012 11:02:10 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: skill and sometimes conflict

[1/12/2012 11:02:13 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @RR perhaps a setting/game world? Even the most basic of worlds...

[1/12/2012 11:02:24 AM] Jon Foss: @everyone, games serve some sort of a purpose at some level

[1/12/2012 11:02:47 AM] Jessica Moes: @RR I think all games involve some small level of mental thought

[1/12/2012 11:02:49 AM] Kristen Latta: @RR setting and opponents whether its time/characters that attempt to stray you away from the end all

[1/12/2012 11:02:50 AM] Adrian Rossing: @jon entertainment, education, etc

[1/12/2012 11:02:50 AM] Andy Bartz: @Tyler, going off a setting there is also sometimes boundaries in games

[1/12/2012 11:03:00 AM] Rebecca Richards: These are all great conditions of gaming.

[1/12/2012 11:03:19 AM] Rebecca Richards: If you had a chance to McAllister's other Chapter "A grammar of Gamework"

[1/12/2012 11:03:23 AM] Rebecca Richards: he gets into this idea

[1/12/2012 11:04:29 AM] Rebecca Richards: And he comes up with "interactivity," "play," "rules," "conflict," and "learning."

[1/12/2012 11:04:42 AM] Rebecca Richards: But I think some of your suggestions are useful, too...

[1/12/2012 11:05:08 AM] Rebecca Richards: I wanted to begin with this question, which we should have started with on Monday, because some of the "games" we are encountering might not *feel* like games to you or me.

[1/12/2012 11:05:14 AM] Rebecca Richards: Perhaps because they are old

[1/12/2012 11:05:28 AM] Rebecca Richards: or they don't involve luck, risk, or boundaries...

[1/12/2012 11:06:13 AM] Rebecca Richards: But under these "academic" definitions of game (which go back to Quintilian!!!)

[1/12/2012 11:06:25 AM] Rebecca Richards: all of these activities fit.

[1/12/2012 11:06:40 AM] Rebecca Richards: ok... let's move on a bit (and we can come back to this discussion in class next week)

[1/12/2012 11:07:21 AM] Rebecca Richards: Ok, then what is a game’s relationship to cyberspace? If we go by my definition of cyberspace as “the displacement of the elements in what Popper calls World 3 through the use of technology, resulting in the manipulation of space and time.” are these games artifacts or tools of cyberspace?

[1/12/2012 11:07:25 AM] Rebecca Richards: (tough question)

[1/12/2012 11:07:28 AM] Rebecca Richards: Let me rephrase

[1/12/2012 11:07:47 AM] Rebecca Richards: Are games the means of cyberspace or the ends?

[1/12/2012 11:07:50 AM] Rebecca Richards: Are they they medium?

[1/12/2012 11:07:57 AM] Rebecca Richards: or the outcome of cyberspace?

[1/12/2012 11:08:36 AM] Jon Foss: @everyone. games interact with cyberspace through the transmission of data

[1/12/2012 11:08:42 AM] Josh Michalec: They seem to be a mdeium, among many other things, in which to participate in Cyberculture

[1/12/2012 11:08:58 AM] Tyler Kyrola: I'd argue that they are both determined by the goings-on of cyberspace yet also aid in determining it-it'd be a very dialectical relationship. Games are a result as well as a creator of cyberspace.

[1/12/2012 11:09:07 AM] Adrian Rossing: i think some games are the outcome of cyberspace, but games have existed forever.. so i think they are more a medium of cyberspace

[1/12/2012 11:09:10 AM] Sky Montour: I'd say games began as an outcome of cyberspace, but are becoming a media due to the fact that a great majority of videogames have online capabilities nowadays

[1/12/2012 11:09:11 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Tyler-- very nice

[1/12/2012 11:09:13 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Richards. A game requires cyberspace (or another virtual space) to be considered a game. Otherwise, living constitutes as a game (under our terms interactivity, goals, etc). A game needs cyberspace to act as a virtual playing board for the game activity.

[1/12/2012 11:09:15 AM] Andy Bartz: I think they are a medium that can distract us in themselves but they are also an outcome of cyberspace. Obviously these games would not be possible if there was no cyberspace, how can it not be considered an outcome?

[1/12/2012 11:09:26 AM] Sarah Fleming: I think cyberspace allows for the ability of this interaction, acting as a medium

[1/12/2012 11:09:29 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: I think that games are both an end of cyberspace and a medium used to create and enhance it.

[1/12/2012 11:09:35 AM] codykragness: Wouldn't they be the outcome because without cyberspace in the first play how would we play them on cyberspace?

[1/12/2012 11:09:42 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Shahr-- excellent

[1/12/2012 11:09:50 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @Bartzy I agree. I feel that internet gaming is an oucome from cyberspace and uses the tools and community of cyberspace to enhance gameplay

[1/12/2012 11:09:52 AM] Rebecca Richards: @cody good question

[1/12/2012 11:09:55 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @cody I agree that they are the outcome but also the medium

[1/12/2012 11:10:19 AM] Jessica Moes: Cyberspace IS interconnectivity. There is learning involved. I would argue that there are rules and conflict. Could we argue that Cyberspace is a game? The most complex game we've ever created?

[1/12/2012 11:10:27 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @Cody, yes, cyberspace had to 'exist first' so that games could take place there, but once games moved into cyberspace they were able to shift the foundations of cyberspace and influence its development.

[1/12/2012 11:10:35 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Jessica, i think that is a cogent argument

[1/12/2012 11:11:00 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Jessica-- so are we always "gaming" when we are plugged in?

[1/12/2012 11:11:02 AM] Jon Foss: @everyone. games could be the means, outcome, medium (all of the above)

[1/12/2012 11:11:09 AM] Dane Price: @tckyrola In what ways has gaming influenced cyberspace?

[1/12/2012 11:11:11 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Jessica. Cyberspace is only a game if people agree on the goals and rules.

[1/12/2012 11:11:37 AM] Josh Michalec: @James interesting point

[1/12/2012 11:11:47 AM] codykragness: @everyone, how will we really know the answer until cyberspace is done advancing? and will that every truly happen?

[1/12/2012 11:11:53 AM] Andy Bartz: @Jessica if you say cyberspace is interconnectivity then what is the goal? Because having an end goal was discussed earlier in the definition of a "game"

[1/12/2012 11:11:54 AM] Taylor Orr: @Jessica So is this a game? (internet chat room?)

[1/12/2012 11:11:54 AM] Kristen Latta: @cody couldn't agree more. Now that the foundation of cyberspace is set, the world of gaming serves as a tool to enhance the cyberworld as we know it.

[1/12/2012 11:11:59 AM] Adrian Rossing: @RR, jessica.. in a sense we are always gaming, but i see james' point that games have rules and golas, and for the most part we all use cyberspace in different ways

[1/12/2012 11:12:07 AM] Sky Montour: @James, I agree, cyberspace has no rules, and I'd say rules are on of the most important requirements of a game.

[1/12/2012 11:12:16 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @Dane, our identities in cyberspace, technological advancements, creation of subcultures, how we interact in the cyberworld, why we want to be in the cyberworld...

[1/12/2012 11:12:30 AM] Josh Michalec: @sky I disagree, cyberspace has plenty of rules

[1/12/2012 11:12:35 AM] Dane Price: I don't believe gaming has truly helped to streamline the way cyberspace works... Sure it contributes to Cyberculture... but not cyberspace itself

[1/12/2012 11:12:52 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Jessica, to add on to your point though... cyberspace can have communities that agree on rules. Survivor spoiler comes to mind.

[1/12/2012 11:12:53 AM] jeffgwarren: @sky the rules define the games we play. Shoot a ball through a hoop to score is basketball

[1/12/2012 11:12:55 AM] Taylor Orr: @sky but is cyberspace beginning to form rules now, what about the article from last night. They formed a 'committee' to ban negative users

[1/12/2012 11:12:58 AM] Sky Montour: @josh, what are they? one can do whatever they want online, isn't that the opposite of rules?

[1/12/2012 11:13:26 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @Everyone maybe cyberspace rules are based on personal ethics and values? like most users don't go on and rape people on the internet

[1/12/2012 11:13:34 AM] Jessica Moes: @RR / everyone I'd say we ARE gaming when we're plugged in. I think there are basic, very basic rules to cyberspace. I think the end goal is simply the transfer of data. It's a game in it's most simple form is just that, data. The rules are set by the hardware we use, the limits of the Internet (which changes consistently, yes, but still exist).

[1/12/2012 11:13:40 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @everyone, could we add that a game requires that all players recognize the game to be a game.

[1/12/2012 11:13:57 AM] Josh Michalec: @Sky in a way, yes you can do whatever you want, but there are plenty of rules laid out. Forums have rules, you follow them or you get banned. Games have rules, follow them or face punishment.

[1/12/2012 11:13:59 AM] Rebecca Richards: @james... good caveat...

[1/12/2012 11:14:07 AM] Sky Montour: @taylor, it is true that the community grouped together in order to have another player banned, but is that a rule now, or just a single occurence that happened because the community was for it?

[1/12/2012 11:14:08 AM] Austin Bly: @James no

[1/12/2012 11:14:09 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @Dane I see what you mean. I think that cyberculture (or specific cultures) is much more a result of games, for sure, but I also believe that games influence our entire conception of what cyberspace even is.

[1/12/2012 11:14:23 AM] Sky Montour: @josh, what is being banned? as Dr. Bungle showed us, it doesn't stop much.

[1/12/2012 11:14:25 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @dane I think that cyberculture is definitely partly defined by the gaming culture and I agree that it isn't cyberspace itself

[1/12/2012 11:14:37 AM] Jessica Moes: It's a different standard of rules than what we normally expect. The only rule is to act within the limits of cyberspace. But that in itself is a rule. Does that make sense?

[1/12/2012 11:14:42 AM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:14:46 AM] Taylor Orr: @sky I think protocol was put in place, they now have a petition system

[1/12/2012 11:14:47 AM] Rebecca Richards: This is excellent

[1/12/2012 11:14:55 AM] Josh Michalec: @Sky Right, but it takes away that persona, that potential piece of you as we talked about before with our virtual identities

[1/12/2012 11:15:03 AM] Rebecca Richards: You're getting at the heart of some of the conflict of "cybercultures"

[1/12/2012 11:15:16 AM] Rebecca Richards: the interpretation of actions via cyberspace is a battle ground

[1/12/2012 11:15:35 AM] Rebecca Richards: While some see it as a space of conflict, engagement... where the rules have been set and people are gaining and losing

[1/12/2012 11:15:53 AM] Dane Price: @tckyrola But when I play a flash game such as the lightcycle, how connected do I even feel? Even with a multiplayer game, don't we lose sight of what is actually going on and just assume our computer is telling us these people exist? It's hard to tell that the internet connects, it just feels like the people are in the room with you.. if that makes sense

[1/12/2012 11:16:01 AM] Rebecca Richards: Others see it as an emergant space...where we can still interrupt practices and come up with "rules."

[1/12/2012 11:16:16 AM] Rebecca Richards: So this brings me to LambdaMOO...

[1/12/2012 11:16:28 AM] Rebecca Richards: And again...

[1/12/2012 11:16:48 AM] Sky Montour: @Josh, taylor I agree with what you are saying, but those rules only apply to one community, and there are an immeasurable amount of communities in cyberspace. If rules only apply to one website, are they rules of cyberspace?

[1/12/2012 11:16:51 AM] Dane Price: @RR Speaking of LambdaMOO, why aren't we all in the living room ahving this conversation? or the bramble bush...

[1/12/2012 11:16:56 AM] Rebecca Richards: I truly apologize for the lack of accessibility from all platforms and browsers. And I truly appreciate those of you who gave it so mcuh effort...

[1/12/2012 11:17:10 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Dane, I had originally wanted to have this conversation in LambdaMOO

[1/12/2012 11:17:12 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @Dane, I'm not sure I'm following you entirely, but I understand that the distinction between cyberspace/cybercultures is tricky and up for debate

[1/12/2012 11:17:22 AM] Rebecca Richards: but I anticipated that you would going to have some issues with navigating the MOO

[1/12/2012 11:17:25 AM] Rebecca Richards: :)

[1/12/2012 11:17:30 AM] Rebecca Richards: I didn't think they would be so great

[1/12/2012 11:17:34 AM] Rebecca Richards: ...:(

[1/12/2012 11:17:37 AM] Rebecca Richards: And I apologize

[1/12/2012 11:17:40 AM] Josh Michalec: The Moo was awesome

[1/12/2012 11:17:44 AM] Andy Bartz: Speaking of cyber rules, how are these rules enforced? There is no cyber police in LambdaMOO correct?

[1/12/2012 11:17:46 AM] Rebecca Richards: But who made it inside Lambda?

[1/12/2012 11:17:50 AM] Kathleen Stefely: @RR, I'm very glad you didn't have this chat on MOO... I could barely get out of the Linen Closet

[1/12/2012 11:17:51 AM] Adrian Rossing: i did!

[1/12/2012 11:17:53 AM] Rebecca Richards: and how long did you take

[1/12/2012 11:17:55 AM] Josh Michalec: I did!

[1/12/2012 11:17:55 AM] codykragness: i did

[1/12/2012 11:17:55 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @RR Lambdamoo was very interesting... confusing at first but enjoyed how some users were so in depth and serious about it.

[1/12/2012 11:17:57 AM] Rebecca Richards: to get in

[1/12/2012 11:17:57 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @RRI did!

[1/12/2012 11:17:59 AM] Jon Foss: The MOO was pretty cool

[1/12/2012 11:18:01 AM] Rebecca Richards: SWEET!!!

[1/12/2012 11:18:02 AM] codykragness: and i didn't make it far

[1/12/2012 11:18:03 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: I did. Did anyone talk to anone on MOO?

[1/12/2012 11:18:04 AM] Rebecca Richards: YES!!

[1/12/2012 11:18:05 AM] Austin Bly: I did too

[1/12/2012 11:18:05 AM] Jessica Moes: I did, but it took a while to figure it out

[1/12/2012 11:18:06 AM] Sarah Fleming: i did... i think.

[1/12/2012 11:18:07 AM] Jon Foss: @RR I did!

[1/12/2012 11:18:07 AM] Rebecca Richards: @James, I did

[1/12/2012 11:18:10 AM] Kristen Latta: I did!

[1/12/2012 11:18:16 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: The tutorial really did help

[1/12/2012 11:18:16 AM] Taylor Orr: It was easy to get in, but difficult to navigate well afterwards

[1/12/2012 11:18:18 AM] Adrian Rossing: went through the tutorial and then only lasted a few more minutes...

[1/12/2012 11:18:22 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @RR no worries, it was fun once I got there! and @Andy, there used to be the Wizards, now isn't it run off general consensus?

[1/12/2012 11:18:23 AM] Sarah Fleming: y did

[1/12/2012 11:18:24 AM] jeffgwarren: I did. i tried to talk and no one would talk with me

[1/12/2012 11:18:25 AM] Rebecca Richards: @James, I talked to Daland

[1/12/2012 11:18:27 AM] Andy Bartz: I did but had no idea what was going on at all no one would "help" me

[1/12/2012 11:18:32 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: I made it in, but didn't talk to anyone.

[1/12/2012 11:18:34 AM] Rebecca Richards: @james who was hiding in the Coat Closet

[1/12/2012 11:18:36 AM] Dane Price: To get out of the closet all you had to type was @go #17

[1/12/2012 11:18:38 AM] Austin Bly: @Jeff I had the same problem!

[1/12/2012 11:18:43 AM] Josh Michalec: @Katherine *couch* I figured that out... haha

[1/12/2012 11:18:49 AM] Josh Michalec: *cough****

[1/12/2012 11:19:03 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @ RR I talked to one player in the coat closet, s/he was pretty nice, not super helpful though. Never found them again or talked to anybody else after that, though.

[1/12/2012 11:19:17 AM] jeffgwarren: The tutorial was long, and the game was frustrating in my opinion

[1/12/2012 11:19:23 AM] Jessica Moes: It was almost too simple

[1/12/2012 11:19:27 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @RR and James, Daland was the player I talked to as well!

[1/12/2012 11:19:29 AM] Jessica Moes: so simple it was difficult

[1/12/2012 11:19:29 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: did people just type in random numbers to go to different places?

[1/12/2012 11:19:30 AM] Taylor Orr: I could not move to the areas where the active users were, and the help command was not helpful

[1/12/2012 11:19:30 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: It felt like a ghost town to me. I couldn't find any people to talk to. Perhaps it was due to the time I logged in at

[1/12/2012 11:19:32 AM] Jon Foss: @RR interacted with two people briefly as well as Josh and Dane

[1/12/2012 11:19:35 AM] Kristen Latta: @jeff I agree! i got super frustrated

[1/12/2012 11:19:45 AM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:19:50 AM] codykragness: @James, when did you log in

[1/12/2012 11:19:56 AM] Josh Michalec: @Katherine you could move by typing n for north, w for west, etc

[1/12/2012 11:19:58 AM] Joseph Pesta: I wasnt able to log in as a guest

[1/12/2012 11:20:01 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: around 3

[1/12/2012 11:20:11 AM] Rebecca Richards: Ok, those of you who found it "frustrating" or "boring"... what is your biggest complaint?

[1/12/2012 11:20:20 AM] codykragness: oh, i was around midnight and couldnt find people either

[1/12/2012 11:20:30 AM] Jon Foss: @RR users have dwindled

[1/12/2012 11:20:31 AM] Kristen Latta: no one would talk to me!! i followed the tutorial and told them i was new, but no one seemed to care haha!

[1/12/2012 11:20:37 AM] Sarah Fleming: I didn't understand how to interact with the game. I just stood in different rooms asking for help

[1/12/2012 11:20:42 AM] codykragness: @RR to much reading during the tutorial, lost interest right away

[1/12/2012 11:20:42 AM] Adrian Rossing: it took a while to figure out how to do things, and i didnt want to have to imagine everything, i wanted pictures and more interactivity

[1/12/2012 11:20:45 AM] Rebecca Richards: @sarah... oh no! So sorry

[1/12/2012 11:20:46 AM] jeffgwarren: @sarah same

[1/12/2012 11:20:53 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @ RR I just couldn't find people to interact with, I explored for a while but the rooms weren't 'exciting' (perhaps I was expecting graphics even though I knew there would be none). If there were more active players I think I would have suck around longer.

[1/12/2012 11:21:00 AM] Jessica Moes: It was all text. Which left it all in my head. Which frustrated me immensely.

[1/12/2012 11:21:02 AM] Dane Price: The map didn't have all the secret rooms! It needs to be updated, because I found a situation room... Which was awesome, we discussed politics, had cigars and brandy!

[1/12/2012 11:21:04 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @RR I feel that it was frustrating because I was unfamiliar with text base games and the commands, I am so used to the new technology games and how easy they have become..

[1/12/2012 11:21:06 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Adrian... interesting... we have become less textual and more visual...

[1/12/2012 11:21:06 AM] Austin Bly: LambdaMoo is to Second Life as typewriter is to computer... anyone else agree?

[1/12/2012 11:21:08 AM] Taylor Orr: I could not maneuver well enough. I was stuck in the house, and most active users were in La Cantina, but I couldn't get there, and did not get help from the help command or from other users

[1/12/2012 11:21:10 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @adrian i thought it would be more of a video game set up!

[1/12/2012 11:21:12 AM] Andy Bartz: Yeah I agree with @Kristen no one wanted to talk to me or help me out probably because they could tell I was a n00b

[1/12/2012 11:21:16 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Richards. I felt like there was too much text. I really liked exploring, but it was exhausting doing that much reading just to get one's bearings.

[1/12/2012 11:21:23 AM] Jon Foss: @Jessica - agreed

[1/12/2012 11:21:24 AM] Dane Price: @austin, haha yes

[1/12/2012 11:21:27 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @austin yes!

[1/12/2012 11:21:29 AM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:21:29 AM] jeffgwarren: @james, ia gree

[1/12/2012 11:21:52 AM] Josh Michalec: @Dane yes I found a petting zoo :)

[1/12/2012 11:21:56 AM] Taylor Orr: @james I actually liked the reading. It was crazy how the descriptions made you feel ike you were walking through some crazy mansion

[1/12/2012 11:22:02 AM] Taylor Orr: like*

[1/12/2012 11:22:04 AM] Rebecca Richards: YES! All of these observations are true. Obviously the MOO is no longer in it heyday ... there used to be thousands of people

[1/12/2012 11:22:21 AM] Jessica Moes: I guess this could lead into how rape on LamdaMOO can be scary. When it's all text, it's all in your head. The rape becomes that much more real.

[1/12/2012 11:22:23 AM] Rebecca Richards: And it relies on a type of textual literacy that we don't really use anymore

[1/12/2012 11:22:28 AM] Andy Bartz: Someone tried to lick me

[1/12/2012 11:22:33 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @dane I ended up on an island in a dungeon!

[1/12/2012 11:22:34 AM] Rebecca Richards: the "interactivity" is called "line edit commands"

[1/12/2012 11:22:41 AM] Kristen Latta: @Andy bartz me too!!

[1/12/2012 11:22:42 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Andy haha

[1/12/2012 11:22:52 AM] Rebecca Richards: @andy, I'm sorry though... yuck

[1/12/2012 11:22:59 AM] Rebecca Richards: So line edit command

[1/12/2012 11:23:09 AM] Rebecca Richards: was the only way to interact before the development of Web browswers

[1/12/2012 11:23:19 AM] Rebecca Richards: and the logic behind it is program-end design

[1/12/2012 11:23:34 AM] Rebecca Richards: Program-end design is created so that users can manipulate programs

[1/12/2012 11:23:38 AM] Rebecca Richards: and design as they go

[1/12/2012 11:23:44 AM] Rebecca Richards: If you end up MOO-in more

[1/12/2012 11:23:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: you can create objects in rooms.

[1/12/2012 11:23:54 AM] Rebecca Richards: and people can interact with them

[1/12/2012 11:23:57 AM] Rebecca Richards: you can create new rooms

[1/12/2012 11:24:05 AM] Rebecca Richards: and make the world exactly to your specifications

[1/12/2012 11:24:16 AM] Rebecca Richards: Now we have "End-user design"

[1/12/2012 11:24:22 AM] Rebecca Richards: with Web browsers

[1/12/2012 11:24:25 AM] Rebecca Richards: (for the most part)

[1/12/2012 11:24:36 AM] Rebecca Richards: and what is privileged is the "usability for the end user"

[1/12/2012 11:25:02 AM] Rebecca Richards: This idea is best summed up in a book called _Don't Make Me Think_

[1/12/2012 11:25:43 AM] Rebecca Richards: The idea is that the user is given the semblance of creative, interactivity... but the programs now limit the ability of (most) end users from creating new objects and developing program functionality.

[1/12/2012 11:25:56 AM] Taylor Orr: How do you get to make your own stuff in the MOO?

[1/12/2012 11:26:07 AM] Rebecca Richards: The obvious problem with Telnet (which is what LambdaMOO uses) is that people can hack it easier...

[1/12/2012 11:26:20 AM] Rebecca Richards: ... and it is more tedious. Decreases speed.

[1/12/2012 11:26:27 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Taylor... you use the "@create" command

[1/12/2012 11:26:50 AM] Kristen Latta: @RR do you write the description for the object too?

[1/12/2012 11:27:03 AM] Rebecca Richards: @KL Yup! Just like you can write a description for yourself.

[1/12/2012 11:27:15 AM] Rebecca Richards: @everyone... you can apply for a stable user name in the MOO

[1/12/2012 11:27:36 AM] codykragness: @everyone can we really think of LambdaMOO as a game becasue by our definition we need to have rules and a goal, and I really don't think we had those while playing this "game"

[1/12/2012 11:27:52 AM] Rebecca Richards: @cody.. .that was my next question!!!

[1/12/2012 11:27:54 AM] Kristen Latta: @RR do people treat you differently if you're not pegged as a guest?

[1/12/2012 11:28:27 AM] Rebecca Richards: @KL... yup... you start to develop relationships... it's very interesting. People recognize you. And I'll give you a clue... I am not a human being in LamdaMOO :)

[1/12/2012 11:28:45 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @everyone I think it's more of a social network but I can see it to be a game to some people.. the goal would be to interact and meet people.. and the rules would be norms addressed between the two people communicating and boundries ....

[1/12/2012 11:28:47 AM] Rebecca Richards: @KL... mind you I hadn't been in the MOO since last time I taught it.

[1/12/2012 11:28:56 AM] Jon Foss: in LambdaMOO you are an avatar

[1/12/2012 11:28:57 AM] Taylor Orr: @RR were you in the doghouse?

[1/12/2012 11:29:05 AM] Rebecca Richards: @RR... no, but that would have been great.

[1/12/2012 11:29:09 AM] Dane Price: @cody Do you really think of lambdaMOO as a game? I think of it more as a means for social interaction, much like a facebook before facebook

[1/12/2012 11:29:16 AM] Adrian Rossing: @RR, cody.. i think it can still be considered a game. it entertained us (or at least was designed to) and we learned strategies to interact in the MOO

[1/12/2012 11:29:17 AM] Rebecca Richards: @TO-- no but that would have been great

[1/12/2012 11:29:26 AM] Jessica Moes: The rules are just broader. Rules don't have to be simple and direct. In this case they are open ended rules. They are the limits of the program. For example, all objects and people are text. You will never have images. That is a rule.

[1/12/2012 11:29:45 AM] Austin Bly: @everyone so every user has the ability to decide how they want to treat this world and what to do in it... I think that in itself can be a game.

[1/12/2012 11:29:47 AM] Andy Bartz: @everyone are there games within LambdaMOO?

[1/12/2012 11:30:05 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @andy. Yes, there are. I played PacMOO

[1/12/2012 11:30:09 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Andy-- -yes! Did anyone make it to the game room? You can play checkers, Monopoly...

[1/12/2012 11:30:10 AM] codykragness: @Dane, no i don't consider it a game, just a way of interacting with new people and @Adrian do we need all the components of the definition or just one for it to be a game?

[1/12/2012 11:30:11 AM] Andy Bartz: @Austin, yes good point

[1/12/2012 11:30:16 AM] Taylor Orr: @Jessica I agree. The confines of the program are the rules, and the goal is interactivity and communication.

[1/12/2012 11:30:29 AM] Dane Price: @andy I saw some listed as i entered rooms, but i do not believe you could actually play them besides saying :plays game "Guest plays game"

[1/12/2012 11:30:52 AM] Rebecca Richards: @DP-- there are certain games you can play with others....

[1/12/2012 11:30:56 AM] Kathleen Stefely: @everyone I spoke to one user and said "I don't understand this game" and he said "it's not a game, per se. It's more of a chat room. But there are secrets and challenges to discover if that's your thing"... so I think there are games of some kind

[1/12/2012 11:30:58 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: @RR, yes but there is something awefully sad about sitting down to a board game by yourself.

[1/12/2012 11:31:01 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Jessica. I have trouble with your assesment of LamdaMOO as a game. If we accept that definition, then a comment board is a game as well.

[1/12/2012 11:31:04 AM] Sky Montour: @Taylor, by that definition would you consider facebook a game?

[1/12/2012 11:31:08 AM] Rebecca Richards: @DP also there are some "games" you can ply by yourself

[1/12/2012 11:31:14 AM] Rebecca Richards: @SS-- indeed! :)

[1/12/2012 11:31:22 AM] Rebecca Richards: @SS-- oops :(

[1/12/2012 11:31:50 AM] Jessica Moes: @James I think we're narrowly definining game to be what we consider a game today. I think the term can be broader.

[1/12/2012 11:31:54 AM] jeffgwarren: @sky the goal of facebook is to accumulate friends and share your thoughts lives with others, at least for some people

[1/12/2012 11:31:58 AM] Jessica Moes: @Sky I would

[1/12/2012 11:32:08 AM] Rebecca Richards: <Interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:32:23 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @everyone I think someone could eventually find an argument to argue everything is a game...

[1/12/2012 11:32:24 AM] Rebecca Richards: Let’s switch to the Reading, A Rape in Cyberspace.

[1/12/2012 11:32:44 AM] Rebecca Richards: Just to make sure everyone is on the same page, a few quick comprehension questions:

[1/12/2012 11:32:49 AM] Rebecca Richards: Who is Mr. Bungle?

[1/12/2012 11:32:54 AM] codykragness: the rapist

[1/12/2012 11:32:55 AM] Dane Price: a RAPIST

[1/12/2012 11:32:55 AM] Sky Montour: the rapist

[1/12/2012 11:32:57 AM] jeffgwarren: the rapist

[1/12/2012 11:32:57 AM] Jon Foss: a user

[1/12/2012 11:32:57 AM] Taylor Orr: The rapist

[1/12/2012 11:32:58 AM] Jessica Moes: He's a creepy groupd of college kids

[1/12/2012 11:32:59 AM] Adrian Rossing: the rapist

[1/12/2012 11:33:00 AM] Kathleen Stefely: the creepy clown

[1/12/2012 11:33:01 AM] Kristen Latta: the user who cyber raped

[1/12/2012 11:33:01 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: rapist

[1/12/2012 11:33:02 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: A collection of users

[1/12/2012 11:33:05 AM] Andy Bartz: the crazy guy

[1/12/2012 11:33:10 AM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:33:13 AM] Josh Michalec: Moo user and abuser

[1/12/2012 11:33:20 AM] Jon Foss: @Josh haha

[1/12/2012 11:33:21 AM] Joseph Pesta: wierdo

[1/12/2012 11:33:23 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: ab-user

[1/12/2012 11:33:25 AM] Kristen Latta: @jessica oh yeah what a twist!

[1/12/2012 11:33:27 AM] Sarah Fleming: also turned into Dr. Jest

[1/12/2012 11:33:27 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: A collectively owned and rather disturbed clown that violated a couple of players with a voodoo doll.

[1/12/2012 11:33:32 AM] Rebecca Richards: you're all right.

[1/12/2012 11:33:33 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: Chris hanson needs to speak to Mr.Bungle

[1/12/2012 11:33:56 AM] Rebecca Richards: Without getting too graphic, what happened to Moondreamer?

[1/12/2012 11:34:02 AM] Rebecca Richards: and exu

[1/12/2012 11:34:05 AM] Rebecca Richards: and others

[1/12/2012 11:34:08 AM] Taylor Orr: Was she the one with the knife?

[1/12/2012 11:34:12 AM] Rebecca Richards: @TO

[1/12/2012 11:34:12 AM] Rebecca Richards: yes

[1/12/2012 11:34:15 AM] Dane Price: one of them ate hair from their preivate parts

[1/12/2012 11:34:19 AM] codykragness: they were violated in front of everyone in the room

[1/12/2012 11:34:22 AM] Dane Price: that was vivid to say the least...

[1/12/2012 11:34:22 AM] Sky Montour: cyberrape, emotional violation

[1/12/2012 11:34:23 AM] Rebecca Richards: @CK yes!

[1/12/2012 11:34:25 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: Moondreamer was forced to do vile acts upon herself

[1/12/2012 11:34:32 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: she was violated

[1/12/2012 11:34:33 AM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:34:40 AM] Sarah Fleming: They were violated, without their consent in public spaces

[1/12/2012 11:35:02 AM] Rebecca Richards: Great... do you understand how this happened... for those of you who were in the MOO, this might make more sense. For those of you who did not enter, this might be difficult to grasp.

[1/12/2012 11:35:10 AM] Rebecca Richards: How did Mr. Bungle "rape" in cyberspace?

[1/12/2012 11:35:30 AM] Dane Price: :( !

[1/12/2012 11:35:30 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: Mr. Bungle used a voodoo doll to control what text the users entered into the communal space

[1/12/2012 11:35:43 AM] Rebecca Richards: @DP don't worry... @James has the answer

[1/12/2012 11:35:45 AM] Andy Bartz: So was he hacking?

[1/12/2012 11:35:45 AM] Jessica Moes: I think the issue is the text based program. It's all in the user's heads. You're forced to imagine the situations you are in, and thus it becomes that much more emotionally real.

[1/12/2012 11:35:49 AM] codykragness: @RR if the person who was being violoated just turned off their computer or logged out, could their character still be violated, or is it gone for the time being?

[1/12/2012 11:36:06 AM] Rebecca Richards: @everyone

[1/12/2012 11:36:13 AM] Rebecca Richards: let me try to clarify this because it is hard to grasp

[1/12/2012 11:36:43 AM] Rebecca Richards: Mr. Bungle @created a voodoo doll... which was basically a text-based application that could make other user/avatars do things to themselves.

[1/12/2012 11:37:00 AM] Rebecca Richards: So he would type a command to "use his voodoo doll" to "make X person do Y"

[1/12/2012 11:37:16 AM] Rebecca Richards: And then everyone in the room would see (textually) "X just did Y!"

[1/12/2012 11:37:26 AM] Rebecca Richards: and it would appear as though that person X did the thing...

[1/12/2012 11:37:33 AM] Rebecca Richards: does that make sense?

[1/12/2012 11:37:37 AM] jeffgwarren: yes

[1/12/2012 11:37:38 AM] Sarah Fleming: :)

[1/12/2012 11:37:38 AM] Rebecca Richards: So it wasn't a "hack"

[1/12/2012 11:37:40 AM] Sky Montour: indeed

[1/12/2012 11:37:40 AM] Joseph Pesta: ic

[1/12/2012 11:37:41 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: yes

[1/12/2012 11:37:42 AM] Adrian Rossing: mhmm

[1/12/2012 11:37:43 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: yes

[1/12/2012 11:37:43 AM] Kristen Latta: yes! how creepy

[1/12/2012 11:37:45 AM] codykragness: yep

[1/12/2012 11:37:48 AM] Rebecca Richards: @KL-- yes!

[1/12/2012 11:37:48 AM] Andy Bartz: yes

[1/12/2012 11:37:57 AM] Josh Michalec: @RR I think part of what makes that worse is that because there are no visuals, others think that is what you just yped

[1/12/2012 11:38:01 AM] jeffgwarren: no one could voodooo bingle and make him stop though..

[1/12/2012 11:38:02 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @RR, yes, but would user X be able to type their own text and disown the voodoo-text? Just to clarify further

[1/12/2012 11:38:05 AM] Rebecca Richards: @JM-- Agreed

[1/12/2012 11:38:23 AM] Dane Price: @RR but he couldn't actually manipulate their avatars could he? He couldn't alter their actualy user inputs and make them move, correct?

[1/12/2012 11:38:46 AM] Taylor Orr: @RL if they logged off could they still be violated? As in, could other users still think they were doing those things?

[1/12/2012 11:38:50 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: The reading implied that the voodoo doll was already a creation, and Mr. Bungle just abused it.

[1/12/2012 11:38:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: @TyKy A user could not disempower the voodoo doll because it would take some time to create an object that worked against Mr. Bungle's device. But yes, a person could type in their own response

[1/12/2012 11:39:22 AM] Rebecca Richards: @SS-- That might be right... I apologize... I can't remember off the top of my head...

[1/12/2012 11:39:26 AM] Taylor Orr: Someone made a cage for them didn't they? It was like a forcefield that blocked the voodoo

[1/12/2012 11:39:49 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @Shahr, that's how I understood the reading as well

[1/12/2012 11:39:53 AM] Rebecca Richards: @dane yes, you can teleport and manipulate others avatars in the space.

[1/12/2012 11:39:56 AM] codykragness: i thought it blocked mr bungle?

[1/12/2012 11:40:02 AM] Sarah Fleming: @Taylor I think so

[1/12/2012 11:40:08 AM] codykragness: not just the voo do doll

[1/12/2012 11:40:15 AM] Rebecca Richards: @everyone... oops, my bad... the voodoo doll was already in existance (thanks SS and TyKy)

[1/12/2012 11:40:37 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: It was a gun that created a forcefield.

[1/12/2012 11:40:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: So the question is this:

[1/12/2012 11:41:04 AM] Rebecca Richards: Well, before a big question...

[1/12/2012 11:41:12 AM] Rebecca Richards: an easier question...

[1/12/2012 11:41:40 AM] Dane Price: @everyone, RR is about to pop the big question!

[1/12/2012 11:41:44 AM] Dane Price: prepare yourselves

[1/12/2012 11:41:47 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: 8-)

[1/12/2012 11:41:53 AM] Rebecca Richards: What is your response to Mr. Bungle's actions? Do you think Mr. Bungle should have been toaded?

[1/12/2012 11:41:58 AM] Rebecca Richards: Or was this just a game?

[1/12/2012 11:42:00 AM] Rebecca Richards: virtual?

[1/12/2012 11:42:09 AM] Rebecca Richards: @DP-- You're making me laugh and mistype :)

[1/12/2012 11:42:31 AM] Sky Montour: I'd say toading him was the right decision BECAUSE it is a game.

[1/12/2012 11:42:41 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: I think the reading summed it up well. His actions in the game were outside the spirit of the game and so were punished within the game.

[1/12/2012 11:42:49 AM] Josh Michalec: @RR this is where rules come into play, and it is why we have them. Games are created to create a certain set of experiences, and when you obstruct others from having that experience, you no longer belong in that gaming environment

[1/12/2012 11:42:55 AM] codykragness: @RR right now I feel like it was just game, but maybe if I played LambdaMOO more like the users violated I would feel much more strongly

[1/12/2012 11:43:02 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @sky I agree but what is to stop him from coming him back as a different user? can LambdaMOO prevent this?

[1/12/2012 11:43:02 AM] Jessica Moes: @Shar I like that assessment

[1/12/2012 11:43:03 AM] Andy Bartz: I think it is a game, but in any game there are times when the line is crossed. I think Mr. Bungle should be toaded or exiled from the game entirely.

[1/12/2012 11:43:04 AM] Adrian Rossing: @RR i agree with the toading. the users wanted him to be gone, and he had done something that is unacceptable

[1/12/2012 11:43:07 AM] Dane Price: Considering it was a mechanic that he was simply abusing, I think it was fine, until other users in the community asked him to stop.. He did deserve the ban for taking it way to far...

[1/12/2012 11:43:13 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @RR regardless of what should happen to Mr. Bungle, I think it is safe to say that from what we've learned so far means it is never 'just' a game or cyberspace. While his actions are clearly different from if they had somehow occurred in the physical and material world, they were still very harmful towards his victims.

[1/12/2012 11:43:32 AM] Kristen Latta: @JM I like your explanation. When you violate another's opportunitiy to experience the game, you should lose your own privilege's to play the game.

[1/12/2012 11:43:44 AM] Sarah Fleming: I think in any game there has to be rules and boundaries. I like how the articles talked about the RL and VR interceptions and where his actions stood. What he did was violated in both realms.

[1/12/2012 11:44:06 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @SS I agree, I feel that Mr. Bungle should of been toaded. He was takein away from others gameplay and experience and was using degrading sexual exploitations

[1/12/2012 11:44:15 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @Dane, I think the Mr. Bungle had a bit of a history to this sort of creepy/violating actions (if to a lesser extent). Perhaps his user history added to his toading.

[1/12/2012 11:44:21 AM] Adrian Rossing: @tyler i completely agree. it hurt the actual users. there is someone on the other side of the computer. so the virtual world isn't complely virtual

[1/12/2012 11:44:23 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: I agree with the toading decision. @Katherine. One could come back as another user, but I think the point is to create a gaming environment for the violater that in the end is no longer entertaining. Along the lines of punish for violating others game experience

[1/12/2012 11:44:47 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @james thanks for clarifying!

[1/12/2012 11:44:48 AM] Josh Michalec: @James that is why we have ip bans

[1/12/2012 11:44:50 AM] Taylor Orr: At first I thought it was just a game, and they may have overreacted. However, after experiencing the MOO briefly I understood their horror because it really feels like you in that mansion. For example, somehow I ended up topless, no idea how, and I was really embarrassed. So I can see how a frequent user could feel really violated. Mr. B was an experienced user/users, I think they knew they

[1/12/2012 11:44:58 AM] Taylor Orr: oops...would get a strong reaction

[1/12/2012 11:45:02 AM] Jon Foss: @everyone. Turning Mr. Bungle into a toad, wiping the players desciption and attributes and replacing them with those of the slimy amphibian was within the rights of LambdaMOO and its community

[1/12/2012 11:45:05 AM] Kathleen Stefely: I think it was disgusting and like everyone already said, reading things can make them feel real and emotional. It doesn't matter if it was "just" a game, the real-life people felt violated too

[1/12/2012 11:45:15 AM] Andy Bartz: Should LamdbaMOO creaters enstill some sort of censorship system, or does that take away from the game?

[1/12/2012 11:45:22 AM] Austin Bly: @everyone but this goes against our ideas that we were coming up with earlier! I thought LambdaMOO is supposed to be limitless - everyone can do what they want, defined by themselves, and others can't restrict that freedom

[1/12/2012 11:45:26 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: @everyone, I think the toading is justified in that it was an action of the community. The MOO is designed around communal creation, so a community decision is fully within the scope of acceptable practice in the game.

[1/12/2012 11:45:33 AM] Rebecca Richards: @AB-- good point...

[1/12/2012 11:45:45 AM] Rebecca Richards: @SS also a good point

[1/12/2012 11:45:48 AM] Taylor Orr: @shar I agree

[1/12/2012 11:45:54 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: I agree with the creepiness of the game and I agree with the article where it asks where the mind ends and the body begins

[1/12/2012 11:46:00 AM] Sarah Fleming: @austin. It can be limitless until you infringe and limit on someone elses play

[1/12/2012 11:46:02 AM] Jessica Moes: He didn't violate any rules at the time though.

[1/12/2012 11:46:08 AM] Rebecca Richards: @KF-- this leads me to my next question nicely

[1/12/2012 11:46:11 AM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:46:15 AM] Josh Michalec: @SS but you have to be careful. Someone has to be in charge, because a majority doesn't always = right

[1/12/2012 11:46:24 AM] jeffgwarren: @RR/AB would censorship take away from the game? it's suppossed to be a world where anything can happen...

[1/12/2012 11:46:31 AM] Rebecca Richards: Ok here comes the big (and very difficult question)

[1/12/2012 11:46:38 AM] Jon Foss: @JM rules can be modified in a setting like LambdaMOO

[1/12/2012 11:46:49 AM] Rebecca Richards: @JGW-- yes rules limit the space...

[1/12/2012 11:46:54 AM] Rebecca Richards: here's the question:

[1/12/2012 11:46:54 AM] Jessica Moes: But not at the time @Jon

[1/12/2012 11:47:34 AM] Rebecca Richards: Did a rape occur? Why or why not? Consider this passage in your response: "to participate, therefore, in this disembodied enactment of life’s most body-centered activity is to risk the realization that when it comes to sex, perhaps the body in question is not the physical one at all, but its psychic double, the bodylike self-representation we carry around in our heads — and that whether we present that body to another as a meat puppet or a word puppet is not nearly as significant a distinction as one might have thought."

[1/12/2012 11:48:23 AM] Jessica Moes: did a rape occur? yes. is it punishable in RL? I think no.

[1/12/2012 11:48:34 AM] Adrian Rossing: A quote from Julian: “Since rape can occur without any physical pain or damage, I found myself reasoning, then it must be classed as a crime against the mind — more intimately and deeply hurtful, to be sure, than cross burnings, wolf whistles, and virtual rape, but undeniably located on the same conceptual continuum.”

[1/12/2012 11:48:40 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: I would consider it a rape of the character and a mental violation of the person embodying that character.

[1/12/2012 11:48:42 AM] Adrian Rossing: yes i think it did occur

[1/12/2012 11:48:46 AM] Taylor Orr: I believe there was a mental violation/rape. I think it would be similar to the idea of stalking or peeping toms. They do no physical harm, but they impact people mentally

[1/12/2012 11:48:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: @adrian...good quotation

[1/12/2012 11:48:52 AM] Jon Foss: No rape occurred at all as any RL court of law has yet defined it.

[1/12/2012 11:48:55 AM] Rebecca Richards: @ss-- good

[1/12/2012 11:49:11 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: virtual rape occurred and it clearly affected the users but I don'tknow if if happened in RL because there were no laws outside of the MOO

[1/12/2012 11:49:11 AM] Josh Michalec: @SS that would be my thoughts exactly

[1/12/2012 11:49:13 AM] Austin Bly: sexual harassment, for sure... Rape? I'm not quite convinced.

[1/12/2012 11:49:15 AM] Jessica Moes: As someone mentioned earlier, he was punished in the game world.

[1/12/2012 11:49:17 AM] codykragness: yes because the person it happened to felt as though they had actually been violated

[1/12/2012 11:49:25 AM] jeffgwarren: @SS so is it more like cyberbullying than a rape?

[1/12/2012 11:49:25 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @AB agreed

[1/12/2012 11:49:29 AM] Dane Price: I don't think it was rape, IIRC the people were only pissed... They didn't feel the usual feelings that rape victims feel, where they feel it is their fault and completely abused..

[1/12/2012 11:49:34 AM] Sarah Fleming: It reminds of the saying sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me... which I don't think is true.

[1/12/2012 11:49:38 AM] Jessica Moes: Because it happened in the game world, he should have punished in the game world.

[1/12/2012 11:49:40 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Richards, I have difficulty considering the act a rape. It seems to me to fall into the lines of identity theft, slander, and harassment. In my opinion a rape is a violation of core identity--that is an identity that one does not choose. Thus, rape can only occur in RL, because you are in a scenario that you did not choose. Because one chooses to exist within VL, one cannot be raped, per se.

[1/12/2012 11:49:43 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @RR I think a distinction has to be made between physical and virtual. This is not to say that virtual rape isn't serious or punishable in the virtual world, but the physical realities of a material rape are vastly different and often adds another layer of trauma to the victim regardless of emotional equality.

[1/12/2012 11:50:15 AM] Jessica Moes: @James. YES

[1/12/2012 11:50:19 AM] Kristen Latta: @Sarah totally! words can be just as hurtful if not more, because they tarnish one's reputation in cyberlife and the real world

[1/12/2012 11:50:28 AM] Josh Michalec: @Dane agreed.

[1/12/2012 11:50:46 AM] Austin Bly: I think an important aspect of rape is that the victim is often times helpless... the victim still had the option of just shutting of their program and/or computer...

[1/12/2012 11:50:49 AM] Sky Montour: @tyler, I agree. A virtual rape ocurred, but that is very different from rape.

[1/12/2012 11:50:59 AM] Dane Price: But the emotions it evoked were not those of a rape victim, just being mad...

[1/12/2012 11:51:05 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @sarah that is a really good description! reading the words on a screen can affect you

[1/12/2012 11:51:13 AM] Austin Bly: @Dane I agree

[1/12/2012 11:51:15 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: I think that people who use chat rooms and programs like this are more vulnarable and maybe have some issues in RL socializing? just a assumption

[1/12/2012 11:51:18 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Dane, the article said there was post-traumatic stress as a result.

[1/12/2012 11:51:29 AM] Kristen Latta: @sarah and @katherine... similar to cyberbullying?!

[1/12/2012 11:51:32 AM] Rebecca Richards: @ James-- yes... that was my next point

[1/12/2012 11:51:40 AM] Rebecca Richards: @everyone:

[1/12/2012 11:51:40 AM] Sarah Fleming: @KL exactly!

[1/12/2012 11:51:42 AM] Taylor Orr: @jeff I think it may be more relatable to bullying, which doesn't discount what happened, but I think categorizes it better

[1/12/2012 11:51:43 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @kristen similar!

[1/12/2012 11:51:50 AM] Kathleen Stefely: I consider it a rape, but not one punishble in RL... still, I can competely see that the users would feel abused and like it was their fault. Can I ask everyone a question about their experience on the MOO? Did anyone know that setitng your gender as female is a red flag?

[1/12/2012 11:51:50 AM] Rebecca Richards: exu experience Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, no?

[1/12/2012 11:52:12 AM] Rebecca Richards: Isn't that a materially, embodied consequence of this "rape"??

[1/12/2012 11:52:21 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @KS I did not know that it was a red flag.

[1/12/2012 11:52:25 AM] Kathleen Stefely: I got propositioned twice... and it really creeped me out. LIke it would in real life

[1/12/2012 11:52:50 AM] Shahriar Shahbazi: @Kathleen By the same person?

[1/12/2012 11:52:52 AM] Rebecca Richards: @KS-- OH no... I didn't know that... I use the Royal gender for exactly that same reason

[1/12/2012 11:53:01 AM] Andy Bartz: I agree @KL this is in the category of cyber bulling, although it is terrible and the victims experienced post-traumatic stress that does not mean it is a rape. Victims of stalkers or peeping toms mentioned earlier by @Taylor can also feel theses things mentally

[1/12/2012 11:53:10 AM] Austin Bly: @RR well, yes. Just like cyberbullying can lead to all sorts of horrible things.

[1/12/2012 11:53:25 AM] Jessica Moes: And we have to think about the perpetrator. The first time, it was a group impersonating an individual. Can you consider that multi-person rape? Or is it still only one on one? A gang bang or a creep? Is rape in the eye of the perpetrator or the victim? Or is it the beholder? That leaves some grey area.

[1/12/2012 11:53:50 AM] Kristen Latta: @Andy, but I think that in the case of cyberbullying, there should be RL consequences. especially if the cyber identities of the bullies are identifiable...

[1/12/2012 11:53:50 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Richards, I think the pstd definately makes the violation serious, but couldn't it also be considered that the pstd is a result of placing one's identity too fully in an unstable environment. I.e. violation was inevitable in a virtual space.

[1/12/2012 11:53:51 AM] Rebecca Richards: @Austin-- right... the difference between bullying and cyberbullying can be great... but oftentimes there are similiar ramifications.

[1/12/2012 11:53:53 AM] Sarah Fleming: @everyone. Just like we have our own vocab for cyberspace maybe we need new definitions for cyberbulling to differentiate

[1/12/2012 11:54:00 AM] Sarah Fleming: from RL

[1/12/2012 11:54:19 AM] Josh Michalec: @Kristen there aren't too many laws governing that kind of thing though

[1/12/2012 11:54:21 AM] Andy Bartz: @KL agreed. In no way am i condoning actions of cyber bulling

[1/12/2012 11:54:45 AM] Rebecca Richards: @James... perhaps... but if I can play devil's advocate... couldn't we say the same thing about our RL identities... that we put a lot of stock in them even though they are "fluid" and can be undermined....

[1/12/2012 11:54:55 AM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 11:55:04 AM] Rebecca Richards: Keep this question in the back of your mind

[1/12/2012 11:55:14 AM] Kathleen Stefely: @James... why do we assume that a virtual space is unstable? Why are the rules of what is acceptable any different than RL?

[1/12/2012 11:55:19 AM] Rebecca Richards: Something happened to Moon and Exu et al

[1/12/2012 11:55:28 AM] Rebecca Richards: what it is... is difficult to define.

[1/12/2012 11:55:38 AM] Rebecca Richards: It is clear that exu experience serious trauma from the event.

[1/12/2012 11:55:56 AM] Rebecca Richards: And remember that exu was an intelligent person... a graduate student...

[1/12/2012 11:56:16 AM] Rebecca Richards: and... if I remember correctly, exu had experience RL sexual assualt, right?

[1/12/2012 11:56:32 AM] Taylor Orr: I think you

[1/12/2012 11:56:36 AM] Taylor Orr: are right

[1/12/2012 11:56:37 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @RR one of the victims did, yes

[1/12/2012 11:56:46 AM] Rebecca Richards: @tyky... thanks...

[1/12/2012 11:57:26 AM] Rebecca Richards: So what was your reaction to finding out the Mr. Bungle was actually a group of college students in a dorm, coming up with these gross commands together?

[1/12/2012 11:57:34 AM] Rebecca Richards: Does this change your perception of the event?

[1/12/2012 11:57:51 AM] Dane Price: Well, it doesn't make it any less disgusting...

[1/12/2012 11:58:01 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Kathleen, the difference is that one chooses to be within a virtual space, which is arguably not a stable environment, primarily because it can be manipulated. On the other hand, nobody chooses to exist within the real world. I would consider the real world dangerous and unstable, but nobody chooses to exist within it. I would say this is why we grant universal rights to people. They have no say in the matter, so rules are created in order to make life safe within the real world.

[1/12/2012 11:58:05 AM] codykragness: did the people who were violated ever find that out?

[1/12/2012 11:58:14 AM] Adrian Rossing: it is even more upseting thinking that a whole group of kids can agree on doing something that hurtful and dumb

[1/12/2012 11:58:17 AM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @Dane true. But I feel that a group of college students could be influenced to do this as a joke instead of one guy being creepy

[1/12/2012 11:58:18 AM] Austin Bly: @RR It makes me think that these actions were of some sort of mob mentality

[1/12/2012 11:58:21 AM] Adrian Rossing: @cody good question

[1/12/2012 11:58:32 AM] Josh Michalec: @Adrian except things in groups are a lot easier then when done alone

[1/12/2012 11:58:50 AM] Kristen Latta: @josh absolutely. diffusion of responsibility

[1/12/2012 11:58:56 AM] Sarah Fleming: it makes it more as a sick joke instead of a creepy perp.

[1/12/2012 11:58:58 AM] Sky Montour: I wasn't surpirsed at all. It definitely doesn't change the outcome of the actions, but it is comforting to know that it wasn't one psychopathic person commiting these acts.

[1/12/2012 11:58:59 AM] Taylor Orr: It made it seem like they thought it was funny, not that it was some psychopath trying to live out a rape fantasy in VL

[1/12/2012 11:59:00 AM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @adrian agreed. its disgusting

[1/12/2012 11:59:04 AM] Tyler Kyrola: I think that, individually, each of the people in the dorm room were less maliciously-intentioned than the final actions ended up being

[1/12/2012 11:59:17 AM] Josh Michalec: @Sky instead it was several?

[1/12/2012 11:59:36 AM] jeffgwarren: @tyler good point. groupt think

[1/12/2012 11:59:44 AM] Austin Bly: I think the the RL interactions between the college students made their collective actions on MOO seem less real, and why they would end up doing such things

[1/12/2012 11:59:49 AM] Jessica Moes: I think it reinforces the distinction between RL and VL, I mean, the violated thought it was one on one rape, the perpetrators thought it was harmless fun (probably). When VL gets involved, perception changes.

[1/12/2012 11:59:50 AM] James Quincy Sponsel: It somewhat makes more sense that a group was involved. Multiplicity in one agent would create a contradictory and chaotic individual.

[1/12/2012 11:59:54 AM] Tyler Kyrola: @Josh, I think Sky means that the students got caught up in their sick little joke, not that they were planning it out and all had the same intentions

[1/12/2012 11:59:55 AM] Austin Bly: *seem less real to them

[1/12/2012 11:59:58 AM] Adrian Rossing: @josh, that is true, but it is still hard to believe that there wouldnt be enough level headed people to stop it...

[1/12/2012 11:59:59 AM] codykragness: maybe it was just all the college buddies trying to push the envelope a little more then the friends?

[1/12/2012 12:00:05 PM] codykragness: and that just escalated really quickly

[1/12/2012 12:00:11 PM] Josh Michalec: @AB exactly. They took the world of Moo less seriously than others

[1/12/2012 12:00:14 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: It actually supports the toading in my mind. The character was psychopathic because of this fractured personality.

[1/12/2012 12:00:15 PM] Andy Bartz: It could have been one extra creepy person leading the charge and his friends going along with it

[1/12/2012 12:00:23 PM] Sky Montour: Mob mentality changes everyone durastically. I'd say with some amount of certainty that none of the students who participated in the actions would have committed them on their own.

[1/12/2012 12:00:29 PM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 12:00:42 PM] Rebecca Richards: Right, there's a level of group think going on... for sure...

[1/12/2012 12:01:03 PM] Rebecca Richards: and so we're less likely to read the event as one psychopath sexual predator...BUT

[1/12/2012 12:01:12 PM] Kristen Latta: @RR could this be a harmful effect of collective intelligence?

[1/12/2012 12:01:22 PM] Rebecca Richards: @KLatta perhaps, right?

[1/12/2012 12:01:28 PM] Kristen Latta: this be considered*

[1/12/2012 12:02:01 PM] Rebecca Richards: We could say that this is a limit of "collective intelligence"

[1/12/2012 12:02:10 PM] Rebecca Richards: that it falls prey to group think and consensus building

[1/12/2012 12:02:21 PM] Rebecca Richards: and sometimes consensus can be violent

[1/12/2012 12:02:51 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: same can be said about democracy. The athenians were notoirious for making bad decisions based on mob mentality

[1/12/2012 12:03:38 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: :(! I don't know too much about athenians

[1/12/2012 12:03:40 PM] Rebecca Richards: Some might argue that this violent act works as a catharsis... it is a way for people's dark sides to be expressed without doing harm in RL. Here's a quote from the reading: "perhaps it’s better to release…violent tendencies in a virtual environment rather than in real life." Do you agree? Are we willing for cyberspace to become the repository for our collective violence that we possess as humans?

[1/12/2012 12:04:23 PM] Rebecca Richards: @James... YES! This is why Derrida says that "Democracy is always to come... never present."

[1/12/2012 12:04:42 PM] codykragness: It is definately better for something to be done in VL that RL, but that doesn't make it ok for you to act on that feeling towards another person's avatar

[1/12/2012 12:04:46 PM] Rebecca Richards: @James and how Socrates was killed... right?

[1/12/2012 12:04:50 PM] Jon Foss: @RR so long as those violent tendencies don't get played out in RL

[1/12/2012 12:04:50 PM] Josh Michalec: @RR That is exactly it. Like we talked about last week, people feel an urge to hold a front when in RL and in front of people it may have long term effects on. When it comes to the internet, there is a feeling of being able to let your guard down and be whoever

[1/12/2012 12:05:08 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: Even if the catharsis is a real benefit, that doesn't excuse acting upon a character controlled by someone else.

[1/12/2012 12:05:11 PM] Sky Montour: I dont think "cyberspace" as a whole is a good place for that repository, but it might be possible to create a community or place that people would go to in order to release that violence

[1/12/2012 12:05:16 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @richards, yes. Socrates, as well as the group decision to commit genocide on certain aegean islands

[1/12/2012 12:05:25 PM] Tyler Kyrola: I think that the virtual world will constantly be in danger of being used as a release for violent/creepy/otherwise socially unacceptable behavior. It is up to users of a certain space to lay out rules of what can cannot be done or said to prevent this from harming the users both in the virtual world and the physical world (as ended up happening in LambdaMoo, perhaps imperfectly)

[1/12/2012 12:05:39 PM] Josh Michalec: @Sky that is basically the internet haha

[1/12/2012 12:05:48 PM] Rebecca Richards: @james... Good point :)

[1/12/2012 12:05:50 PM] Kristen Latta: @RR couldn't that become a slippery slope though?

[1/12/2012 12:05:54 PM] Austin Bly: @RR @JM that's like saying being drunk is an excuse for someone's actions... the alcohol effects releases you to do what you want and lowers in inhibitions

[1/12/2012 12:06:06 PM] Austin Bly: still obviously not a good excuse

[1/12/2012 12:06:12 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Austin good point

[1/12/2012 12:06:17 PM] Josh Michalec: @Austin Oh I wasn't excusing them, I was merely pointing out what people do.

[1/12/2012 12:06:31 PM] Jessica Moes: @austin but that is still RL action, not VL

[1/12/2012 12:06:38 PM] Adrian Rossing: @austin i completely agree. whether in RL or a virtual space, violence should not be accepted too openly

[1/12/2012 12:06:40 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: Rl can provide an anger outlet, but it stilll isn't right to deliberately go out of their way to harm people- RL or VL regardless

[1/12/2012 12:06:46 PM] Jon Foss: and I believe the violent tendencies played out in VR cannot go beyond the scope of (can't think of a way to say it)

[1/12/2012 12:06:46 PM] Kathleen Stefely: @RR No, a virtual environment is not a good outlet... VL and RL are too interconnected

[1/12/2012 12:06:59 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Kathleen-- I agree... the line is too fuzzy for me...

[1/12/2012 12:07:16 PM] Sky Montour: @Josh, well lambdamoo is the internet and people weren't okay with it there. I know what you are saying, and it would be near impossible to get everyone with violent tendencies to go to one place online in order to release them. But, if we still want to move cyberspace in a utopic direction, this could be a good step towards that goal.

[1/12/2012 12:07:33 PM] jeffgwarren: @RR i disagree, they do interact but they are separate entities

[1/12/2012 12:07:54 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Jeff then how do we explain that exu had PTSD from the event?

[1/12/2012 12:08:08 PM] Andy Bartz: VL and RL are connected, actions in VL effect RL

[1/12/2012 12:08:20 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @Bartzy20 I agree to an extent

[1/12/2012 12:08:20 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Sky. We also need to consider that catharsis is only a possible outcome of violence. Even if we were to create a space in which one could take out aggression, it may only reinforce aggressive behavior.

[1/12/2012 12:08:28 PM] Josh Michalec: @Sky but it's like saying "Okay we can't have these things in RL, put it in VL. Wait, we don't want it there now, lets move it to a new place. Wait, that is inconvenient..." Why not just call it what it is; unacceptable anywhere.

[1/12/2012 12:08:31 PM] Jessica Moes: @jeff I think we are becoming more and more connected to our cyber selfs. That is inevitable with the growth of technology. As the connection increases, more rules on the connection should be made.

[1/12/2012 12:08:43 PM] jeffgwarren: I would say that that was the result of an interaction she had in cyberspace

[1/12/2012 12:09:03 PM] jeffgwarren: i do not agree with the fact than the user of exu was raped

[1/12/2012 12:09:16 PM] Taylor Orr: @JM I totally agree. An invested MOO user would have as much mental commitment to RL and VL relationships

[1/12/2012 12:09:17 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Jeff... so there's a connection between exu's RL and VL

[1/12/2012 12:09:34 PM] Rebecca Richards: <interrupting>

[1/12/2012 12:09:50 PM] Rebecca Richards: This is a tough discussion... perhaps because rape is so loaded with connotations

[1/12/2012 12:09:52 PM] jeffgwarren: yes, there is interaction and they can influence one another but I still think there is distinction

[1/12/2012 12:09:59 PM] Rebecca Richards: and difficult to discuss in RL anyhow

[1/12/2012 12:10:09 PM] Jessica Moes: @Taylor and it's only getting more and more connected. I would argue that some of my facebook relationships with friends from the past are especially important to our RL interactions

[1/12/2012 12:10:16 PM] Rebecca Richards: but what if we shift the topic just a bit to something usually seen as more positive:

[1/12/2012 12:10:21 PM] Rebecca Richards: LOVE <3

[1/12/2012 12:10:29 PM] Josh Michalec: (inlove)

[1/12/2012 12:10:30 PM] Rebecca Richards: (that was supposed to be a heart)

[1/12/2012 12:10:31 PM] Dane Price: :( !

[1/12/2012 12:10:36 PM] Adrian Rossing: (h)

[1/12/2012 12:10:42 PM] Rebecca Richards: (h)

[1/12/2012 12:10:44 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: <3

[1/12/2012 12:10:45 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: \o/

[1/12/2012 12:10:45 PM] Austin Bly: @RR but love doesn't necessarily require a physical component... does it?

[1/12/2012 12:10:53 PM] Dane Price: Love as it exists on the internet?!?

[1/12/2012 12:10:57 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Austin-- Hold on to that thought.

[1/12/2012 12:10:59 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @richards. Love would seem workable within a cyberspace because it implies mutality.

[1/12/2012 12:11:01 PM] Josh Michalec: @Love games

[1/12/2012 12:11:05 PM] Rebecca Richards: So many people are falling in love via new media technologies. See this article:

[1/12/2012 12:11:13 PM] Rebecca Richards: Just quickly scan this article.

[1/12/2012 12:11:14 PM] Josh Michalec: @Dane* Love games

[1/12/2012 12:11:20 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: mutuality*

[1/12/2012 12:11:40 PM] Dane Price: @Josh playing them with me?

[1/12/2012 12:12:20 PM] Rebecca Richards: I would *never* imply that falling in love and rape are equivalent acts.

[1/12/2012 12:12:36 PM] Rebecca Richards: But I think that both events have an embodied element and a psychological/mental element to them.

[1/12/2012 12:13:09 PM] Rebecca Richards: or maybe we should use "being violated" and "falling in love"

[1/12/2012 12:13:48 PM] Rebecca Richards: If you believe in "love" or "falling in love," do you believe that you can do so virtually?

[1/12/2012 12:14:16 PM] Taylor Orr: I do, I think it's mostly a mental state. So it could definitely be done virtually

[1/12/2012 12:14:24 PM] Jessica Moes: Love, I think, is just an intense connetion between two people. By that definition, yes.

[1/12/2012 12:14:36 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @RR yes, I feel that the virtual world of these programs/matchmaking are tools, the article stated that they eventually met up in person and are doing well, also we see like e harmony and sites doign so well because they just help people meet similar people

[1/12/2012 12:14:37 PM] Adrian Rossing: i think it is different for many people. but i know people who say it has happened. so, if you are able to fall in love in a VL you are able to be violated in VL

[1/12/2012 12:14:52 PM] Austin Bly: @RR you can fall in love with the virtual identity of that person... but obviously that can be different from the user's RL

[1/12/2012 12:14:55 PM] Josh Michalec: @RR wouldn't falling in love virtually be the most idealistic of settings? It is only their personality (provided they act like "who they are") with looks taken out of the equation

[1/12/2012 12:15:06 PM] Sarah Fleming: I think you can to an extent, like we talked about facebook its you on your best day. So someone could be extremely attracted to the idea of you. Although it may be just a fragement of who you actually are in RL

[1/12/2012 12:15:07 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: different people define it differently, but people seem to know it when it happens

[1/12/2012 12:15:10 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @richards, love would be possible virtually, but there are some complexities one would have to keep in mind. For instance, how can one be sure the person receiving the love actually shares the feelings of love, or is playing deceiver?

[1/12/2012 12:15:26 PM] Jessica Moes: However, even a Virutal identity is based on a real identity. There will always be fragments of RL in a virtual relationship.

[1/12/2012 12:15:31 PM] codykragness: @Josh, even if its not their normal personality, as long as they keep it up in VL does it really matter?

[1/12/2012 12:15:33 PM] Rebecca Richards: @everyone: these are all good points.

[1/12/2012 12:15:36 PM] Sky Montour: @Josh, ideally that is the way it should work. But the percent of people that act like themselves online? probably not bery high.

[1/12/2012 12:15:44 PM] Kristen Latta: @everyone but can we really forget the physical attraction element of love?

[1/12/2012 12:15:59 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @everyone. One could argue that when someone loves someone else they love a virtual being, since it is what the lover conceives the beloved to be..

[1/12/2012 12:16:01 PM] Sarah Fleming: @KL can you be attracted to avatars?

[1/12/2012 12:16:02 PM] Kristen Latta: is being physically attracted to a cyber identity good enough?

[1/12/2012 12:16:02 PM] Andy Bartz: I feel like you can build strong relationships online but until you really meet someone in person you can't really be sure can you? People can depict themselves however they want but if they are a totally different person in RL than VL than I think that would someone fall out of love

[1/12/2012 12:16:05 PM] Josh Michalec: @James for lots of people expressing those feelings are easier over the internet than in RL (though that i why being decieved can be so hurtful)

[1/12/2012 12:16:19 PM] Austin Bly: @KL "I fell in love with her the first time I laid eyes on her." will have a whole new meaning

[1/12/2012 12:16:28 PM] Tyler Kyrola: @Austin, I agree. Being in love with a virtual person can be real, but that love possibly can be altered by meeting them in the physical world. Perhaps they are putting a false avatar out on the internet unconsciously and are just different enough that you don't love the physical individual, only the virtual one they put forth and have interacted with you through.

[1/12/2012 12:16:49 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Josh. I agree, the point I was trying to make is that it is much easier to be deceived on-line then in RL.

[1/12/2012 12:16:52 PM] Jon Foss: @everyone VL and RL are two completely different spaces so I think they have to be treated as such

[1/12/2012 12:17:00 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: could we say the same thing about online dating or text message relationships then? where do those fall?

[1/12/2012 12:17:07 PM] Kristen Latta: @Austin. haha so true!

[1/12/2012 12:17:15 PM] Austin Bly: @everyone Do people troll on sites like eHarmony?

[1/12/2012 12:17:26 PM] Josh Michalec: @James totally correct!

[1/12/2012 12:17:38 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Austin--- YES!!!!! There are trolls everywhere... we'll explore this in our last week.

[1/12/2012 12:17:51 PM] Dane Price: no trolls here NOPE.jpg

[1/12/2012 12:17:53 PM] Rebecca Richards: I don't really expect us to have a good answer for this today.

[1/12/2012 12:18:04 PM] Jessica Moes: @Jon et al : But I would argue that VL is based off of RL to some degree. Even people that depict themselves not as themselves stil are showing facets of who they are, pieces of their imagination. There is truth behind every virtual connection.

[1/12/2012 12:18:48 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @jessica. Yes, as long as the projection is authentic, love would be possible virtually.

[1/12/2012 12:18:51 PM] Sky Montour: perhaps a VL identity is ever more "who you are" than a RL identity?

[1/12/2012 12:19:30 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: What about falling in love with a collective identity? Lets say there is a different group of people portraying one character and that character combines all of their positive traits. What then?

[1/12/2012 12:19:38 PM] Jessica Moes: i think the truth comes out in VL. even if it is not your true self, it is a depiction of your inner mind. you hopes, your goals, or, consequently, the opposite of those. there is almost more truth to it.

[1/12/2012 12:19:43 PM] Austin Bly: @SK @JM so... what about minors/young teens who "fall in love" when one of them is actually a 40 year old man?

[1/12/2012 12:19:44 PM] Rebecca Richards: And we'll keep exploring this (potential) connection between RL and VL... from teaching about LambdaMOO for years, I can tell you that most of us are more apt to believe that positive interactions in cyberspace are "real" and negative ones are "less real." Consider this article: about a spouse cheating on his wife in Second Life. (You don't have to read it now)...

[1/12/2012 12:19:47 PM] Kristen Latta: @sky depending on the identity. I know I represent myself differently on facebook than in real life. think of all those pictures we choose to untag.

[1/12/2012 12:19:59 PM] Rebecca Richards: Ok, perhaps we cannot resolve these issues on a Thursday morning chat session. But I hope you will continue thinking about them as we start talking about activism, hate speech, and social networking for our last two weeks of class.

[1/12/2012 12:20:21 PM] Rebecca Richards: Any last thoughts on this topic or anything we discussed before we start wrapping up?

[1/12/2012 12:20:33 PM] Jessica Moes: @Austin : Then the truth to his identity has something to do with his desire to be young again, his ultimate desire to violate young females (or males, I suppose). It is more true to his inner self.

[1/12/2012 12:21:33 PM] Austin Bly: @JM ...rok I suppose

[1/12/2012 12:21:56 PM] Josh Michalec: ????

[1/12/2012 12:21:56 PM] Dane Price: @RR is he cheating on his RL wife with a VL one or a VL with a VL one?

[1/12/2012 12:22:02 PM] Rebecca Richards: To "housekeeping items" then!

[1/12/2012 12:22:13 PM] Josh Michalec: haha thought you meant me. I clearly am good at paying attention

[1/12/2012 12:22:31 PM] Rebecca Richards: @DP he's cheating on his RL wife with his Second Life partner... (I believe)... I haven't read it in a few days...

[1/12/2012 12:22:46 PM] Dane Price: oh god...

[1/12/2012 12:22:51 PM] Dane Price: that's disgusting..

[1/12/2012 12:23:01 PM] Rebecca Richards: First, on a scale of 1-10 with 1 being painful and tedious and 10 being fun and engaging, how would you rate this chat?

[1/12/2012 12:23:12 PM] Sky Montour: 8

[1/12/2012 12:23:13 PM] Kristen Latta: 8

[1/12/2012 12:23:14 PM] Austin Bly: 8

[1/12/2012 12:23:15 PM] codykragness: 8

[1/12/2012 12:23:17 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: 8ish

[1/12/2012 12:23:17 PM] Kathleen Stefely: 9

[1/12/2012 12:23:19 PM] Adrian Rossing: 8

[1/12/2012 12:23:20 PM] Jessica Moes: 7. I feel like we all go to talk more, but keeping up was difficult.

[1/12/2012 12:23:21 PM] Tyler Kyrola: 8!

[1/12/2012 12:23:22 PM] Taylor Orr: 8.5

[1/12/2012 12:23:24 PM] Josh Michalec: 3

[1/12/2012 12:23:25 PM] Sarah Fleming: 8

[1/12/2012 12:23:26 PM] Jon Foss: 2

[1/12/2012 12:23:27 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: 7

[1/12/2012 12:23:28 PM] jeffgwarren: 7.56

[1/12/2012 12:23:29 PM] Andy Bartz: 7

[1/12/2012 12:23:30 PM] Joseph Pesta: 9

[1/12/2012 12:23:34 PM] Tyler Kyrola: Though it was hard to follow sometimes, so maybe 7/8

[1/12/2012 12:23:35 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @RR 8 I liked meeting via online in my own dormroom setting

[1/12/2012 12:23:36 PM] Jon Foss: This was anarchy/mayhem

[1/12/2012 12:23:44 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Jon-- yes it was

[1/12/2012 12:23:47 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: 8

[1/12/2012 12:23:47 PM] Josh Michalec: Apparently everyone else loves this haha

[1/12/2012 12:23:53 PM] Jon Foss: everyone seems more combative as well

[1/12/2012 12:23:59 PM] Rebecca Richards: @josh... we all have things we like more as well...

[1/12/2012 12:24:03 PM] Rebecca Richards: @ jon... interesting observation.

[1/12/2012 12:24:06 PM] Dane Price: 3...

[1/12/2012 12:24:08 PM] Jessica Moes: we're more free to be ourselves in VIRTUAL SPACE

[1/12/2012 12:24:14 PM] Dane Price: it's ahrd when i am at my home computer

[1/12/2012 12:24:14 PM] Rebecca Richards: @jessica... interesting

[1/12/2012 12:24:17 PM] Dane Price: and when other people

[1/12/2012 12:24:20 PM] jeffgwarren: @JS the anonymity

[1/12/2012 12:24:21 PM] Dane Price: are trying to skype me

[1/12/2012 12:24:26 PM] Rebecca Richards: @dane... agreed...

[1/12/2012 12:24:46 PM] Taylor Orr: I liked it, but I actually feel more exhausted than I would after normal class. It was hectic

[1/12/2012 12:24:53 PM] Austin Bly: @JS @RR but its such a good free-flow of thought

[1/12/2012 12:25:02 PM] Jon Foss: everyone can and should still be just as respective in a virtual space in my opinion

[1/12/2012 12:25:02 PM] Adrian Rossing: @taylor.. i agree

[1/12/2012 12:25:02 PM] Jessica Moes: I felt much more engaged in the conversation, actually

[1/12/2012 12:25:04 PM] Dane Price: I literally felt like I was chasing an elephant through the jungle, all the while swatting mosquitoes

[1/12/2012 12:25:07 PM] Sarah Fleming: @taylor agreed. It was sometimes hard to follow the conversation

[1/12/2012 12:25:08 PM] Rebecca Richards: keep thinking about the difference between this class and the f2f class

[1/12/2012 12:25:10 PM] Rebecca Richards: @dane ha ha

[1/12/2012 12:25:16 PM] Rebecca Richards: @dane good analogy

[1/12/2012 12:25:16 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: @taylor agreed

[1/12/2012 12:25:21 PM] Jon Foss: lines flashing in front of me were hard to follow

[1/12/2012 12:25:23 PM] Rebecca Richards: Ok... we'll talk about this next week

[1/12/2012 12:25:25 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: and @dane it kept hapening to me too

[1/12/2012 12:25:26 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: It can be hard to keep up. Sometimes you miss a quote and then replies are a little confusing.

[1/12/2012 12:25:37 PM] Rebecca Richards: Item 2: if you would like me to read a blog entry for you this week, don’t forget to shoot me a quick email. Otherwise, try out some new techniques, and I will return to giving you feedback next week.

[1/12/2012 12:26:21 PM] Rebecca Richards: I'm also going to give you a group progress report on your wiki next week... so you know how you're doing as a class

[1/12/2012 12:26:29 PM] Rebecca Richards: Also: Geocaching

[1/12/2012 12:26:36 PM] Rebecca Richards: Did the team go out this morning?

[1/12/2012 12:26:40 PM] Rebecca Richards: Jeff et al?

[1/12/2012 12:26:41 PM] jeffgwarren: yes

[1/12/2012 12:26:43 PM] Taylor Orr: yea!

[1/12/2012 12:26:46 PM] Rebecca Richards: did you find the cache?

[1/12/2012 12:26:46 PM] Kristen Latta: yeah!

[1/12/2012 12:26:48 PM] Sarah Fleming: Yep. Go team black!

[1/12/2012 12:26:50 PM] jeffgwarren: yup

[1/12/2012 12:26:56 PM] Dane Price: get GPS, get cache

[1/12/2012 12:27:04 PM] Rebecca Richards: Good job.

[1/12/2012 12:27:09 PM] Kristen Latta: thanks

[1/12/2012 12:27:13 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: Are we already supposed to be geocashing?

[1/12/2012 12:27:20 PM] Andy Bartz: it was in the trees we found it thanks to sarah

[1/12/2012 12:27:23 PM] Dane Price: tomorrow is when majority of us are

[1/12/2012 12:27:26 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: woooo

[1/12/2012 12:27:28 PM] jeffgwarren: haha

[1/12/2012 12:27:31 PM] Rebecca Richards: If you don't have a group yet... don't fret

[1/12/2012 12:27:32 PM] Sarah Fleming: hahah well i do what i can

[1/12/2012 12:27:32 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: we're going right after this

[1/12/2012 12:27:33 PM] Taylor Orr: @BartzD [1/12/2012 12:27:36 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: does any group have room for one more member?

[1/12/2012 12:27:44 PM] Rebecca Richards: We're going to get you help soon...

[1/12/2012 12:27:54 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: Yeah, I don't have a group yet either.

[1/12/2012 12:27:57 PM] Kathleen Stefely: my group has room

[1/12/2012 12:27:58 PM] Rebecca Richards: There's a group of two members who cannot go this weekend because of work

[1/12/2012 12:28:13 PM] Tyler Kyrola: @James and @Shahr, Jessica and I are going tomorrow, probably during our class time

[1/12/2012 12:28:43 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Tyler. That works for me. Can I join you two?

[1/12/2012 12:28:51 PM] Tyler Kyrola: @James, of course!

[1/12/2012 12:28:54 PM] Rebecca Richards: If you don't have a group... email/chat the people who just responded here after class... (or while I finish up :) )

[1/12/2012 12:28:59 PM] Jessica Moes: @James gooooood with me!

[1/12/2012 12:29:13 PM] Jessica Moes: @Shar you too?

[1/12/2012 12:29:19 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: @Tyler, that would be great, yeah.

[1/12/2012 12:29:20 PM] Rebecca Richards: As you begin taking video and/or editing it together, you might be wondering... what kind of a video should you make.

[1/12/2012 12:29:24 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: @Jessica and @Tyler. Thanks! Where are you meeting?

[1/12/2012 12:29:27 PM] Rebecca Richards: I want to offer you these samples....

[1/12/2012 12:29:40 PM] Tyler Kyrola: @James, don't know, I'll start an email group for us to discuss

[1/12/2012 12:29:56 PM] Rebecca Richards: You can make a little music video, like this one: (music video)

[1/12/2012 12:29:58 PM] codykragness: who else cant do it this weekend?

[1/12/2012 12:30:23 PM] Rebecca Richards: Or maybe you can make an adventure narrative of sorts:

[1/12/2012 12:30:55 PM] Rebecca Richards: You don't have to show the entire excusion though... consider just showing the find and giving some context, like this one:

[1/12/2012 12:31:15 PM] Kathleen Stefely: I can't go this weekend. Does anyone working on it tomorrow with a small group have room for Cody and I?

[1/12/2012 12:31:30 PM] Rebecca Richards: At worst, here's a poorly edited class project geocache from another university:

[1/12/2012 12:31:35 PM] Rebecca Richards: At least this one gives some context...

[1/12/2012 12:31:41 PM] codykragness: I cant go tomorrow either, I am going home right after this gets done

[1/12/2012 12:32:01 PM] Rebecca Richards: What you don't want to do is create a rambling, annoying video like this one:

[1/12/2012 12:32:16 PM] Rebecca Richards: You don't have to look at all of these now, but they will be saved in this chat for you to view later

[1/12/2012 12:32:43 PM] Rebecca Richards: PLEASE (for the love of all that is good) keep them to five minutes or less.

[1/12/2012 12:33:09 PM] Rebecca Richards: And if you have editing issues, bring your files to class, and we can discuss. I can set you up in the Media Editing Studio

[1/12/2012 12:33:27 PM] Rebecca Richards: Ok... that's all... from me. Anyone have questions or concerns before we adjourn?

[1/12/2012 12:33:40 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: @RR nope Thank you!

[1/12/2012 12:33:45 PM] Rebecca Richards: @EC

[1/12/2012 12:33:46 PM] Josh Michalec: pz

[1/12/2012 12:33:50 PM] Rebecca Richards: you're welcoem

[1/12/2012 12:33:50 PM] Sarah Fleming: Thanks!

[1/12/2012 12:33:54 PM] Adrian Rossing: have a good weekend :)

[1/12/2012 12:33:55 PM] Rebecca Richards: Ok, have a great weekend!

[1/12/2012 12:33:58 PM] Taylor Orr: See you Monday

[1/12/2012 12:33:59 PM] Kristen Latta: bye!

[1/12/2012 12:34:00 PM] jeffgwarren: adios

[1/12/2012 12:34:02 PM] Tyler Kyrola: @everybody, see you later!

[1/12/2012 12:34:04 PM] Katherine Fitzgerald: see ya

[1/12/2012 12:34:04 PM] oooxxxxxzzzz: take care!!

[1/12/2012 12:34:04 PM] Rebecca Richards: Hang out if you have a question

[1/12/2012 12:34:05 PM] Jessica Moes: toodles!

[1/12/2012 12:34:07 PM] Shahriar Shahbazi: Bye

[1/12/2012 12:34:08 PM] Austin Bly: later

[1/12/2012 12:34:08 PM] Rebecca Richards: peace

[1/12/2012 12:34:12 PM] James Quincy Sponsel: bye

[1/12/2012 12:34:12 PM] Adrian Rossing: haha

[1/12/2012 12:34:18 PM] Jon Foss: peace out

[1/12/2012 12:34:29 PM] Joseph Pesta: (highfive)

[1/12/2012 12:34:41 PM] Kathleen Stefely: bye everyone... question for Cody. When, exactly, can you work on it?

[1/12/2012 12:34:45 PM] *** Sky Montour has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:34:46 PM] Rebecca Richards: Make sure you "leave" the conversation....

[1/12/2012 12:34:52 PM] Rebecca Richards: :)

[1/12/2012 12:34:57 PM] codykragness: next week

[1/12/2012 12:35:00 PM] *** Taylor Orr has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:35:04 PM] Kristen Latta: @RR

[1/12/2012 12:35:08 PM] *** Tyler Kyrola has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:35:10 PM] Austin Bly: @RR even if we want to read this chat later?

[1/12/2012 12:35:20 PM] Kristen Latta: I have a random question for you!

[1/12/2012 12:35:26 PM] Rebecca Richards: @Austin-- I believe this chat is archived even after you leave.

[1/12/2012 12:35:29 PM] *** Andy Bartz has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:35:30 PM] *** oooxxxxxzzzz has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:35:36 PM] Austin Bly: rok. bye!

[1/12/2012 12:35:38 PM] Rebecca Richards: @austin... I can access all my old chats

[1/12/2012 12:35:46 PM] codykragness: @KS i have work wednesday and thursday night, so would you want to do it like monday or tuesday after class?

[1/12/2012 12:35:46 PM] Rebecca Richards: @KL-- shoot!

[1/12/2012 12:35:53 PM] *** Austin Bly has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:35:58 PM] Rebecca Richards: @KL I mean your question... shoot

[1/12/2012 12:35:59 PM] *** Conference call ***

[1/12/2012 12:35:59 PM] Rebecca Richards: :)

[1/12/2012 12:36:03 PM] *** Missed conference call. ***

[1/12/2012 12:36:46 PM] lattahockey19: Ok haha! Well I have this essay that I'm writing for an update to medical schools, six months after my application was turned in

[1/12/2012 12:37:04 PM] Rebecca Richards: @KL... ok

[1/12/2012 12:37:10 PM] lattahockey19: and I'm wondering if you'd be willing to read it for grammatical errors and flow

[1/12/2012 12:37:17 PM] Rebecca Richards: @KL... Sure!

[1/12/2012 12:37:20 PM] Rebecca Richards: How long is it?

[1/12/2012 12:37:24 PM] Rebecca Richards: two pages?

[1/12/2012 12:37:25 PM] Rebecca Richards: More?

[1/12/2012 12:37:46 PM] lattahockey19: 790 words

[1/12/2012 12:38:06 PM] lattahockey19: so like a little more than a page single space but with chunks

[1/12/2012 12:38:16 PM] kastefely: @cody .. Tuesday I have practice, but Monday works. Will you ask around and see if anyone else is willing to do it then?

[1/12/2012 12:38:18 PM] Rebecca Richards: @ Kristen... just sent you a private IM

[1/12/2012 12:38:39 PM] codykragness: @kathleen from the class or just friends?

[1/12/2012 12:39:18 PM] *** smshahbazi has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:39:23 PM] kastefely: @cody... Preferably from class, but that doesn't seem likely. So friends, I guess.

[1/12/2012 12:39:41 PM] codykragness: haha alright i can do that, i got to go now but i will see you monday

[1/12/2012 12:40:06 PM] kastefely: Bye!

[1/12/2012 12:40:15 PM] *** kastefely has left ***

[1/12/2012 12:40:21 PM] dane.price: Have a good weekend everyone

[1/12/2012 12:40:29 PM] dane.price: goodluck with the caching!

[1/12/2012 12:41:03 PM] *** Rebecca Richards has left ***

[1/15/2012 8:53:33 PM] *** Josh Michalec has left ***

[1/20/2012 10:28:12 AM] *** fleming223911 has left ***

[1/20/2012 10:34:12 AM] *** codykragness has left ***

[1/20/2012 10:40:48 AM] *** Katherine Fitzgerald has left ***