- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- This is how bored I am...
This is how bored I am...Follow
I'd say Totem, but there's not nearly enough hate.
The Christians thing threw me off, as well as the good spelling and grammar, so I just guessed Totem.
Edited, Fri Jul 30 19:15:25 2004 by CrimsonMagician
Edited, Fri Jul 30 19:15:25 2004 by CrimsonMagician
Quote:
I'd say Totem, but there's not nearly enough hate.
Hahaha.
You do one, Yan.
GFY!
DIE!
DIE!
Why don't you do yourself a favor and go kill yourself. Just because I'm a stupid w'**** with no self esteem I like to see other people suffer too. F'uck you Skeet you camel jockey piece of ****.
and here's a new one:
Is that all you have is some stupid f'in comeback. I'll kick your @ss. Don't f'uck with me and big booty nasty lookin hoes.
Is that all you have is some stupid f'in comeback. I'll kick your @ss. Don't f'uck with me and big booty nasty lookin hoes.
1) Everyone
2) Katie
3) that new guy that really sucks, don't remember his name
Too easy.
2) Katie
3) that new guy that really sucks, don't remember his name
Too easy.
Those were funny, though.
What about:
Poster 1: I used to be in this guild and you guys totally fu[/i]cked me over!
Poster 2: We fu[i]cked you over?!? You totally sucked in the first place.
What about:
Poster 1: I used to be in this guild and you guys totally fu[/i]cked me over!
Poster 2: We fu[i]cked you over?!? You totally sucked in the first place.
Empyre and Taco.
They used to argue over some old a[i][/i]ss EQ guild they were in.
They used to argue over some old a[i][/i]ss EQ guild they were in.
Hey everybody! Look at me!!
This is not an impression, I really do want you to look at me. See me? Yeah? Looking this way? Great. Keep doing that.
This is not an impression, I really do want you to look at me. See me? Yeah? Looking this way? Great. Keep doing that.
Before my time.
Here's one:
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Asylum. It seems that recently many of you and your legions of sockpuppets have decided to grace our boards with your presence. Let me be the first to let you know that you are absolutely unwelcome. This influx of bad posting seems to stem from the FFXI forum, and I urge all of you to observe what some of the old timers have written, and try to model your posting after them. They, think before they post, as obviously you do not. You wet the bed, and you smell bad.
Here's one:
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Asylum. It seems that recently many of you and your legions of sockpuppets have decided to grace our boards with your presence. Let me be the first to let you know that you are absolutely unwelcome. This influx of bad posting seems to stem from the FFXI forum, and I urge all of you to observe what some of the old timers have written, and try to model your posting after them. They, think before they post, as obviously you do not. You wet the bed, and you smell bad.
Quote:
Hey everybody! Look at me!!
This is not an impression, I really do want you to look at me. See me? Yeah? Looking this way? Great. Keep doing that.
This is not an impression, I really do want you to look at me. See me? Yeah? Looking this way? Great. Keep doing that.
Hehehe...hey I see you over there....how's it going?
Eh. Doing my best to keep from going on another hiatus. Not sure what's up but I just can't read all of this crap. In the process of moving (yep, 3rd times a charm hopefully) so maybe after that's all settled I'll be able to get back into the fray.
Until then ya'll will just have to keep yourselves amused with my puppets.
Until then ya'll will just have to keep yourselves amused with my puppets.
So you're moving out of the place where everything gets disconnected? Where to now?
Either the room or the basement of a townhouse near woodbridge. Will be paying a LOT less rent, but it's way the heck out there.
Well, out there as in "far away from my job in DC" kind of out there.
It's all good though, not too much longer 'till Flea and I shack up somewhere ;)
Well, out there as in "far away from my job in DC" kind of out there.
It's all good though, not too much longer 'till Flea and I shack up somewhere ;)
Quote:
It's all good though, not too much longer 'till Flea and I shack up somewhere ;)
I was going to ask about that.
You guys should do it. Living in sin is soooo sinful!
Good luck. Moving sucks. Give us an impression before your hiatus.
Will only be semi-sinful if I get my way. Depending on her and other family stuffs, we might move in when we get engaged..
I'm sure she'll post a pic of the ring when I finally pop the question, not only for the "yay I'm engaged" thing, but also 'cause it's a PHAT ring. All of those years plucking fruits in the orchard has really paid off.
I'm sure she'll post a pic of the ring when I finally pop the question, not only for the "yay I'm engaged" thing, but also 'cause it's a PHAT ring. All of those years plucking fruits in the orchard has really paid off.
Quote:
Will only be semi-sinful if I get my way. Depending on her and other family stuffs, we might move in when we get engaged..
Good luck Skeet, thats a big move. Almost tried it with my GF of 2 years but thought better of it. It seems like you are a little more committed though.
Hey kiddos,
I'm out have a great weekend!
Skeet, good luck!
I'm out have a great weekend!
Skeet, good luck!
Thus, even though the traditional pattern of research, which - at its best - springs out of questions that arise in the classroom, and thus deals with questions that arise from a dialogic situation, often the situation, or the direction, of the classroom/research relationship is reversed. That is, rather than doing research that comes out of students' needs, the traditional researcher picks her course topics (especially of graduate seminars) based on the research that needs to be accomplished.
Even if the research does come out of concern for the students' intellectual growth and development as future professionals in the field (or future members of a healthy society, or whatever the overarching goal of higher education is perceived to be), the research process immediately moves from a dialogic position to a solitary one in which the researcher goes into her study or into the library and begins the long, ardous, and often lonely task of turning out the next article or book.
Cycles offer researchers a different model; since cycles are by their nature are collaborative, groups of researchers and groups of students (the distinction is lessened though not erased in this mode of work) are forced to find a common ground -- to begin asking questions together and present their research findings not a traditional print text in which answers are given out, but as a dialogical process, a "process of inquiry".
Unlike the traditional scholar's mode of work, in which she or he works alone and publishes work that is called "solely" hers or his, the personnel of a cycle work together in a collaborative mode; those of use who do traditional scholarly work in the academy may have found that culture sadly lacking, one that forces us to work alone rather than together so that we might be able to point to this article or that hypertext and say, "That is mine." The need to claim individual authorship and the need to privilege individual authorship over collective work is fueled by the competitiveness to which scholars in the academy have been socialized.
Downing and Sosnoski created the Cycles Project as a potential antidote to this situation: they hoped to build "a culture we might prefer to inhabit." However, the solution they sought -- though pursued through use of technology -- was nevertheless not a purely technical or technological solution:
I think what we have to avoid is thinking that technology will itself transform what we do. All we have to do is put ourselves, our texts into this new wrapper and lo and behold out comes New-literary study. Often we're doing the same things only calling them by different names.
Technology is not capable of transforming literary study. If the everyday conditions of our work have changed, is that because we are simply in a different work place or is that because we think differently about what we are doing? Finally, the bottom line is: what will the social effect of literary study be? In the past, we, as you put it earlier, were theoristic--speaking only to ourselves about ourselves.
And that's a problem of connectivity. We think our work connects us to each other. After all we call ourselves "colleagues." And we have all these conferences, publications, forums, exchanges. You'd think we were pretty connected. . . . [O]ur discipline actually does a better job of disconnecting us and isolating us and invidividualizing us. Gerald Graff, following Lawrence Veysey, called it "patterned isolation," but it's even deeper than just our specializations in departments separating us until we can get to 4cs or MLA. For me, the main question is the one that came up so forcefully in Cycles 4: what counts as our work? And how can we connect that work to our lives so we can build a culture we might prefer to inhabit? (Downing, Computers and Writing)
Having made those connections, a group of cycle participants can then present a variety of solutions from a number of different perspectives; accordingly, one job of the moderator of a cycle is to pull together a pool of people who share a common interest but not necessarily a common understanding of a given subject.
One of the strengths of the TicToc Project was that it pulled together computer enthusiasts who worked with computers because they simply enjoyed working with them so much, scholars in the field of computers and composition who had taken a rather skeptical stance towards the use of computers in a writing pedagogy, academic computing professionals who made their living supplying computing services to a large research university, college and university administrators, students, staff, and others who might be affected by the changes that teaching much of the curriculum on or with computers would entail.
Given that the model of research assumed by a cycle is one that privileges collaboration and that it attempts to find concurrence between a multitude of voices, it follows that the natural form of a cycle is not a jointly authored work that than purports to a monologic text but a simple representation of the dialogue itself that has involved a number of participants over the last few months or longer, however long the period of the cycle has been.
Of course, the technology involved in the last few cycles, the listserv, is one that appears in most users' mailboxes not in digest form, but in the shape of individual pieces of e-mail. In such an environment, given the generally informal nature of e-mail, a technology that almost seems synchronous at times, it is no wonder that some individuals will use the same styles of informal writing that have served them so well in reading and responding to e-mail. This is a medium that tends to the informal and the fully cited research note is an exception to a much more general rule.
Thus, it is common for participants in a cycle to be given the chance to rewrite their original comments, now recognizing in a very real sense that the notes they wrote, perhaps very quickly, are headed for publication and citation in other scholarly works. This opens up the possibility that participants may find themselves accurately quoted but not feeling adequately represented. Moving from one medium, e-mail to another, one destined for print, may change the way participants feel about their texts, leading to revision, or even to the insertion of other, more formal texts such as essays, reviews, and other materials.
Even so, it is necessary to preserve the dialogic nature of these collaborations, as more than anything they show the ways that people negotiate cyberspace, and this new method of creating and defining solutions to problems.
Always, when cyber-teachers get asked about their courses, the first question is one of community, usually asked as a plaintative question: "But won't you miss getting to know your students?" (Potter). The assumption here is that cyberspace is an environment in which it is impossible to know or to get to know one another.
In fact, teachers in these environments know students as well as though in different ways than students they have met face to face. In online teaching, teachers learn to recognize the textual voices of their students; unlike most composition courses, in which only part of the work is written, in the online course, all of it is. And so students and teachers alike learn to negoitate different styles and dictions as they modulate between chatting before and after class, working through a difficult reading, and disscussing student produced texts.
Thus, the interpersonal dimenstion is not missing -- it is simply changed; one protocol that is used to help create the interpersonal is the use of the autobio. Participants in a cycle are asked to introduce themselves; their introduction styles can range from the purely professional to the intensely personal.
For instance, Judoth Kegan Gardiner, a leading feminist scholar, introduced herself to the TicToc conversation as follows:
Dear TicTockers,
I'm a Professor of English and Women's Studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago and author of Rhys, Stead, Lessing, and the Politics of Empathy (1989), the editor of Provoking Agents: Gender and Agency in Theory and Practice, (1995), and an editor of Feminist Studies, with essays on feminist and psychoanalytic theory and on women writers. I'm currently working on a book about masculinity in feminist theory. I'm interested in feminist pedagogy and, as a former departmental Director of Graduate Studies, of the changes in higher education that affect jobs, teaching, and institutions. Although convinced of online possibilities as of ancillary use in teaching and research, I'm skeptical about distance learning and administrative desires to replace faculty with adjuncts, perhaps both with packaged commercial systems and packaged courses, so that educational funding goes to Microsoft U or Disney U. . . (Gardiner)
In another vein, Willaim A. Covino, then one of UIC's most noted scholars, said:
In connection with the TicToc project, I am mainly interested in the ways in which electronic environments "charm" us: what magical motives they exploit, to what end, with what gains and losses.
I'm Professor and Associate Head in the Department of English at the University of Illinois at Chicago, where I teach histories and theories of rhetoric in the Language, Literacy, and Rhetoric graduate emphasis. Before becoming an increasingly curmudgeonly academic, I had a top-40 band in Southern California (I played keyboard, sang everything from "Proud Mary" to "My Way" to "The Bride Cuts the Cake"--this was the 70s, pre-Macarena--and bantered with the crowd at wedding receptions, bar mitzvahs, and bowling banquets). (Covino)
Both, of course, are prefectly legitimate approaches to the problem of adding the interpersonal; other means explored by the TicToc Project included scanned photographs of participants which were added to the website by Ken McAllister. These were attempts to introduce the interpersonal to the seemingly sterile environment of cyberspace, a need expressed with some poignacy in the question at the top of this note. A need to address the seemingly impersonal nature of the technological was certainly felt by the originators of the Cycles Project as well:
When we organized the early experiments in the research project now known as "Cycles," we felt it necessary to personalize communications on the mailers, listservs, and virtual conferences we employed because for many of our colleagues the use of technology in literary study often appears to de-personalize it. (Modern Fiction Studies)
In these environments, it is all too easy to forget the human and to forget that there is a voice and a face and a self on the end end of the computer connection; while networks may transmit words, they can be used to bring together individuals.
Who's that?
Edited, Fri Jul 30 20:03:51 2004 by Skeeter
Even if the research does come out of concern for the students' intellectual growth and development as future professionals in the field (or future members of a healthy society, or whatever the overarching goal of higher education is perceived to be), the research process immediately moves from a dialogic position to a solitary one in which the researcher goes into her study or into the library and begins the long, ardous, and often lonely task of turning out the next article or book.
Cycles offer researchers a different model; since cycles are by their nature are collaborative, groups of researchers and groups of students (the distinction is lessened though not erased in this mode of work) are forced to find a common ground -- to begin asking questions together and present their research findings not a traditional print text in which answers are given out, but as a dialogical process, a "process of inquiry".
Unlike the traditional scholar's mode of work, in which she or he works alone and publishes work that is called "solely" hers or his, the personnel of a cycle work together in a collaborative mode; those of use who do traditional scholarly work in the academy may have found that culture sadly lacking, one that forces us to work alone rather than together so that we might be able to point to this article or that hypertext and say, "That is mine." The need to claim individual authorship and the need to privilege individual authorship over collective work is fueled by the competitiveness to which scholars in the academy have been socialized.
Downing and Sosnoski created the Cycles Project as a potential antidote to this situation: they hoped to build "a culture we might prefer to inhabit." However, the solution they sought -- though pursued through use of technology -- was nevertheless not a purely technical or technological solution:
I think what we have to avoid is thinking that technology will itself transform what we do. All we have to do is put ourselves, our texts into this new wrapper and lo and behold out comes New-literary study. Often we're doing the same things only calling them by different names.
Technology is not capable of transforming literary study. If the everyday conditions of our work have changed, is that because we are simply in a different work place or is that because we think differently about what we are doing? Finally, the bottom line is: what will the social effect of literary study be? In the past, we, as you put it earlier, were theoristic--speaking only to ourselves about ourselves.
And that's a problem of connectivity. We think our work connects us to each other. After all we call ourselves "colleagues." And we have all these conferences, publications, forums, exchanges. You'd think we were pretty connected. . . . [O]ur discipline actually does a better job of disconnecting us and isolating us and invidividualizing us. Gerald Graff, following Lawrence Veysey, called it "patterned isolation," but it's even deeper than just our specializations in departments separating us until we can get to 4cs or MLA. For me, the main question is the one that came up so forcefully in Cycles 4: what counts as our work? And how can we connect that work to our lives so we can build a culture we might prefer to inhabit? (Downing, Computers and Writing)
Having made those connections, a group of cycle participants can then present a variety of solutions from a number of different perspectives; accordingly, one job of the moderator of a cycle is to pull together a pool of people who share a common interest but not necessarily a common understanding of a given subject.
One of the strengths of the TicToc Project was that it pulled together computer enthusiasts who worked with computers because they simply enjoyed working with them so much, scholars in the field of computers and composition who had taken a rather skeptical stance towards the use of computers in a writing pedagogy, academic computing professionals who made their living supplying computing services to a large research university, college and university administrators, students, staff, and others who might be affected by the changes that teaching much of the curriculum on or with computers would entail.
Given that the model of research assumed by a cycle is one that privileges collaboration and that it attempts to find concurrence between a multitude of voices, it follows that the natural form of a cycle is not a jointly authored work that than purports to a monologic text but a simple representation of the dialogue itself that has involved a number of participants over the last few months or longer, however long the period of the cycle has been.
Of course, the technology involved in the last few cycles, the listserv, is one that appears in most users' mailboxes not in digest form, but in the shape of individual pieces of e-mail. In such an environment, given the generally informal nature of e-mail, a technology that almost seems synchronous at times, it is no wonder that some individuals will use the same styles of informal writing that have served them so well in reading and responding to e-mail. This is a medium that tends to the informal and the fully cited research note is an exception to a much more general rule.
Thus, it is common for participants in a cycle to be given the chance to rewrite their original comments, now recognizing in a very real sense that the notes they wrote, perhaps very quickly, are headed for publication and citation in other scholarly works. This opens up the possibility that participants may find themselves accurately quoted but not feeling adequately represented. Moving from one medium, e-mail to another, one destined for print, may change the way participants feel about their texts, leading to revision, or even to the insertion of other, more formal texts such as essays, reviews, and other materials.
Even so, it is necessary to preserve the dialogic nature of these collaborations, as more than anything they show the ways that people negotiate cyberspace, and this new method of creating and defining solutions to problems.
Always, when cyber-teachers get asked about their courses, the first question is one of community, usually asked as a plaintative question: "But won't you miss getting to know your students?" (Potter). The assumption here is that cyberspace is an environment in which it is impossible to know or to get to know one another.
In fact, teachers in these environments know students as well as though in different ways than students they have met face to face. In online teaching, teachers learn to recognize the textual voices of their students; unlike most composition courses, in which only part of the work is written, in the online course, all of it is. And so students and teachers alike learn to negoitate different styles and dictions as they modulate between chatting before and after class, working through a difficult reading, and disscussing student produced texts.
Thus, the interpersonal dimenstion is not missing -- it is simply changed; one protocol that is used to help create the interpersonal is the use of the autobio. Participants in a cycle are asked to introduce themselves; their introduction styles can range from the purely professional to the intensely personal.
For instance, Judoth Kegan Gardiner, a leading feminist scholar, introduced herself to the TicToc conversation as follows:
Dear TicTockers,
I'm a Professor of English and Women's Studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago and author of Rhys, Stead, Lessing, and the Politics of Empathy (1989), the editor of Provoking Agents: Gender and Agency in Theory and Practice, (1995), and an editor of Feminist Studies, with essays on feminist and psychoanalytic theory and on women writers. I'm currently working on a book about masculinity in feminist theory. I'm interested in feminist pedagogy and, as a former departmental Director of Graduate Studies, of the changes in higher education that affect jobs, teaching, and institutions. Although convinced of online possibilities as of ancillary use in teaching and research, I'm skeptical about distance learning and administrative desires to replace faculty with adjuncts, perhaps both with packaged commercial systems and packaged courses, so that educational funding goes to Microsoft U or Disney U. . . (Gardiner)
In another vein, Willaim A. Covino, then one of UIC's most noted scholars, said:
In connection with the TicToc project, I am mainly interested in the ways in which electronic environments "charm" us: what magical motives they exploit, to what end, with what gains and losses.
I'm Professor and Associate Head in the Department of English at the University of Illinois at Chicago, where I teach histories and theories of rhetoric in the Language, Literacy, and Rhetoric graduate emphasis. Before becoming an increasingly curmudgeonly academic, I had a top-40 band in Southern California (I played keyboard, sang everything from "Proud Mary" to "My Way" to "The Bride Cuts the Cake"--this was the 70s, pre-Macarena--and bantered with the crowd at wedding receptions, bar mitzvahs, and bowling banquets). (Covino)
Both, of course, are prefectly legitimate approaches to the problem of adding the interpersonal; other means explored by the TicToc Project included scanned photographs of participants which were added to the website by Ken McAllister. These were attempts to introduce the interpersonal to the seemingly sterile environment of cyberspace, a need expressed with some poignacy in the question at the top of this note. A need to address the seemingly impersonal nature of the technological was certainly felt by the originators of the Cycles Project as well:
When we organized the early experiments in the research project now known as "Cycles," we felt it necessary to personalize communications on the mailers, listservs, and virtual conferences we employed because for many of our colleagues the use of technology in literary study often appears to de-personalize it. (Modern Fiction Studies)
In these environments, it is all too easy to forget the human and to forget that there is a voice and a face and a self on the end end of the computer connection; while networks may transmit words, they can be used to bring together individuals.
Who's that?
Edited, Fri Jul 30 20:03:51 2004 by Skeeter
That's an impression? I have no idea.
Recent Visitors: 371
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (371)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- This is how bored I am...
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC