Google Group Assignment

Gun Ownership
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.guns/browse_thread/thread/66dda33a2271c4eb/22883cc543dd3542?lnk=st&q=guns&rnum=1#22883cc543dd3542

Baseball-Yankee’s fan
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.baseball.ny-yankees/browse_frm/thread/a633097759727e3d/503f83b1776efc15#503f83b1776efc15

Police Softball
http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/kurupt4/vpost?id=1202342&trail=855

Well, it has been an overwhelming week to say the least. I work in a field where the unexpected occurs around each corner and this had been a week where just that has occurred. While most normal people are sleeping comfortably, I (on the other hand) am wide awake, handling issues and dealing with last minute subpoenas. With that said, time was more than limited toward this assignment. As such, I had to modify this assignment to allow for any response or completion of it. First and for most, I attempted to follow some Google groups of interest which met the criteria. I found some interesting results, but before I begin, let me say the following: I have owned a computer and used one relatively frequently going on ten years now and I have NEVER EVER corresponded in a chat room or on instant message. That’s right, it’s hard to believe I know, but I’ve never communicated that way. I’ve used computers for internet browsing, for finding inquiry results, I’ve sent many emails, but I don’t even know how to “IM.” Simply because I’ve never needed or wanted to do it.

This assignment was fun and educational in that it forced me to research how a chat room setting worked and being nosey by nature, I liked watching correspondence and arguments develop. I equate it with watching a train wreck, as sad as it is, you can’t stop watching. Although my investigative time was greatly limited as a result of actually having a life (actually unexpected work assignments), I think I got the idea behind these groups.

In regards to Professor Perry’s introduction of “flamewars,” I must admit, I too had no idea of what they were until last week. I think I could have figured them out by virtue of their title; however, trying to find one (which as it turns out wasn’t very hard) really showed people’s true colors t times. My selection in my groups revolved around a constant corresponding group (Police Softball – very active), one in which actually tried to incite a flamewar (Baseball-Yankee – active only for one day), and another which has a passionate topic (Guns – 2 years old, but extensive).

There are without question identity found within each chat community. In my Guns group, people really show their passion toward their feeling of gun ownership while at the same time impose their point by means of aggressive and sarcastic writings. There were only 34 messages, all appear to have been males (unknown ages), and there also seems to be one or two who correspond frequently. This made me question whether some others corresponded a few times under different names or not. As expected, there appeared to be some who made valid arguments using data to support their views, and others who simply wrote with what I would guess was straight passion. Their views at times clashed and there seemed to be some inciting going on, but not to the point of a flamewar I suppose. I did not find a sense of trust on these participants and if given the opportunity to ever meet, I imagine some would relish the forum to create more controversy just for the sake of controversy.

Regarding my Yankee group, this was a very small group only 19 entries, but I read these for one specific point, that being the flamewars. I wanted to watch a flamewar as I occurred and these idiots did not disappoint. Probably not as derogatory as some, but these entries were simple and seemed to just jab at one another. It appeared to be well mix of participants and again most (if not all) seemed to be male, with the exception of one person who responded several times to messages. People were called “morons,” “asswipes,” “dipshits,” and many many more. However, one entry ended by calling someone a “nitwit” and then with “Can't you flame better than this?” I found this the most interesting entry of any groups due to this person acknowledging he is attempting to engage in a flamewar.

My last group was that of a Police Softball group. It appears most of the participants are in law enforcement and most are male. The topic revolved around a simple question to which (at the time of this writing) there were 869 entries (but the site was viewed 6475 times). This community seemed to have the best cohesion. There were little jabs at one another, but it appeared to all be in good fun. There are many participants within this group, but there are also distinguishing participants who enter messages on a more frequent basis. Of the three groups, this one definitely seemed to have a believable trust amongst one another.

In reflecting on this project, each group had its own “personality” sort of speak, which I suppose was the point of it to begin with; to identify each community and those individual identities within each group. In watching these groups communicate, I would have to conclude people hide behind their “onscreen” persona. I can’t imagine people would be that direct or at times so willing to incite another person in an argument while speaking face-to-face.

This is my brief essay regarding the assignment, but I am being called away. I will attempt to continue my findings on another blog if time permits.