Re: <documenta X><blast> fields...always fields

Brandon Van Every (vanevery@blarg.net)
Sun, 15 Jun 1997 14:03:52 -0700

> From: John Beckmann <jbeckmann@axismundi.com>
>
> Brandon:
>
> >You perceive MUDs as "illusory?" I have to ask: are you speaking from
> >first-hand experience? Or are you speaking from a position of Fear,
> >Uncertainty, and Doubt as promulgated by the mainstream media?
> >Participating in a MUD, and participating in the tangled web of
marketing
> >materials spun by the popular media are two very different things. Most
> >MUDders I've encountered are very adamant about the "reality" of their
> >experiences, to the point that they expect other people to act as though
> >they were face to face in the real world (which I personally find an
> >annoying request!)... Text-based MUDs are at least psychologically
> >compelling in their own right...
>
> I take it that your a real Dungeons and Dragon's fan! I see no reason to
> defend text-based MUD's, they are what they are, they serve a purpose
like
> phone sex.
> Phone sex is compelling for some too. So what?

Not a D&D fan. But I have spent a fair amount of time on MUDs. Have you?
I find your remark about "phone sex" rather reductive, but perhaps you just
meant that as conversational repartee, and you'd welcome the opportunity to
elaborate on the other social phenoms occurring on MUDs? For me, there is
a clear danger in assuming that a MUD is synonymous with the media's
representation of MUDs, VR, and the Internet. Wherein I define "danger"
according to an ethnographer's agenda.

> Also, you mis-read my notion of "getting lost", as some reference to
> getting lost on the Internet, when I was refering to the GPS and GIS
> systems with blanket our planet. And which now ironically have appeared
in
> our over-priced luxury sedans as a convience for navigation, so we don't
> miss that turn going on the way to Uncle Pete's (laughs):).

I don't see where you mentioned GPS and GIS systems in your original
posting. After all, satellite networks are used for many things, including
the "global village" and trans-oceanic Internet connections.

> And finally, I don't think are present day condition is in any way
> comparable to the 60's (huh)? In essence, you missed the point of my
entire
> posting.

Well I guess this is just grounds for more discussion. :-)

> A careful look at the addresses of this group will reveal no aol
> users here (as if that was some kind of insult), and so what if they
were?
> Do I detect an Internet snob in my uh un/presense?

You're missing one of my points: AOL is a centralized authoritative
experience, the Internet in general is not. Centralization of authority
keeps a lot of people from getting lost. In fact, most people would say
this is the primary service that AOL offers: "it's easier to navigate."
The tradeoff for that ease of navigation, is AOL's authority over its site.
Its usage policies, its discussion groups, its advertizing accounts, etc.

Cheers,
Brandon J. Van Every <vanevery@blarg.net> DEC Commodity Graphics
http://www.blarg.net/~vanevery Windows NT Alpha OpenGL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seattle! Join the <<<NORTHWEST CYBERARTISTS>>>. Monthly meetings at
the Speakeasy. Check out http://www.nwlink.com/cyberartists