<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title>typewriting tag: community</title>
	<link href="http://typewriting.org/tag/community/"/>
	<updated>2006-08-20T09:40:50-07:00</updated>
	<id>http://typewriting.org/tag/community/</id>
	<subtitle>Most recent articles on typewriting.org for tag: community</subtitle>
<author>
				<name>Scott Reynen</name>
			</author><entry>
					<title>The Suspicious Kindness of Strangers</title>
               		<link href="http://typewriting.org/2006/08/20/The_Suspicious_Kindness_of_Strangers/"/>
					<content type="xhtml">
						<div>
							<p>In the past week, I’ve received two separate notes of encouragement to continue writing my blog from complete strangers. The first was from mdhatter, who <a href="http://typewriting.org/2006/08/07/Regular_Wednesday_Night_Gigs%2C_Likely_Moving/#comment-3679">wrote</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>So, I came across your blog, through 'jessicas'. which i got to by looking up an A Whitney Brown quote and seeing who wrote a funny comment. That's 3 degrees away from my original search, but it was time well spent. Nice place you've got.</p></blockquote>
<p>And then someone else just sent me an email saying:</p>
<blockquote><p>I haven't yet commented but I lost your blog for a while and only recently discovered it. Even though you usually dont receive very many comments, keep up the blogging. You do a great job of it and I like hearing your interesting opinions; chances are you'll have a regular commetor.</p></blockquote>
<p>I wouldn’t find this so odd except that in the five years I’ve been writing a weblog (oh wow, almost exactly five - <a href="http://meme3.blogspot.com/2001_08_19_meme3_archive.html">my first post was on August 22</a>), this has never happened. Am I being too cynical in suspecting some cause for this beyond the simple kindness of strangers?</p>
<p>Have I been giving off the impression recently that I intend to shut down my weblog soon? (I don’t.) Is there some sort of coordinated “improve the atmosphere around here” effort afoot? (Maybe there <a href="http://bbgun.burningbird.net/fooflah/eat-the-red-couch/">should be</a>.) Is this all part of a targetted spam campaign? (I get a dozen <q>I love your blog!!</q> spam comments daily, but none with references to specific content.) Or is it really just strangers going out of their way to be nice?</p>
							<p><a href="http://typewriting.org/2006/08/20/The_Suspicious_Kindness_of_Strangers/#comments">Comment</a></p>
						</div>
					</content>
					<updated>2006-08-20T09:40:50-07:00</updated>
                	<id>http://typewriting.org/2006/08/20/The_Suspicious_Kindness_of_Strangers/</id>
				</entry><entry>
					<title>QOTD: People You Can't Stand</title>
               		<link href="http://typewriting.org/2006/08/10/QOTD%3A_People_You_Can%27t_Stand/"/>
					<content type="xhtml">
						<div>
							<blockquote><p>Now, I was about to say that this is a bad thing because peacefully dealing with incompatible people is important to living in a society.  But that's not true. No, peacefully dealing with people you can't stand <b><i>is</i></b> society.  That's literally all it is. People with opposite tastes and conflicting personalities sharing space and cooperating, through gritted teeth sometimes.</p></blockquote>
<p>— <a href="http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/misery.html"><cite>David Wong, 7 Reasons the 21st Century is Making You Miserable</cite></a>.</p>
							<p><a href="http://typewriting.org/2006/08/10/QOTD%3A_People_You_Can%27t_Stand/#comments">Comment</a></p>
						</div>
					</content>
					<updated>2006-08-10T21:46:00-07:00</updated>
                	<id>http://typewriting.org/2006/08/10/QOTD%3A_People_You_Can%27t_Stand/</id>
				</entry><entry>
					<title>Shared Mythology</title>
               		<link href="http://typewriting.org/2006/02/12/Shared_Mythology/"/>
					<content type="xhtml">
						<div>
							<p>Last week, Shelley Powers wrote about web browsers in terms of "<a href="http://weblog.burningbird.net/2006/02/02/a-story-of-cane-and-able-and-the-browser-that-rode-chariots/">Cane and Able</a>," which was strikingly similar to the old tale of Cain and Abel. Today Danny Ayers wrote about the upper- and lower-case semantic webs in terms of the <a href="http://dannyayers.com/archives/2006/02/12/out-of-eden/">Garden of Eden</a>, and added a disclaimer at the end <q>...if anyone feels uncomfortable with my use of Judaic mythology here...</q></p>
<p>In both cases, I think discussing technology in terms of a shared mythology makes for much more interesting — and thus easier — reading. It's too bad we don't have more shared mythology from which to draw. Certainly we have more mythology than we ever have before, but it's less and less <em>shared</em>. I can discuss complex issues in terms of Battlestar Galactica, but how many people will understand the references? How many people even understand the Biblical references today?</p>
<p>I know many people who are worried about the loss of "morals" (which more often than not means "the right to be comfortable among homogeneous people" — but that's another post) in society, but I think more troubling is the loss of shared stories. Even if someone were able to write a modern epic, commonly accessible by a wide variety of cultures throughout the world, I think there's a modern intolerance for believable fiction that would kill the story before it spread.</p>
<p>In the past, we could weave a lie in with the truth, and make a new truth from it. I think that's how most religions have begun. But I'm not sure we can do that today.</p>
							<p><a href="http://typewriting.org/2006/02/12/Shared_Mythology/#comments">Comment</a></p>
						</div>
					</content>
					<updated>2006-02-12T13:31:41-08:00</updated>
                	<id>http://typewriting.org/2006/02/12/Shared_Mythology/</id>
				</entry><entry>
					<title>Community Influences Language Adoption</title>
               		<link href="http://typewriting.org/2005/12/06/Community_Influences_Language_Adoption/"/>
					<content type="xhtml">
						<div>
							<p>I promised myself I would never write about Lisp again after <a href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/12/How_not_to_Provoke_Imitation/">accidentally stumbling</a> into a mob in search of a flame war. But <a href="http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/rewritingreddit">Aaron Swartz's account of an irrational Lisp community</a> sounded too familiar to ignore:</p>
<blockquote><p>The idea that there is something better than Lisp is apparently inconceivable to some, judging from comments <a href="http://reddit.com/blog/2005/12/night-of-living-python.html">on the reddit blog</a>. The Lispers instead quickly set about trying to find the <em>real</em> reason behind the switch.</p>
<p>One assumed it must have been divine intervention, since "there seems to be no other reason for switching to an inferior language." Another figured something else must be going on: "Could this be...a lie? To throw off competition? It's not as though Paul Graham hasn't hinted at this tactic in his essays..." Another chimed in: "I decided it was a prank." Another suggested the authors simply wanted more "cut corners, hacks, and faked artisanship."</p></blockquote>
<p>So it's not just me. Turns out Reddit's post followed the same path as my own. It was posted on <a href="http://lemonodor.com/archives/001301.html">Lemonodor</a>, without context, and with emphasis that spun it as a vehemently anti-Lisp post, and then it was picked up by <a href="http://planet.lisp.org/">Planet Lisp</a>. I take back <a href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/15/Other_Planetary_Damange/">what I said</a> about the problems with planet sites. It's not the aggregator, it's the writer that removes the context. John Wiseman is the author of Lemonodor. I want to paraphrase <a href="http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0410/15/cf.01.html">Jon Stewart</a> and say to John Wiseman: Stop, stop, stop, stop hurting Lisp.</p>
<p>By provoking unnecessarily emotional defenses of Lisp across the web, John is causing otherwise neutral people like myself to actively avoid the Lisp community, because it comes off as a bunch of irrational trolls. I know there are intelligent people using Lisp, but John's reposts distort people's actual views through half-truths and re-emphasis, and the result makes Lisp look like a language only ridiculous people use, people who say things <a href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/12/How_not_to_Provoke_Imitation/#comment-1588">like</a> <q>When you say that you've never spoken Chinese and have no interest in learning it, you are not being anti-Chinese, but you are being closeminded and parochial</q> <a href="http://reddit.com/blog/2005/12/night-of-living-python.html#113380843112882577">or</a> <q>My first reaction was 'say it ain't so'. Then I decided it was a prank.
</q></p>
<p>This type of comment prompts reactions <a href="http://reddit.com/blog/2005/12/on-lisp.html#113389379135846949">like</a> <q>I have never been on a lisp forum but the way the lispers here are reacting are sure to keep me off it too...</q> True that.</p>
							<p><a href="http://typewriting.org/2005/12/06/Community_Influences_Language_Adoption/#comments">Comment</a></p>
						</div>
					</content>
					<updated>2005-12-06T20:19:46-08:00</updated>
                	<id>http://typewriting.org/2005/12/06/Community_Influences_Language_Adoption/</id>
				</entry><entry>
					<title>Reading Lists</title>
               		<link href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/21/Reading_Lists/"/>
					<content type="xhtml">
						<div>
							<p>Over two years ago <a href="http://typewriting.org/2003/07/26/ten_random_feeds/">I wrote</a> "i don't believe there are currently any newsreaders that allow users to subscribe to an OPML file." Over a year ago, <a href="http://typewriting.org/2004/07/23/dynamic_OPML/">I repeated</a> "i believe there are still no newsreaders that allow users to subscribe to an OPML file." I've mentioned this to NetNewsWire author Brent Simmons <a href="http://inessential.com/?comments=1&amp;postid=2766">three</a> <a href="http://inessential.com/?comments=1&amp;postid=3066">times</a> <a href="http://inessential.com/?comments=1&amp;postid=3071">now</a>. Still no subscribe-able OPML.</p>
<p>But now that <a href="http://www.reallysimplesyndication.com/2005/10/13#a1032">Dave Winer mentioned the idea</a>, it's being <a href="http://www.25hoursaday.com/weblog/CommentView.aspx?guid=c5039596-ca64-4604-b063-fda45ca5757b">discussed</a> <a href="http://dannyayers.com/archives/2005/11/21/other-subscriptions-and-format-dissipation/">more</a> <a href="http://nick.typepad.com/blog/2005/10/reading_lists_f.html">widely</a>, and I expect it will be implemented by the third anniversary of when I first mentioned it. <em>Sigh</em>. Trickle-down idea economics. Oh well. Better late than never.</p>
							<p><a href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/21/Reading_Lists/#comments">Comment</a></p>
						</div>
					</content>
					<updated>2005-11-21T16:28:48-08:00</updated>
                	<id>http://typewriting.org/2005/11/21/Reading_Lists/</id>
				</entry><entry>
					<title>Other Planetary Damange</title>
               		<link href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/15/Other_Planetary_Damange/"/>
					<content type="xhtml">
						<div>
							<p>Earlier this month, Phil Rignalda wrote a post titled "<a href="http://weblog.philringnalda.com/?p=1008">Planetary Damage</a>," the damage being that individuals like <a href="http://dannyayers.com/archives/2005/11/03/new-toys-2/">Danny Ayers</a> don't feel the need to write about things that show up on sites like <a href="http://planetrdf.com/">Planet RDF</a>. I, like Phil, read Danny and <a href="http://weblog.burningbird.net/">Shelley Powers</a> but not Planet RDF, so if Danny or Shelley don't write about something in the world of RDF, I don't read it. Planet sites run the risk of forming closed communities in which the only people reading about a technology are those already using it.  And that's one form of planetary damage</p>
<p>I experienced another sort today when <a href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/12/How_not_to_Provoke_Imitation/">something I wrote (which I thought was about screencasts)</a> made its way onto <a href="http://planet.lisp.org/">Planet Lisp</a>. My comments on Lisp weren't altogether positive, and that brought the fanboys out to tell me how evil I am for hating Lisp. The thing is, I <em>don't</em> hate Lisp. I don't even care about Lisp. I know next to nothing about Lisp. I certainly don't belong on Planet Lisp. <a href="http://www.planet-php.net/">Planet PHP</a>, maybe. <a href="http://planet.openjsan.org/">Planet JavaScript</a> would be a stretch. But Planet Lisp? That's just ridiculous. In this case, I wish the community were a bit <em>more</em> closed, with the only people <em>writing</em> about a technology being those who are already using it.</p>
							<p><a href="http://typewriting.org/2005/11/15/Other_Planetary_Damange/#comments">Comment</a></p>
						</div>
					</content>
					<updated>2005-11-15T23:23:31-08:00</updated>
                	<id>http://typewriting.org/2005/11/15/Other_Planetary_Damange/</id>
				</entry></feed>
