Also, the comments/post ratio doesn't factor in one person looking many times (again, as far as I know), so the high viewing to posting ratios of some threads may be due to those of us who love the sound of our own voice re-reading and re-re-reading what we've written over and over again. Not that I do that, of course.
In my very sloppy assessment, it seems most threads have about a 20% posting to viewed ratio. The really good threads - considered comments, on topic, delving into a single idea/building review/construction problem/licensing issue etc. - have fewer people reading them but the people who are reading them are more engaged, so the ratio is higher.
My little laptop statistical analysis, completely personal and non-scientific. Archinect probably does have access to better info on all our posting habits.
That pic of Wigley is so, so wonderful. It really makes me laugh.
Sure, people like Stephen, Alexander Trevi and Kazys Varnelis should be involved in this kind of event. This was Postopolis' first outing, and perhaps on subsequent versions of this event (indeed, this should be an annual thing), then more people can be involved. Don't fault the organizers for so-called "omissions" when they were preoccupied with the logistics and the content of the event. Believe me, it was a hell of a thing to organize. I'm willing to bet that they would have wanted more people involved.
If you want to play the history game and properly recognize the idea of posting stuff on walls, then perhaps you should look way back before Quondam. Indeed, at the 1932 MoMA Modern Architecture show (the Johnson/Hitchcock thingy), Le Corbusier's drawings for the Centrosoyuz, etc, were not actually drawings, but blown-up photographs from the Ouvre Complete. How conceptually different is that from spray-mounting blog entries inside the Storefront? Not much, especially if you consider what the Ouvre Complete truly is.
So, I just played the history game ... and it got me nowhere. It won't get anyone anywhere.
To wit: the Clip/Stamp/Fold followed the same tactic. Covers of various magazines were also plastered along one wall. Noone seemed to cry foul when that happened ... perhaps it is indicative of how to curate architectural writing within a (literally and figuratively) circumscribed space.
i don't why this that should be involved in this event. it is done and done with the people who have involved.
it was not a historical survey of who and when, that is down the line whole another historical survey show, maybe a book.
this, rather, was an action-reaction-response-generate-post-unpost-talk, discuss and show +,+,+, whatever, performance meets venue, meets content, meets medium, meets other people, kind of a thing by itself. a show, an event. live ammo.
i am glad it happened. it announced the new territory to more people. i think people should move on and use the medium to expand their work. postopolis! is done. you want to keep doing work? go ahead and produce. thanks for the pics.
how the fuck mystery guest javier ended up there? he was supposed to be here in la. he is a mover and shaker and one jet set publishing genius, a paradigm in this business.
i wonder if selma hayek from ugly betty was with him speaking spanish and everything.
i watched ugly betty when it was on telemundo or univision i forget which one, gee i sorta figured that when betty got those glasses and braces off and got a new do that she'd be muy bonita! but i liked xica better. some great brazilian telenovella there. watched it all dubbed into spanish. a language i don't speak.
Not my point either, but oh well. As for your clarification, who knows? One reason is certainly the fact that web self-publishing is now a much more common occurrence than before. But that is an obvious reason. Other than that, I have no idea.
Mark, be careful not to draw hasty conclusions. Some of what I said was provisional and depended on either a transcript of the interview or your feedback. Now that I have it I’m grateful and better acquainted with your specific point of view, which by the way is pretty refreshing coming from .edu, although your reputation precedes you so it’s not all that surprising.
For the record I agree with part of Kwinter’s knowledge activism thesis which suggests watching and waiting are attitudes of commitment. So my view of lurkers is certainly more nuanced than the antiquated, though sometimes appropriate definition, re private—a definition which seems especially apt when looking for ways to describe the sedentary state of democracy in the West, but there are very encouraging signs of renewal, starting with blogs and social entrepreneurialism.
The Internet has forced a reappraisal of the “idiot line” by providing me with some interesting empirical evidence. I’m not referring here to the prevailing enthusiasm for emergence, complexity theory or evolutionary biology. However, some studies I’ve read are compellingly devoid of the customary supine conjecture. Scott Page’s essay about how diversity trumps ability is a good recent example. But we’re not talking about problem solving here per se, and this is where my issue with your claim lies. To ascribe the epithet “idiocy” to blogs, categorically, folds simple engagement into an ethic of instrumentality. So when you say “the usual thread meltdown through idiocy”, I say, so what. And, if so what, where’s the idiocy? There’s no there there. No end point necessary. It’s just a celebratory mosh pit. I will concede however that in a different context where a goal is an explicit good and the venue is framed accordingly, you may have a point. In those cases however, there is usually, or should be, an active moderator of some sort present. Maybe.
Normally I wouldn’t be so persistent in finessing the point but you are a public figure with sufficient integrity to incline many others toward appreciable consensus or worse, uncritical capitulation. In addition, it’s no secret that traditional media’s initially haughty dismissal of the blogosphere and its attendant vices (alleged) is due to a “hearing in tongues, speaking in ears” misunderstanding of the medium, not to mention professional jealousy. They used to think the blogosphere was a vast virtual drosscape but have been of late, irony of ironies, frantically trying to catch up with blog culture and in the process reconstituting their raison d’être and internal editorial structures. You probably wouldn’t want your nuanced “idiot” opinion and old media’s prejudice to be mistakenly conflated by others any time soon. Semantics matter sometimes. Vado’s refinement of the point through etymology @ 10:42 is spot on. Think of it as an act of epistemo-determinism (see Kwinter).
Now to the meat. You’ve hinted at this already but I’ll say it categorically: Trust the swarm, embrace the “idiocy” and the "idiotes"; or get used to a very quiet room with a bunch of compliant drones. I witnessed first hand the canonical flame wars that galvanized the discourse around online-community governance in the early Internet/Web era. Brand’s The Well and later Rheingold’s Electric Minds contained some of the most exhilirating threads and EGO I’ve ever seen. The carnage that inevitably ensued resulted in a bifurcation that took years to resolve itself. Some stomped off behind a masonic firewall and others slugged it out in open chaos trying to craft a modicum of civility with sometimes Swiftian rules.
Those early experiments gave me a keen sense of what a healthy ecology of mind might feel like. I spent equal time both behind and in front of the firewall. Each has their place depending on your pleasure principle but the metaphor you bring to the space is key. It was hard watching brilliant people engage in a self-defeating bloodsport. So hard in fact that I was pushed back onto my assumptions with a singular intent: find a way to navigate all of it, drop the negative metaphors and wade in with an open heart, patience, judo skills and a radical reinterpretation of Arendt.
There are few people that can block, dodge & parry with equal aplomb in the blogosphere. I know of a few examples and they are a wonder to watch, however inconsistent they may be. There should be a course designed for exquisite blog hosting inside every major .edu. A new army of Jedi bloggers would be a boon to humanity and degauss the received notions of interdisciplinarity. When I was hosting a group online years ago we used to deliberately call out the lurkers from the shadows with the most outrageous tactics. These usually worked quite well and I’ll give you an idea of what the effect was by way of an anecdote:
When I was a young sprite I went camping with a bunch of buddies and some lame brain (me) decided to throw a can of Campbell’s tomato soup into the fire. Nothing happened and we forgot about it and returned to where we were sitting ‘round the blaze. Well, about an hour later the can went ballistic, sending us flying back onto our asses. The fire was extinguished in the process and we were all covered with splotches of soup, soot and live embers. Everywhere around us were these little pieces of lit embers, we were each these moving gallactic clusters and the whole scene looked like a star field. We were all silent for a few minutes until the shock and threat of injury or Armageddon wore off and then as it dawned on us what had happened we all burst out laughing. We laughed so hard that one us even vomited from the abdominal contractions.
Mark, lurkers to me are potential cans of Campbell’s tomato soup. That’s one of the reasons I called you out. I’m glad I did. I believe we all need more of this kind of conversation. That’s why I loved Postopolis. It was celebratory, canny, as you would say, and clever. The selection of the Storefront venue was just brilliant. I know of few ad hoc events that out of the gate managed to be as vital and charmed. Whatever insights are gleaned from the post-mortem I’m sure will be put to good use for the next event but there’s nothing like the electricity of a “first” well-played don’t you think?
I’m in the middle of reading Cocteau’s biography but I assure you there was no Dada in my second paragraph. Both idiot references were considered a “good”.
Which is why I said “your flagrant “idiocy” has now made you one of us. Welcome to Archinect!” What was required was a refinement and airing of the etymology.
I also look forward to more of your posts. I assure you your first one in this thread was anything but a candidate for the “idiot column”, as you understand it. Maybe you can set up a pseud account and call yourself “wiggles”. I like the “agitation” it connotes.
Tip of the hat to namh, metam, AP & 765.
George Bowering had this to say about the human intellect in his This I believe statement.
The above monologue seemed designed more to impress than to engage, minus the tale of the can, which was hilarious. Was that a means of stonewallling, or was it a series of feints, or passive-aggression, or flirtation? Something that gets me about the phenomenon of blogging and forum-posting (ha. I typo'ed that as "posing" - perhaps more appropiate) is when it is so competitive. And I'm more of the "la la la, ok you win, enjoy being the winner, now I'm off to do what I want anyway!" sort, so I don't know what to do other than note what is happening; the best reaction I can think of is "this is not part of my world."
I was present during the telephone conversation in its entirety and it did not even occur to me to feel insulted by Mr. Wigley's comments on the archetypal structure of blog threads, the pattern that arises in many conversations, and the roles that various actors play in these conversations, including the role of "the idiot." I did not agree with everything he said, but it was not insulting, or if it was, then it entirely went over my head because I'm an idiot. ;)
Due to the audio problems, I'm not sure that a transcript would be possible. Someone was shooting video but it's probably useless. As evident in the photos courtesy of Quilian, I was directly under the speaker and still had difficulty literally hearing some of what Mr. Wigley said - but still understood him pretty well. Perhaps the people at SFFAA had something wired-in to the phone that the audience couldn't see, and will eventually make it available/audible.
Lurkers are under no obligation to contribute, just because those who choose to assert themselves publicly feel uncomfortable at the thought of an unknown audience. It is probably good to remember that you don't know who is consuming your ideas at any given time. Whether you are more careful or will yourself to remain oblivious because of that... So who wants to be part of those "tennis matches?" If a conversation is a tennis match and lurkers are the audience... better to be the oblivious fat kid happily passed out on the upper bleachers with a melted sno-cone in her hand!
the only potential lurker i care about is my boss. but i don't think thats a real issue. i still tend to not vent about or comment about the specifics of my job. its like being a sort of secret agent in that regard. i would like to gloat about a certain something that has happened in regard to my job, but i won't because, despite of what you guys think, i am a professional.
i think it would be hard to expect an .edu person to allow improv constantly
...sorry metamechanic but have you ever taught? sort of an improv act in itself. a class might veer towards strange directions and if you're good, you know how far to stray and when to pull back, and how to tie all the loose ends.
i can't believe there's still talk on the idiot comment. wonder if anybody else had made it [other than a well known academic, i mean], would there still have been about one page's worth of discussion?
in any case, i don't find monologues engaging either.
@ Xentropy Here Here!
@ metamechanic I believe that you seem to be suggesting Agitation is at least for you preferable to being fat and lazy?
However might i suggest that in some professions or circles that that would be the height of agitation?
Hmmmm
i'm not sure that they really count as "clients" but when i was in grosse pointe a few months back at the height of the breuer library charrette i did meet many librarians, board members and random citizens who had seen and were actively following the relevant library threads (and maybe threads for all i know)
several of the archinectors who participated in postopolis! have remarked that it was great to finally meet some of these people in person....and, yes, that's great to connect with members our little community, but to take it a step further into the real world (or should i give a more trendy name, maybe lurkspace) and to be on site in grosse pointe and have people, complete strangers that resembled my grandmother, or eccentric uncle, introduce themselves to me and start talking about archinect and the things that myself and others had posted...that was just surreal...and deeply gratifying too because many of those people were very happy that we became involved in their issue and helped them avoid making a mistake by demolishing a landmark.
even so, having serious conversations with people and referring to others as "puddles" or "vado" and trying to explain some of the nuances of the behavior on our forum...i don't know how to describe it...just weird, i guess
Archinect @ Postopolis!
100% truth!
He's smaller than you'd think...
it reminds me of:
or this:
but how many times has he looked without either posting or commenting. there's no published statistic for that, right?
Right, puddles, as far as I know.
Also, the comments/post ratio doesn't factor in one person looking many times (again, as far as I know), so the high viewing to posting ratios of some threads may be due to those of us who love the sound of our own voice re-reading and re-re-reading what we've written over and over again. Not that I do that, of course.
In my very sloppy assessment, it seems most threads have about a 20% posting to viewed ratio. The really good threads - considered comments, on topic, delving into a single idea/building review/construction problem/licensing issue etc. - have fewer people reading them but the people who are reading them are more engaged, so the ratio is higher.
My little laptop statistical analysis, completely personal and non-scientific. Archinect probably does have access to better info on all our posting habits.
That pic of Wigley is so, so wonderful. It really makes me laugh.
Metamechanic ...
Sure, people like Stephen, Alexander Trevi and Kazys Varnelis should be involved in this kind of event. This was Postopolis' first outing, and perhaps on subsequent versions of this event (indeed, this should be an annual thing), then more people can be involved. Don't fault the organizers for so-called "omissions" when they were preoccupied with the logistics and the content of the event. Believe me, it was a hell of a thing to organize. I'm willing to bet that they would have wanted more people involved.
If you want to play the history game and properly recognize the idea of posting stuff on walls, then perhaps you should look way back before Quondam. Indeed, at the 1932 MoMA Modern Architecture show (the Johnson/Hitchcock thingy), Le Corbusier's drawings for the Centrosoyuz, etc, were not actually drawings, but blown-up photographs from the Ouvre Complete. How conceptually different is that from spray-mounting blog entries inside the Storefront? Not much, especially if you consider what the Ouvre Complete truly is.
So, I just played the history game ... and it got me nowhere. It won't get anyone anywhere.
To wit: the Clip/Stamp/Fold followed the same tactic. Covers of various magazines were also plastered along one wall. Noone seemed to cry foul when that happened ... perhaps it is indicative of how to curate architectural writing within a (literally and figuratively) circumscribed space.
For the record: Trevi and Varnelis were invited and were unable to participate for personal reasons.
Bryan spies on the crowd...
i don't why this that should be involved in this event. it is done and done with the people who have involved.
it was not a historical survey of who and when, that is down the line whole another historical survey show, maybe a book.
this, rather, was an action-reaction-response-generate-post-unpost-talk, discuss and show +,+,+, whatever, performance meets venue, meets content, meets medium, meets other people, kind of a thing by itself. a show, an event. live ammo.
i am glad it happened. it announced the new territory to more people. i think people should move on and use the medium to expand their work. postopolis! is done. you want to keep doing work? go ahead and produce. thanks for the pics.
how the fuck mystery guest javier ended up there? he was supposed to be here in la. he is a mover and shaker and one jet set publishing genius, a paradigm in this business.
i wonder if selma hayek from ugly betty was with him speaking spanish and everything.
i watched ugly betty when it was on telemundo or univision i forget which one, gee i sorta figured that when betty got those glasses and braces off and got a new do that she'd be muy bonita! but i liked xica better. some great brazilian telenovella there. watched it all dubbed into spanish. a language i don't speak.
So what *I* want to know is...
Who was hooking up with who and how often and where?
I hooked up with Rice to Riches .... I had, like, 5 pints of rice pudding.
was that anything like the heinz bean scene from the movie version of tommy?
More like the cover to The Who Sell Out
I know it's one of the most classic bits of graphic design, but I've always hated the Heinz label design...
Orhan... You missed it... I was in L.A., Mark Wigley style, on the Venice boardwalk.
vado the original ugly betty (betty la fea) is a Colombian soap opera. Specifically it is from Bogota, very heavy local accents.
yeah i was talkin about xica bein brazilian. and why wasnt it called blogopolis???
i watched a horribly dubbed Boyz in the Hood on UniVision last night.
how did they spell boyz?
i have also enjoyed watching the miss venezuela pagent on telemundo. this thread has been hijacked.
Metamechanic ...
Not my point either, but oh well. As for your clarification, who knows? One reason is certainly the fact that web self-publishing is now a much more common occurrence than before. But that is an obvious reason. Other than that, I have no idea.
so if everyone is makin blogs and self publishing how does the average working man have time to filter all of the pulp to get to the juice???
Mark, be careful not to draw hasty conclusions. Some of what I said was provisional and depended on either a transcript of the interview or your feedback. Now that I have it I’m grateful and better acquainted with your specific point of view, which by the way is pretty refreshing coming from .edu, although your reputation precedes you so it’s not all that surprising.
For the record I agree with part of Kwinter’s knowledge activism thesis which suggests watching and waiting are attitudes of commitment. So my view of lurkers is certainly more nuanced than the antiquated, though sometimes appropriate definition, re private—a definition which seems especially apt when looking for ways to describe the sedentary state of democracy in the West, but there are very encouraging signs of renewal, starting with blogs and social entrepreneurialism.
The Internet has forced a reappraisal of the “idiot line” by providing me with some interesting empirical evidence. I’m not referring here to the prevailing enthusiasm for emergence, complexity theory or evolutionary biology. However, some studies I’ve read are compellingly devoid of the customary supine conjecture. Scott Page’s essay about how diversity trumps ability is a good recent example. But we’re not talking about problem solving here per se, and this is where my issue with your claim lies. To ascribe the epithet “idiocy” to blogs, categorically, folds simple engagement into an ethic of instrumentality. So when you say “the usual thread meltdown through idiocy”, I say, so what. And, if so what, where’s the idiocy? There’s no there there. No end point necessary. It’s just a celebratory mosh pit. I will concede however that in a different context where a goal is an explicit good and the venue is framed accordingly, you may have a point. In those cases however, there is usually, or should be, an active moderator of some sort present. Maybe.
Normally I wouldn’t be so persistent in finessing the point but you are a public figure with sufficient integrity to incline many others toward appreciable consensus or worse, uncritical capitulation. In addition, it’s no secret that traditional media’s initially haughty dismissal of the blogosphere and its attendant vices (alleged) is due to a “hearing in tongues, speaking in ears” misunderstanding of the medium, not to mention professional jealousy. They used to think the blogosphere was a vast virtual drosscape but have been of late, irony of ironies, frantically trying to catch up with blog culture and in the process reconstituting their raison d’être and internal editorial structures. You probably wouldn’t want your nuanced “idiot” opinion and old media’s prejudice to be mistakenly conflated by others any time soon. Semantics matter sometimes. Vado’s refinement of the point through etymology @ 10:42 is spot on. Think of it as an act of epistemo-determinism (see Kwinter).
Now to the meat. You’ve hinted at this already but I’ll say it categorically: Trust the swarm, embrace the “idiocy” and the "idiotes"; or get used to a very quiet room with a bunch of compliant drones. I witnessed first hand the canonical flame wars that galvanized the discourse around online-community governance in the early Internet/Web era. Brand’s The Well and later Rheingold’s Electric Minds contained some of the most exhilirating threads and EGO I’ve ever seen. The carnage that inevitably ensued resulted in a bifurcation that took years to resolve itself. Some stomped off behind a masonic firewall and others slugged it out in open chaos trying to craft a modicum of civility with sometimes Swiftian rules.
Those early experiments gave me a keen sense of what a healthy ecology of mind might feel like. I spent equal time both behind and in front of the firewall. Each has their place depending on your pleasure principle but the metaphor you bring to the space is key. It was hard watching brilliant people engage in a self-defeating bloodsport. So hard in fact that I was pushed back onto my assumptions with a singular intent: find a way to navigate all of it, drop the negative metaphors and wade in with an open heart, patience, judo skills and a radical reinterpretation of Arendt.
There are few people that can block, dodge & parry with equal aplomb in the blogosphere. I know of a few examples and they are a wonder to watch, however inconsistent they may be. There should be a course designed for exquisite blog hosting inside every major .edu. A new army of Jedi bloggers would be a boon to humanity and degauss the received notions of interdisciplinarity. When I was hosting a group online years ago we used to deliberately call out the lurkers from the shadows with the most outrageous tactics. These usually worked quite well and I’ll give you an idea of what the effect was by way of an anecdote:
When I was a young sprite I went camping with a bunch of buddies and some lame brain (me) decided to throw a can of Campbell’s tomato soup into the fire. Nothing happened and we forgot about it and returned to where we were sitting ‘round the blaze. Well, about an hour later the can went ballistic, sending us flying back onto our asses. The fire was extinguished in the process and we were all covered with splotches of soup, soot and live embers. Everywhere around us were these little pieces of lit embers, we were each these moving gallactic clusters and the whole scene looked like a star field. We were all silent for a few minutes until the shock and threat of injury or Armageddon wore off and then as it dawned on us what had happened we all burst out laughing. We laughed so hard that one us even vomited from the abdominal contractions.
Mark, lurkers to me are potential cans of Campbell’s tomato soup. That’s one of the reasons I called you out. I’m glad I did. I believe we all need more of this kind of conversation. That’s why I loved Postopolis. It was celebratory, canny, as you would say, and clever. The selection of the Storefront venue was just brilliant. I know of few ad hoc events that out of the gate managed to be as vital and charmed. Whatever insights are gleaned from the post-mortem I’m sure will be put to good use for the next event but there’s nothing like the electricity of a “first” well-played don’t you think?
I’m in the middle of reading Cocteau’s biography but I assure you there was no Dada in my second paragraph. Both idiot references were considered a “good”.
Which is why I said “your flagrant “idiocy” has now made you one of us. Welcome to Archinect!” What was required was a refinement and airing of the etymology.
I also look forward to more of your posts. I assure you your first one in this thread was anything but a candidate for the “idiot column”, as you understand it. Maybe you can set up a pseud account and call yourself “wiggles”. I like the “agitation” it connotes.
Tip of the hat to namh, metam, AP & 765.
George Bowering had this to say about the human intellect in his This I believe statement.
The above monologue seemed designed more to impress than to engage, minus the tale of the can, which was hilarious. Was that a means of stonewallling, or was it a series of feints, or passive-aggression, or flirtation? Something that gets me about the phenomenon of blogging and forum-posting (ha. I typo'ed that as "posing" - perhaps more appropiate) is when it is so competitive. And I'm more of the "la la la, ok you win, enjoy being the winner, now I'm off to do what I want anyway!" sort, so I don't know what to do other than note what is happening; the best reaction I can think of is "this is not part of my world."
I was present during the telephone conversation in its entirety and it did not even occur to me to feel insulted by Mr. Wigley's comments on the archetypal structure of blog threads, the pattern that arises in many conversations, and the roles that various actors play in these conversations, including the role of "the idiot." I did not agree with everything he said, but it was not insulting, or if it was, then it entirely went over my head because I'm an idiot. ;)
Due to the audio problems, I'm not sure that a transcript would be possible. Someone was shooting video but it's probably useless. As evident in the photos courtesy of Quilian, I was directly under the speaker and still had difficulty literally hearing some of what Mr. Wigley said - but still understood him pretty well. Perhaps the people at SFFAA had something wired-in to the phone that the audience couldn't see, and will eventually make it available/audible.
Lurkers are under no obligation to contribute, just because those who choose to assert themselves publicly feel uncomfortable at the thought of an unknown audience. It is probably good to remember that you don't know who is consuming your ideas at any given time. Whether you are more careful or will yourself to remain oblivious because of that... So who wants to be part of those "tennis matches?" If a conversation is a tennis match and lurkers are the audience... better to be the oblivious fat kid happily passed out on the upper bleachers with a melted sno-cone in her hand!
hi susan :P
the only potential lurker i care about is my boss. but i don't think thats a real issue. i still tend to not vent about or comment about the specifics of my job. its like being a sort of secret agent in that regard. i would like to gloat about a certain something that has happened in regard to my job, but i won't because, despite of what you guys think, i am a professional.
vado I thought you were the boss
thats the funniest thing i heard today!
...sorry metamechanic but have you ever taught? sort of an improv act in itself. a class might veer towards strange directions and if you're good, you know how far to stray and when to pull back, and how to tie all the loose ends.
i can't believe there's still talk on the idiot comment. wonder if anybody else had made it [other than a well known academic, i mean], would there still have been about one page's worth of discussion?
in any case, i don't find monologues engaging either.
Yes, exactly. Competitive, mean-spirited, smug ass-kicking? What a stunted little world.
my wife has started lurking...
@ Xentropy Here Here!
@ metamechanic I believe that you seem to be suggesting Agitation is at least for you preferable to being fat and lazy?
However might i suggest that in some professions or circles that that would be the height of agitation?
Hmmmm
history is displacement. the diaspora of fat lazy kids are locked and loaded and coming for their sno cones.
i'm not sure that they really count as "clients" but when i was in grosse pointe a few months back at the height of the breuer library charrette i did meet many librarians, board members and random citizens who had seen and were actively following the relevant library threads (and maybe threads for all i know)
several of the archinectors who participated in postopolis! have remarked that it was great to finally meet some of these people in person....and, yes, that's great to connect with members our little community, but to take it a step further into the real world (or should i give a more trendy name, maybe lurkspace) and to be on site in grosse pointe and have people, complete strangers that resembled my grandmother, or eccentric uncle, introduce themselves to me and start talking about archinect and the things that myself and others had posted...that was just surreal...and deeply gratifying too because many of those people were very happy that we became involved in their issue and helped them avoid making a mistake by demolishing a landmark.
even so, having serious conversations with people and referring to others as "puddles" or "vado" and trying to explain some of the nuances of the behavior on our forum...i don't know how to describe it...just weird, i guess
Is this board dead....
Oh well the discussion continues with lurkers,
i think a DNR has been issued.
i don't know the author in person, but i do consider quondam.com a work of labor and art and i reserve a due respect for it.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.