Penultimate Notes
by Schadenfreude
09/27/2011, 11:00 AM #
1.Of all of the many internet "don'ts", "Invite your stalker to dinner" is very, very near the top.
2.Why do all of our local conspiracy theorists think the Plotz posts are a hoax? It seems to draw a stark line between those who are reality-challenged and...well...normal people.
3.Good to see some old posters coming back for the final show, some of them anonymously. Sorry we didn't have a better show for you guys. Yes, this really is what we've been doing for the last seven years.
4.There is a 4, but it's a deep, dark secret.
5.There is, however, no 5.
6.For those of you looking to recreate the Fray experience on some other board: it ain't gonna happen.
7.The moving finger, having writ, moves on...
Showing posts with label The Slow Death. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Slow Death. Show all posts
27 September 2011
04 March 2010
Another Key Passage
Another Key Passage
by Inkberrow
03/04/2010, 7:50 PM
Schmutzie's State of the Fray piece, below, and Catna's Frayback Machine concept, detailed on Shameful Conduct, by way of NickD's reminder that JTM is even now considering a revised Star Poster designation, all put me in (more of) a nostalgic frame of mind. Not sure it was ever posted on the New Fray anyway, but I tried via Google Advanced Search to find a reprint of Ender's Star List, in order, first seventy-five to a hundred. No dice, but the search results did include a memory-laden and ironically timely segment from one of the old Editor columns.
The Kinesiology of the Fray
by Kevin Arnovitz, August 10, 2003.
The challenge: How to condition the Fray? How do its hardened veterans muscle up and get back into shape to address what Adam_Masin refers to as "the need for some new, worthy blood to fill the Fray's veins"? An interesting debate reigns between Hauteur (fka Cicero) and Ender over the alleged deterioration of the Star Fray Poster, a veritable kids-these-days row. Here, and more elaborately there [BOTF], Ender---who tends to agree with the general premise of Adam's post---appeals to current stars to disarm and hand in their glimmering achievements in order to return to a simpler, and presumably superior Fray era. Over in Fraywatch Fray, Hauteur responds that
I also encountered some of the early star designees, and I was less than favorably impressed. So who's correct, myself or Ender?
Obviously we are both correct, because quality is in the eye of the beholder. Right, as if you did not see that coming. It's not as if the early star designees were bad, by any means. It's just that they were not generally better than today's average designee. Let's take two of the latest to get their stars: Meletus [fka sgras] and TheQuietMan. Both are outstanding writers. No one fair-minded could call either of these posters second rate star designees. The old crowd was not better than the new.
Ah, memories! And the more things change, the more things stay the same. (Or do they?). Not that I disagree with Hauteur/Cicero on Meletus and TQM, but the substantive certitude of his comparative remarks did seem to belie his initial "quality is in the eye of the beholder" premise.
Some other then-regular poster nics worth re-calling or re-iterating, featured in that 2003 sequence of Editor columns I stumbled upon: WVMicko, chango, Geoff, Seamus, shannpalmer, Sissyfuss1, BeverlyMann, Deej, EFriedemann, AdamMorgan, REW-OEM, Splendid_IREny, CaptainRonVoyage, twifferthegnu, MikeBeers, Rob_said_that, satish_desai, WatchfulBabbler. Never mind (for now) the featured names from Editor Moira's 2001 columns, the ones that didn't overly impress Hauteur.....
Editor Arnowitz also details a fevered debate on between those who decry taking Fray posting too seriously versus those who decry not taking it seriously enough. Arnowitz observes, insightfully in my view, that while there are plenty of Fray posting mandarins, so also "Many regulars make a fetish, very nearly a religion, out of posting just for lighthearted fun, and so much so that they take real offense at the suggestion that there may be more to posting life than just clutching at self-indulgent pleasure. So what is this attitude except 'taking posting too seriously'?" Yes, the old studied indifference and earnest indolence! And those who pose in one of the two camps while reposing their hearts and minds in the other.
So is Fray posting but generational, cyclical, Groundhog Day fodder? Or are there ongoing and concerted fundamental changes and shifts in absolute terms in one direction or another? Maybe some of both. Who cares anyway, right, if our truest Star, the Fray itself, is about to go nova.....
by Inkberrow
03/04/2010, 7:50 PM
Schmutzie's State of the Fray piece, below, and Catna's Frayback Machine concept, detailed on Shameful Conduct, by way of NickD's reminder that JTM is even now considering a revised Star Poster designation, all put me in (more of) a nostalgic frame of mind. Not sure it was ever posted on the New Fray anyway, but I tried via Google Advanced Search to find a reprint of Ender's Star List, in order, first seventy-five to a hundred. No dice, but the search results did include a memory-laden and ironically timely segment from one of the old Editor columns.
The Kinesiology of the Fray
by Kevin Arnovitz, August 10, 2003.
The challenge: How to condition the Fray? How do its hardened veterans muscle up and get back into shape to address what Adam_Masin refers to as "the need for some new, worthy blood to fill the Fray's veins"? An interesting debate reigns between Hauteur (fka Cicero) and Ender over the alleged deterioration of the Star Fray Poster, a veritable kids-these-days row. Here, and more elaborately there [BOTF], Ender---who tends to agree with the general premise of Adam's post---appeals to current stars to disarm and hand in their glimmering achievements in order to return to a simpler, and presumably superior Fray era. Over in Fraywatch Fray, Hauteur responds that
I also encountered some of the early star designees, and I was less than favorably impressed. So who's correct, myself or Ender?
Obviously we are both correct, because quality is in the eye of the beholder. Right, as if you did not see that coming. It's not as if the early star designees were bad, by any means. It's just that they were not generally better than today's average designee. Let's take two of the latest to get their stars: Meletus [fka sgras] and TheQuietMan. Both are outstanding writers. No one fair-minded could call either of these posters second rate star designees. The old crowd was not better than the new.
Ah, memories! And the more things change, the more things stay the same. (Or do they?). Not that I disagree with Hauteur/Cicero on Meletus and TQM, but the substantive certitude of his comparative remarks did seem to belie his initial "quality is in the eye of the beholder" premise.
Some other then-regular poster nics worth re-calling or re-iterating, featured in that 2003 sequence of Editor columns I stumbled upon: WVMicko, chango, Geoff, Seamus, shannpalmer, Sissyfuss1, BeverlyMann, Deej, EFriedemann, AdamMorgan, REW-OEM, Splendid_IREny, CaptainRonVoyage, twifferthegnu, MikeBeers, Rob_said_that, satish_desai, WatchfulBabbler. Never mind (for now) the featured names from Editor Moira's 2001 columns, the ones that didn't overly impress Hauteur.....
Editor Arnowitz also details a fevered debate on between those who decry taking Fray posting too seriously versus those who decry not taking it seriously enough. Arnowitz observes, insightfully in my view, that while there are plenty of Fray posting mandarins, so also "Many regulars make a fetish, very nearly a religion, out of posting just for lighthearted fun, and so much so that they take real offense at the suggestion that there may be more to posting life than just clutching at self-indulgent pleasure. So what is this attitude except 'taking posting too seriously'?" Yes, the old studied indifference and earnest indolence! And those who pose in one of the two camps while reposing their hearts and minds in the other.
So is Fray posting but generational, cyclical, Groundhog Day fodder? Or are there ongoing and concerted fundamental changes and shifts in absolute terms in one direction or another? Maybe some of both. Who cares anyway, right, if our truest Star, the Fray itself, is about to go nova.....
03 March 2010
The Key Passage
The Key Passage
by Schmutzie
03/03/2010, 9:38 AM
In the middle of one of his multi-purpose Fraywatch gang replies, our intrepid moderator squeezed out this little tidbit...
Re: When invitations are deleted
by JeremyTheModerator
03/02/2010, 5:22 PM #
@IncogNeato (02/18/2010, 12:43 AM) I remove all of the "posts which are racist, sexist, obscene, abusive, post other people's personal info" that are reported to me (except on a number of self-regulating boards that are entirely insulated communities and impossible to get to unless you know where you're going and pretty much what you're getting into - and even there I remove racist/sexist/homophobic language when its reported to me). One of the major benefits of the new system is an improved moderation platform, so if you like to comment on more subjects, but don't like to be subject to abuse (which often goes unreported, and thus unseen in the Fray), then you're a lot better off commenting in the new system.
Bold is mine of course, but I think that piece of news from Jeremy merits analysis.
Botf, Procrastination, Shameful Conduct, and whatever board I happen to choose for the next phase of the Great Geezer Experiment, are essentially the wild fucking west in Jeremy the Mod's eyes. Unless you say things like nibber, wunt or paggot. Then he'll do his job and actually moderate....for the time being.
So it's okay, on these "self-regulating" boards, to mine personal info and then post the name of someone's daughter, as long as you don't call her a wunt.
It's okay to lie, on these "self-regulating" boards, about a poster being the subject of a restraining order, as long as you don't call him a nibber-lover in the process.
It's okay to post a link, on these "self-regulating" boards, to a poster's real life name, as long as you don't say, HEY EVERYBODY this paggot here finished fourth!!! on Sale of The Century.
And it is perfectly acceptable to make up a false set of nursing credentials, to spam these "self-regulating boards" with daily insane rants, to post private e-mails sent by other posters, and to lay a fine glaze of scummy residue over an entire front page, as long as you don't say those naughty words while doing it.
In other words, on these "self-regulating" boards, it's not what you say, it's which words you use to say it, that are important to Jeremy the Mod.
Obviously, by allowing Nurse Betty to remain, in the face of overwhelming evidence that she should be banned, the Mod has sent a clear message that Slate wants people to choose the new Kit as a means of posting comments on Slate's articles, and the Fray as we all knew it is as dead as disco.
by Schmutzie
03/03/2010, 9:38 AM
In the middle of one of his multi-purpose Fraywatch gang replies, our intrepid moderator squeezed out this little tidbit...
Re: When invitations are deleted
by JeremyTheModerator
03/02/2010, 5:22 PM #
@IncogNeato (02/18/2010, 12:43 AM) I remove all of the "posts which are racist, sexist, obscene, abusive, post other people's personal info" that are reported to me (except on a number of self-regulating boards that are entirely insulated communities and impossible to get to unless you know where you're going and pretty much what you're getting into - and even there I remove racist/sexist/homophobic language when its reported to me). One of the major benefits of the new system is an improved moderation platform, so if you like to comment on more subjects, but don't like to be subject to abuse (which often goes unreported, and thus unseen in the Fray), then you're a lot better off commenting in the new system.
Bold is mine of course, but I think that piece of news from Jeremy merits analysis.
Botf, Procrastination, Shameful Conduct, and whatever board I happen to choose for the next phase of the Great Geezer Experiment, are essentially the wild fucking west in Jeremy the Mod's eyes. Unless you say things like nibber, wunt or paggot. Then he'll do his job and actually moderate....for the time being.
So it's okay, on these "self-regulating" boards, to mine personal info and then post the name of someone's daughter, as long as you don't call her a wunt.
It's okay to lie, on these "self-regulating" boards, about a poster being the subject of a restraining order, as long as you don't call him a nibber-lover in the process.
It's okay to post a link, on these "self-regulating" boards, to a poster's real life name, as long as you don't say, HEY EVERYBODY this paggot here finished fourth!!! on Sale of The Century.
And it is perfectly acceptable to make up a false set of nursing credentials, to spam these "self-regulating boards" with daily insane rants, to post private e-mails sent by other posters, and to lay a fine glaze of scummy residue over an entire front page, as long as you don't say those naughty words while doing it.
In other words, on these "self-regulating" boards, it's not what you say, it's which words you use to say it, that are important to Jeremy the Mod.
Obviously, by allowing Nurse Betty to remain, in the face of overwhelming evidence that she should be banned, the Mod has sent a clear message that Slate wants people to choose the new Kit as a means of posting comments on Slate's articles, and the Fray as we all knew it is as dead as disco.
11 February 2007
The Fading Fray
Subject: The Fading Fray
From: Ender
Date: Feb 11 2007 11:55PM
My interest in keeping the fray interesting hasn't waned so much as it has evolved. It was that desire to keep the fray interesting that lead to bestofthefray [bestofthefray.blogspot.com/]. But a curious thing happened once the focus I usually reserved for the fray was shifted to the task of exploiting the rest of the web. Piece by piece, bit by bit, I began to feel that the talents I'd discovered thanks to the fray had been wasted on the fray. This suspicion in light of the many years I'd been a pure frayster eventually left me with something similar to buyer's regret. By the time I tired of bestofthefray, my buyer's regret was just one of a dozen arguments that left me seeing the blogosphere as the fray, only writ large. I regard bestofthefray not as a failure, but as a step in my evolution from frayster to blogger. A "transitional fossil", if you like.
But the fray remains good for some things. It's good for conversation. It's good for maintaining anonymity. Not that you can't be an anonymous blogger, but unlike the fray, blogging has the power to make you famous, which makes anonymity a lot trickier. It's good for teaching the value of anonymity, and the fray, you could argue, can serve as a good proving ground for cutting your virtual teeth. Lastly, the fray remains good for community. You can argue the relative merits or current state of the community, but you can't argue it doesn't exist. I end my little list of the fray's merits with community because my membership in that community, my investment in that community is the only thing about the fray that doesn't pale in light of what I learned thanks to bestofthefray.
At this point it's useful to remember what kind of frayster I was because it helps to explain what kind of blogger I am. I was a political poster, a literary poster, a social poster, and that's just for starters. As I sit here thinking about all the different types of posts I've written, I know that I simply can't list them all, and that despite having dabbled in just about every type of posting imaginable, the one type that comes to mind most, that I suspect comes to your mind first, is the manipulative poster. The reason for that is not just because I've been successful at it roiling the pond, but because no matter the type of post, I usually managed to make it manipulative too. That sounds bad, and I won't deny that I went about collecting wounded egos the way some went about collected friends. But in my defense, I always paid you the compliment of treating you like adults, and as I define manipulation, everyone is guilty, to varying degrees.
But manipulative, however accurate, doesn't really do my fray history justice. If you can imagine one, a fray mechanic is a better way of understanding how I approached posting. From understanding what would get a rise out of the fray to finding new ways to take advantage of the structure and nature of the fray, my aim, it seems, was to get the fray to do things no one else had. To me the fray wasn't just a problem to be solved, but a problem I took pleasure in solving, and was even driven to solve. It is this interest in the question--how can I make this thing meet its full potential--that I no longer ask about the fray, but I ask instead about blogging. Manipulating the fray, and you, is a primitive pursuit compared to the challenge of roiling the ponds, lakes, oceans of the internet. This is the kind of blogger I am.
The challenges of blogging and the tools available to bloggers are both more sophisticated and many compared to the fray. And much in the same way I was experimenting with the fray, others have long since experimented with the blogosphere. It is the same problem, at the same state of solution, but much much bigger, and with bigger fish working it. I'm intrigued, and almost without realizing it, I've started in on work my solution.
This is where WikiFray comes in. WikiFray is the beginnings of my proof. My buyer's regret? WikiFray solves it. It brings my investment in this community with me to the blogosphere. Sounds selfish and it is. I lost interest in the fray, but rather than abandoning my investment here I devised a way to take it with me. The joke is on everyone who followed me to WikiFray isn't it? I manipulated them. Some of you are going to love the idea of me admitting to manipulating those who joined WikiFray. This is it! The gotcha that we knew Ender would pull. But those of you who are thinking that as you read this are not adults. An adult recognizes that what is true for me is also true for WikiFray contributors. My investment is their investment. I'm not taking advantage of them anymore than they're taking advantage of me and each other. All I've done is set up an exchange where fraysters can convert their fray stocks into blogging stocks.
As for the future, well, I won't be changing my stripes. I'm a mechanic. That is my main reason for playing. This, however, is the last time I invest those energies in getting the fray to do something new. If you can't see the advantages of WikiFray, that's too bad. If you're here just for the conversation or to play anonymously, I understand. But I want more than just conversation. I want as many people as possible to read what I have to say. It's that simple. Achieving that is the problem, it would seem, I was born to work on. I've had success here, but I could use your help out there. You each have strengths that you've discovered and honed and rely on in the fray. WikiFray combines our strengths, so that in addition to using them in opposition to one another as you do here in fray, their secondary potential to persuade and invite a larger audience isn't wasted bouncing off the walls of this closed community. You may know your most erudite argument in opposition to your old fray adversaries won't cause them to budge. Yet you still write it. You still post it. Then why if not to persuade the audience, if not to compete to be seen as the winner of the exchange? How much more fun would that be, how much more worth it, if your audience was more than a handful of people who already know you so well they already know which one of you is going to win?
Think about it. [wikifray.blogspot.com ]
http://fray.slate.com/?id=3936&m=18812651
From: Ender
Date: Feb 11 2007 11:55PM
My interest in keeping the fray interesting hasn't waned so much as it has evolved. It was that desire to keep the fray interesting that lead to bestofthefray [bestofthefray.blogspot.com/]. But a curious thing happened once the focus I usually reserved for the fray was shifted to the task of exploiting the rest of the web. Piece by piece, bit by bit, I began to feel that the talents I'd discovered thanks to the fray had been wasted on the fray. This suspicion in light of the many years I'd been a pure frayster eventually left me with something similar to buyer's regret. By the time I tired of bestofthefray, my buyer's regret was just one of a dozen arguments that left me seeing the blogosphere as the fray, only writ large. I regard bestofthefray not as a failure, but as a step in my evolution from frayster to blogger. A "transitional fossil", if you like.
But the fray remains good for some things. It's good for conversation. It's good for maintaining anonymity. Not that you can't be an anonymous blogger, but unlike the fray, blogging has the power to make you famous, which makes anonymity a lot trickier. It's good for teaching the value of anonymity, and the fray, you could argue, can serve as a good proving ground for cutting your virtual teeth. Lastly, the fray remains good for community. You can argue the relative merits or current state of the community, but you can't argue it doesn't exist. I end my little list of the fray's merits with community because my membership in that community, my investment in that community is the only thing about the fray that doesn't pale in light of what I learned thanks to bestofthefray.
At this point it's useful to remember what kind of frayster I was because it helps to explain what kind of blogger I am. I was a political poster, a literary poster, a social poster, and that's just for starters. As I sit here thinking about all the different types of posts I've written, I know that I simply can't list them all, and that despite having dabbled in just about every type of posting imaginable, the one type that comes to mind most, that I suspect comes to your mind first, is the manipulative poster. The reason for that is not just because I've been successful at it roiling the pond, but because no matter the type of post, I usually managed to make it manipulative too. That sounds bad, and I won't deny that I went about collecting wounded egos the way some went about collected friends. But in my defense, I always paid you the compliment of treating you like adults, and as I define manipulation, everyone is guilty, to varying degrees.
But manipulative, however accurate, doesn't really do my fray history justice. If you can imagine one, a fray mechanic is a better way of understanding how I approached posting. From understanding what would get a rise out of the fray to finding new ways to take advantage of the structure and nature of the fray, my aim, it seems, was to get the fray to do things no one else had. To me the fray wasn't just a problem to be solved, but a problem I took pleasure in solving, and was even driven to solve. It is this interest in the question--how can I make this thing meet its full potential--that I no longer ask about the fray, but I ask instead about blogging. Manipulating the fray, and you, is a primitive pursuit compared to the challenge of roiling the ponds, lakes, oceans of the internet. This is the kind of blogger I am.
The challenges of blogging and the tools available to bloggers are both more sophisticated and many compared to the fray. And much in the same way I was experimenting with the fray, others have long since experimented with the blogosphere. It is the same problem, at the same state of solution, but much much bigger, and with bigger fish working it. I'm intrigued, and almost without realizing it, I've started in on work my solution.
This is where WikiFray comes in. WikiFray is the beginnings of my proof. My buyer's regret? WikiFray solves it. It brings my investment in this community with me to the blogosphere. Sounds selfish and it is. I lost interest in the fray, but rather than abandoning my investment here I devised a way to take it with me. The joke is on everyone who followed me to WikiFray isn't it? I manipulated them. Some of you are going to love the idea of me admitting to manipulating those who joined WikiFray. This is it! The gotcha that we knew Ender would pull. But those of you who are thinking that as you read this are not adults. An adult recognizes that what is true for me is also true for WikiFray contributors. My investment is their investment. I'm not taking advantage of them anymore than they're taking advantage of me and each other. All I've done is set up an exchange where fraysters can convert their fray stocks into blogging stocks.
As for the future, well, I won't be changing my stripes. I'm a mechanic. That is my main reason for playing. This, however, is the last time I invest those energies in getting the fray to do something new. If you can't see the advantages of WikiFray, that's too bad. If you're here just for the conversation or to play anonymously, I understand. But I want more than just conversation. I want as many people as possible to read what I have to say. It's that simple. Achieving that is the problem, it would seem, I was born to work on. I've had success here, but I could use your help out there. You each have strengths that you've discovered and honed and rely on in the fray. WikiFray combines our strengths, so that in addition to using them in opposition to one another as you do here in fray, their secondary potential to persuade and invite a larger audience isn't wasted bouncing off the walls of this closed community. You may know your most erudite argument in opposition to your old fray adversaries won't cause them to budge. Yet you still write it. You still post it. Then why if not to persuade the audience, if not to compete to be seen as the winner of the exchange? How much more fun would that be, how much more worth it, if your audience was more than a handful of people who already know you so well they already know which one of you is going to win?
Think about it. [wikifray.blogspot.com ]
http://fray.slate.com/?id=3936&m=18812651
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
