Thursday, October 22, 2009

The nature of RPG discussion online?

I came across something interesting the other day speaking about the nature of debate on the Internet. The subject was global warming and I'd like to pass on that subject itself as this isn't a science or political blog, what's important here is that the author (Roger Pielke Jr.) is for the most part a supporter of the idea of global warming but objects to certain statements made by other proponents.

That objection resulted in what strikes me as an all too common Internet approach to debate. He describes it as such:

"Here is how it works. The really giant fish -- public intellectuals like Tom Friedman and Paul Krugman -- confer authority on the big fish of the liberal blogosphere. They do so by applauding the work of the big fish and saying that they trust them. This is a useful exchange because the big fish amplify the writings of the giant fish in the blogosphere and do the dirty work of taking down their political opponents by playing some gutter politics that the giant fish would rather not be seen playing. This has the effect of establishing the big fish as people to be listened to, not because they are necessarily right about things, but because the giant fish listen to them and the giant fish set political agendas."

Further on...

"But even the big fish apparently see some gutter behavior as not really becoming of professionals (though Romm doesn't seem to care), as to more effectively attack someone's reputation they also rely on the minnows of the blogosphere, people who see it as their sole job to "trash" someone's reputation via innuendo, fabrication and outright misrepresentation."

Full article found here.

Pulling this back to the subject of RPGs, the pond is vastly smaller, and so too are the fish. But I've seen much the same result. The GNS debates for example certainly has it's giant fish (Edwards), big fish (Clinton, Vincent), and minnows (the mass of Forge/GNS supporters).

It would seem to me a natural result of how large numbers of people would interact in an enviroment that is effectively uncontrolled (and almost void of people with true standing on the subject). Something to keep in mind I think.

No comments: