On the part where you said that Internet should not have the capital I unless used in the beginning of a sentence. Do you have a credible source to back you up by that? I have always capitalized my I no matter where in the sentence it is. So I was just wondering if there is a source you found this out from and are they credible? If so whats there reasoning behind not using the capital I?
In public perception, the Internet has changed from an entity to a process. It is becoming regarded as a communications medium and most people do not think of themselves as Internet users. Instead, their mental focus is on what they’re doing — they’re getting information, sending e-mails to their friends, or downloading music — in just the same way that they think of the telephone. You don’t call it “The Telephone”, you regard it as a generalized mechanism with which to get in touch with a friend or order a pizza. And just as we don’t capitalize the words for media such as television, radio, mail, telephone, or newspaper, why should we capitalize Internet? The change, though minor in itself, is a cultural marker for a shift in public perception and a further sign that the Internet is becoming a mature medium.
Reference: www.Worldwidewords.com
During your research did you find any other words that were as strong as 'flaming' that went along with either good or poor netiquette?
I did not find any other words that were as strong as ‘flaming’. Flaming was created as a term for criticizing people on the internet.
Flaming is the practice of attacking people on a personal level. While flaming is relatively common on the internet, almost everybody will claim they're opposed to it. They may even flame you for having flamed someone. It's all really confusing, actually.
However, there are some fairly obvious things. Responding to someone's analysis of the deficit crisis by telling them that they probably walk funny or weren't breast fed could easily classify as flaming. Making rude comments about an individual's sexual organs or religion would also probably classify.
Reference: http://songweaver.com/netiquette.html
Flaming, and arguing on the internet needs to be attempted the same way we would argue in real life. Does Flaming mostly happen within companies who are in different locations? Does it happen within the same building? I’m wondering what kind of conflict styles people adapt to when “flaming.” I can’t imagine these individuals wanting to interact directly when in conflict? Has it been found that when people flame in emails they somewhat hide behind their computer?
Flame wars can take place in any news group, and even on mailing lists. Anywhere with an audience, really. The serious stuff occurs in alt.flame and other reserved sites.
Although flames often get out of hand, they have a purpose in the ecology of cyberspace. Many flames are aimed at teaching someone something (usually in overstated language) or stopping them from doing something (like offending other people). Flame messages often use more brute force than is strictly necessary, but that's half the fun.
Netiquette does ask that you consider the art of flaming before pulling out the flame-thrower. Any wannabe with an email account can ignite a firestorm of ill-conceived and boring flames. It takes diligence and creativity to pull off an artful flame. Who knows -- if your flame is good enough, you might even make it into the Hall of Flame
Reference: http://www.albion.com/netiquette/book
Wow, I learned so much from your lit review! I noticed that mentioned bad netiquette could possibly cost one his or her job. Do you have any specific examples of the consequences people have had for using bad netiquette? Is this something that is being stated and expected in business policies? Where is the line between forgiving someone their mistakes (or naivete), and actual punishment?
I think there is a line to what is considered acceptable and unacceptable netiquette. However, I feel that it depends on the company to set such standards for their employees in order to avoid punishment. I found an example where a highly regarded journalist was criticized for bad netiquette.
Coulter Criticized for Bad 'Netiquette'
Dave Astor
NEW YORK --
BradBlog.com blogger Brad Friedman criticized conservative columnist/author Ann Coulter for putting a blogger's personal contact information on her Web site. "In an extraordinary lapse of both common 'netiquette' and overall decency ... Coulter has posted a personal phone number and e-mail address of Lydia Cornell," Friedman posted on his liberal BradBlog.com, adding that this might have been in retaliation for a guest item Cornell wrote on his site titled "Death is Sexier than Sex" (to Ann Coulter)…
No comments:
Post a Comment