lovehatethings

For years of online gaming the avatar has become a player's online manifestation that outstretched the simple handle. And although I'm not downplaying the rationale for such a creation within a gaming community, there now has become a growing affection for stylized avatars within social networking communities. Whether it was through people disguising their true image on MySpace or not wanting to get "tagged" in Facebook or simply thinking their Twitter icon looks cool as a zombie or anime character, avatars have taken on meme of the month status.

Within a Massively Multiplayer game experience, I can appreciate a need to be distinguished from the hundreds or thousands of other players who are all trying to decide which player to frag or cast a spell on. In fact, being someone who's absolutely useless with names, I can appreciate a unique avatar. When playing online poker, I rarely remember someone by their screen name, but I have a far easier time remembering someone who sucked out a river inside straight draw by their crop circle pic of Futrama's Bender... I hate you ironically-named MadSkillz69.

There is also a certain need for privacy with some people who want to use social networking sites and want to avoid a photorealistic representation for one reason or another. I find it hard to justify a constant shuffling of personal avatars on a weekly or daily basis. After all, isn't the purpose of an avatar for someone to be able to identify you when a real picture is unavailable?

While I'm not a player/user of Second Life, I would imagine that radically changing one's appearance on a regular basis would not only be counter productive to maintaining intergame relationships, but frustrating to any other players who would not want to persist in figuring out each person every time they logged on.

I'm not one of those Twitter users with thousands of people on my list, but even within the short list of people that I do follow, it seems there is constant change. Whether it's a manga, hobbit, alien, superhero or South Park character that you choose to represent you, I crave consistency for at least a short period of time.

And, just for the edification of those of you who participate in every avatar meme, allow me to let you in on the "down low" about a couple things. First, your dog, baby, or garden gnome is not you. As much as I appreciate you actually using a real photo as a representation, I'm not buying the miny sorcerer's hat and the rake. Also, yes your baby looks cute in the same way that all babies look cute when you have someone making face and bubbling out gibberish while popping two dozen pics on your Kodak C340, but I'm not social networking with your baby... unless of course they can type, "LOL, I can't believe how drunk we were!" after every picture that you post. At that point, they'll at least be on par with 75% of the rest of Facebook.

Next, appreciate the size of your avatar on most social network pages. To place family portrait in the space instead of a simple headshot pretty much just screams "Hey, I'm going to justify the time I spend online with friends as extended family networking time because it's not MY profile, it's a FAMILY profile. If you're going to have a picture that includes you as your avatar, how about JUST you. Also, for all you college guys who use a picture of a bikini model or your favorite emo singer as a pic that represents you, congratulations, you have now become a less than one-dimensional facade of a human being on a platform that only allows a single dimension.

I'm all for individualized expression on a medium that has moved from text to images to audio to video. I know that many of you like to express your inner values by changing your pic from laughing you to serious you to Macauley-Culkin-Shockface-in-Home-Alone you, but I beg you, please, stop.

I will cop to the fact that my avatars are always photoshopped to remove photorealistic aspects, but, anyone who knows me will always recognize my face and not that of a stuffed animal or a car. Also, I rarely, I repeat RARELY change any of my social network representations. I'm quite ready to admit that, from day to day, my macrolife doesn't change that much and, even though I could create some crazy avatar to pretend that my life is somehow more interesting or exciting than it is, I'm prepared to allow the static, consistent avatar choices I've made to be an indication of someone comfortable with who they are and not seeking trying to keep up with the meme of the month club.

The disappearance of original screenplays in Hollywood. Free up screenwriters and support independent film.

While I've certainly had my obligatory lovehate on the Canadian and US elections, the self-perpetuating of election news cycles have allowed bloggers to be up front and on point with political snippets on a minute to minute basis. Whether it's bloggers that work for CNN, CNBC, Fox News, or some of the larger independent blog sites like Huffington and Drudge, people (including network news producers) are turning to blogs on a more frequent basis for information. Such a relationship has also reinforced the persistent echoing of Uncle Ben in Peter Parker's head: "With great power comes great responsibility." 

Any news agency that gets duped by a blog post cries foul over the blogger's resposibility. Any reader who gets deceived when they buy into a false fact or "opinion as fact" mopes and pouts about how blogs have done them wrong. But the simple truth of the matter is that bloggers don't owe anyone anything. If a news organization gets duped by a blog post, I say "Hell Yeah!" If CNN or Fox News can't do some fact checking before they run with something, their discredit serves them right. And, while I would admit that a casual reader is far more likely to buy into something they read on a blog, I offer up the bastardized consumer warning: "Reader Beware".

Producers of personal web content owe their readers nothing. If readers start to get what they don't expect, they will stop reading.  There are few to no examples of paid blogs these days, so no fiscal responsibility is at risk. I support the idea of writers inventing complete bullshit if that suits their fancy. If nothing else, it will start to hone readers' skills of detecting such crap, because, I guarantee you, 90% of what gets presented on respected news outlets on a daily basis is laced with bias, spin, and gatekeeping filters amuck.

I know it's a bit of a cliched cop out to shout "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" on the web, as pretty much anything that can be said, has, is, or will be said. And, that said, I'm a proponent of wild anarchy reigning webwide since all other major media outlets are constrained by advertising and the moral outrage of motivated minority groups.

The web needs to be the great frontier. The web needs to be the autobahn where we will allow participants to go as fast as they need to go because we believe that to restrict everybody for the sake of the idiotic few is anathema. The web needs to be the Wild West where all that is required to stake a claim is an idea, storage and bandwidth.

I have only one responsibility as a blogger - free expression. The blogger is the guerilla pamphleteer of days gone by: someone who threw a thousand pieces of paper up into the circling breezes of the town square to be consumed by anyone who had the inclination to pick one up. As soon as bloggers start to cede responsibility over their content to any other than their own sensibilities, freedom is lost. I'm not advocating bloggers enacting anything that will incite physical harm, but, that said, only someone with an entrenched credibility can move others to action anyway - and even the best orators cannot get people out to do something as simple as voting.

The community will self-regulate by ignoring anyone whose credibility is lost. For those who missed that: The community will self-regulate by ignoring anyone whose credibility is lost!

Deride anyone who seeks to encapsulate your ideas. Deny anyone's right to silence your voice.

Love your freedom of expression. Hate any rules that try to scare you from it.

We will stake our claims.
We will police ourselves.
We will express ourselves in every language, including objectionable.
We will post with abandon.
We will breach taboos.
We will cross every line.
We will not apologize.
We will not relent.

My podcast application to the new BGC3 Bill Gates Think Tank.

Seemingly the most generic stereotype of the "geek" from the perspective of the outside world is still something more akin to the leads from Revenge of the Nerds than your average work-a-day Joe Six Pack or Joe the Plumber, but, trust me, either Joe may very well be harboring an inner-geek.

While the vast populace of web-savvy wingnuts may or may not have achieved "geek" status, I'm quite prepared to take the technology aspect out of the definition. I'm offering up, for consideration, that the path to geekdom is in direct relation with the continued refining of the generic to the specific. Instead of offering up a sample set that involves technology, let's follow a parallel structure to refine the map to the inner geek of fishing. Just as a quick disclaimer, I know absolutely NOTHING about fishing, but that I can place these steps in the following should show the commonalities within the geek archetype regardless of the field.

Step One (Hobbyist): The casual fishing or "outdoorsperson" picks up the occasional issue of Field & Stream or Outdoor Life to decide where a good corporate fishing retreat of week-long booze-up with friends might happen. Sure, they have a interest/hobby in a wide variety of wildlife-oriented issues, but they have as much geek level cred in fishing as one who reads Rolling Stone would have with music. And while someone who eventually becomes a fishing geek may one day reach back to Field & Stream as a fond memory, it will never hold the credibility it once did. The hobbyist views nature as art and uses their reading to enhance their perspective.

Step Two (Threshold Geek): Moves into fishing-specific magazines... kinda like moving from Wired's tech esoterica to a PC or Mac specific title. The threshold fishing geek doesn't care much for hunting or hiking or spelunking, but wants to focus on fishing and only fishing. They don't want one article every three months on rod and reel advancements, but several articles every month. They crave full page ads for mail order lure houses in Minnesota that they make lists from, and copiously circle and highlight, but never buy anything. They have growing frustrations in trying to get friends to go on weekend trips to stand on rocky shores or in hip-waders with the promise of many beers to be consumed while fishing or each night. The threshold geek views fishing as an art that they admit a certainly lack of facility with, but are gaining an appreciation of. Think of the weekend golfer that knows they will never have the time to get as good as they'd like to be, but will watch endless hours of golf tournaments and relish being able to guess club choice before the announcer calls it.

Step Three (Geek): To move into official geek status, the fishing enthusiast has to make a choice (dive in so to speak) as the sub-genre of fishing they wish to specialize in: freshwater, saltwater, boat, spear, ice or fly. The distinguishing feature between the geek and the ubergeek lies in the geeks ability to remain open to the possibility of subgenres beyond the geek level. For instance, the flyfishing fan, having committed to all things fly, has a cornucopia of rod and fly choices, location scouting, outfitting, and the art of fly creation. The geek has views flyfishing as an art that they are willing to commit to, but are starting to learn that the more they get into, the more they have to learn. They have invented drinking games to the impracticalities of A River Runs Through It, but are willing to adopt a zen-like quality when talking about their rods becoming extension of their bodies. (You all have very sick minds!)

Step Four (Ubergeek): Can talk about bass fishing for days on end - and do! They know every sub-classification of the bass family, what they eat, where they live and can identify sex by scale patterns. They have refined rod and reel research down to second nature (to even talk about such things is a step down for them unless they've defined a holy grail rod handmade by a craftsman in Sapporo that costs as much as the family van and can only be discussed via online forums with the six other people in North America who know enough to speak of such things). They are plenty qualified to write for Bassmaster magazine but to do so they would have to lower themselves to keep up with the rest of fishing world. They would rather devote their time to the refined aspects of bass fishing than actually fishing. The ubergeek views bass fishing as a lifestyle and a venue for self-improvement. They see the disciplines involved in fishing in every aspect of their daily lives. Their boat comes outrigged with everything necessary, but is nowhere near as decked out as the boat of a bass boat uber geek who belongs to a slightly different subset. They belong to several fishing clubs (online and in the community). They will occasionally deign to come down from the mountain to consort with regular geeks. They consider deep sea fishers "elitist assholes" and flyfishers "namby-pamby girly-men". They think ice fishers are just "outworldly whackjobs" and secretly dream of the day they can move to an isolated Northern Canadian cabin with a 1653 first edition of Izaak Walton's The Compleat Angler: or the Comtemplative Man's Recreation: Being a Discourse of Rivers, Fishponds, Fish and Fishing Not Unworthy the Perusal of Most Anglers.

Of course there can be several subcategories within the Four Steps of Geekdom, but the most important thing to recognize is that geeks are not bound to technology. Anyone who can re-associate this fishing paradigm to any other topic knows that everyone's a little bit geeky, and some of us more than most.

Who is the person that I occasionally catch the fleeting glimpse of in the mirror that causes me to double-take in confusion?
Who can explain the musical success of singer who cannot sing and musicians who cannot play?
Who greenlit Beverly Hills Chihuahua?
Who is that ING Direct guy and what ad wizards decided to put him on the air?
Who abducted the hearts of cities and replaced them with bowels?

What rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
What cannot be defended against by a big enough cereal box fort?
What makes people think Comic Sans is acceptable for a business document?
What incredibly effective lobbying effort has kept the fax machine around this long?
What makes us afraid to see our strengths in others?

When did children learn to give up before high school?
When did keeping up with the Joneses dictate every suburban house in America besmirched by siding?
When did Prince see the white cliffs of sanity and decide "parachute optional"?
When will we tear the roof off the sucka?
When will we finally take everything back?

Where can I buy Silly Putty?
Where is east of somewhere and west of nowhere?
Where do animated gifs go to die?
Where does cloud computing go after the rain?
Where did I go wrong?

Why has style replaced substance?
Why is it that best ideas come to mind in inverse relation to my proximity to a pen?
Why is it that as much as pop culture lets me down I am inexorably drawn to it?
Why would loving deities permit suffering?
Why do so many people care about the acceptance of strangers?

How can our gift of seeing the big picture so obscure our ability to see the details?
How did we not rise up as one when networks placed bugs on our screens 24/7?
How does a litre of water from a machine cost more than a litre of gas from another?
How did everything become so diposable?
How do I start loving more than I hate?