"A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy"

[Jon S.]

Not sure where this topic fits, put the thread in Middle Earth, but if an Admin wants to move it it's cool by me.

I got a kick out of this excerpt from the following (there's definitely some truth in it):

A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy by Clay Shirky
A speech at ETech, April, 2003
Published July 1, 2003 on the "Networks, Economics, and Culture" mailing list.

http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html

Good morning, everybody. I want to talk this morning about social software ...there's a surprise. I want to talk about a pattern I've seen over and over again in social software that supports large and long-lived groups. And that pattern is the pattern described in the title of this talk: "A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy."

ooo

The third pattern Bion identified: Religious veneration. The nomination and worship of a religious icon or a set of religious tenets. The religious pattern is, essentially, we have nominated something that's beyond critique. You can see this pattern on the Internet any day you like. Go onto a Tolkein newsgroup or discussion forum, and try saying "You know, The Two Towers is a little dull. I mean loooong. We didn't need that much description about the forest, because it's pretty much the same forest all the way."

Try having that discussion. On the door of the group it will say: "This is for discussing the works of Tolkein." Go in and try and have that discussion.

Now, in some places people say "Yes, but it needed to, because it had to convey the sense of lassitude," or whatever. But in most places you'll simply be flamed to high heaven, because you're interfering with the religious text.

ooo

[The Gaffer]

Troll





;)

[Jon S.]

"Pass me the mutton, Bert, if ye ain't got no man-flesh." :p

P.S. The reference is canonical. ;)

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

I guess I've been lucky. I've only got a three forum sample to work from but two of them are almost 100% insult-free and on the other one we only insult idiots and n00bz. :p

[Earniel]

Religious veneration is way over the top to describe this sort of thing. As if something religious is the only thing people can get passionate about. I think that on many Tolkien forums there will be more than enough people able to express their opinion politely and engage in an actual discussion rather than flame wars. There will always be one to yell at you somewhere, mind you. But what do you expect on the internet?

I'll say this one thing though. if you go to Tolkien forums anywhere, and you insist on misspelling the good man's name twice, I think you deserve what's coming. :p Respect is a two-way street.

[Gordis]

I'll say this one thing though. if you go to Tolkien forums anywhere, and you insist on misspelling the good man's name twice, I think you deserve what's coming. :p Respect is a two-way street.
:D I second that!

[The Gaffer]

All that theorising about new technologies, social networks and the like is 99% vapourware.

The example the speaker gave would be like going into a Communist Party meeting and saying "Well, you know, isn't it all a pile of nonsense really. Come on, isn't it."

The medium has nothing to do with it.

[Jon S.]

Didn't you love it in Forest Gump when Forest, after punching the guy who was abusing the girl he worshipped in his face, told the assemblage, "I'm sorry for ruining your Black Panther Party."

Friends, I laughed when I read the article - at the content and at myself. Can y'all laugh similarly? :D

[The Gaffer]

Yes, though maybe not similarly. These sorts of psychosociofuturology things just wind me up a bit that's all. "Here's a pattern I've noticed" like its some great new insight.

Anyway, I never understood the canon thing.

[Earniel]

I dunno. I can laugh at myself on a lot of occasions, but when an interest of mine is described as religious fanaticism, I don't quite see the fun of it.

Sorry for being so unsportive, Jon. :p

[Valandil]

And... even though this is Entmoot, right in the heart of Fangorn - I think we'd be alright with discussing whether the forest parts in Two Towers were too boring, without jumping someone's case. :)

Flamers beware! :p

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

I'm not sure the author means "religious" in the sense you're taking it. The guy's clearly got some sociology background and in that field common words like "religious" may have an uncommon meaning. Kind of like how the way the terms "cult" and "sect" are used in common speech being flip-flopped from how they are used by sociologists.

I don't find the use of the term "religious" insulting at all, in that case. Because it doesn't have to do with worship as much as it has to do with faith and dogma.

[GrayMouser]

On this and other Tolkien sites I've seen people maintain that they couldn't stand Bombadil and he should have been cut out totally, that the entire trip to Rivendell was too long and meandering and should have been severely edited, how stupid it was to have Aragorn wandering around Eriador with a broken sword, the flashbacks in the TT and RoTK were sloppy writing, and, to bring the Hobbit in, a rather widespread view that unspeakably vile tortures should be inflicted on the Elves who sang the "Tra-la-la-la-lee Down in the Valley" song.

I personally have opined that
- Tolkien was a very bad poet and that everything except his comic doggerel should have been tossed out

- the use of archaic speech to convey high-flown sentiment in RoTK is grossly overdone

-the whole Arwen thing was mishandled ( still remember my first reaction on reading about the wedding in RotK over forty years ago: "Who the hell is she?")

- the siege of Minas Tirith wrecked the climax of the book because, no matter how thrilling the whole "great horns of the North wildly blowing" scene is, it reduces Aragorn son of Arathorn, rightful heir to the throne of Gondor, to a backup guy in the deliverance of his Kingdom and vengeance upon the destroyer of his heritage.

And I'm still live and kicking.

(I did leave the White Council after disagreements with Michael Martinez, the site's founder, but they were about the nature of the work, rather than its quality. His site, his views.)

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

I personally have opined that
- Tolkien was a very bad poet and that everything except his comic doggerel should have been tossed out

- the use of archaic speech to convey high-flown sentiment in RoTK is grossly overdone

-the whole Arwen thing was mishandled ( still remember my first reaction on reading about the wedding in RotK over forty years ago: "Who the hell is she?")

- the siege of Minas Tirith wrecked the climax of the book because, no matter how thrilling the whole "great horns of the North wildly blowing" scene is, it reduces Aragorn son of Arathorn, rightful heir to the throne of Gondor, to a backup guy in the deliverance of his Kingdom and vengeance upon the destroyer of his heritage.


:eek:

Are there still threads around based on those last two? Because I'd enjoy that discussion. I personally LOVE the way Arwen was handled and didn't feel that the Rohirrim took anything away from Aragorn at all.

[Varnafindë]

and, to bring the Hobbit in, a rather widespread view that unspeakably vile tortures should be inflicted on the Elves who sang the "Tra-la-la-la-lee Down in the Valley" song.

I'd be inclined to share that view ...

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

As far as The Hobbit's Elves are concerned, I like to think it was accurate simply because although we're told numerous times that the Elves were merry it is one of the very few examples of them actually showing it. I personally would have liked to see even more of the personable side of those folk.

[The Gaffer]

Excellent stuff, GM. Maybe we should have a list of sh!tfight topics and go to it. It's always a shame when one of these comes up and someone goes "been there, here's the link" and it stops.

[Noble Elf Lord]

I'd be inclined to share that view ...

:eek::eek::eek: How can you say that? Does it make you embarrassed to read stuff which you find embarrassing? ;)

Tra-la-la-la-lee-lee... Elbereeeth... *walks down the path singing shamelessly* :)

[Varnafindë]

I don't find it embarrassing, I find it irritating. And I don't find them merry, I find them silly.

My excuse for them is that they cannot be Noldor, they must be some of those Green-elves who never made the Great Journey and never saw the Trees. ;)

[Gordis]

My excuse for them is that they cannot be Noldor, they must be some of those Green-elves who never made the Great Journey and never saw the Trees. ;)

Because those who had seen the Trees would never be merry again...:p:D

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

I realize that was in jest, but I think the point is valid. Dark and Grey Elves seem to be much more well-adjusted than the Noldor, more content with their place in the world.

The Noldor seem to be the world's first emo kids. Little chance of them singing merry songs of good cheer like their Sindarin cousins.