[Air-l] Trying not to flame...

[Cristian Berrio]

Dear Eva:

Thanks for wrapping up such a bunch of information and give give some
orientation to the flame case! I am new to this digest and it is very 
difficult for me to keep the track of all the comments as some of them
seem to be very chaotic(uups, could that be flaming someone?).

Regarding to the flame topic, once reviewed some sources quoted by the other 
guys in the list, seems to me that FLAME=AGGRESSION WITHIN
E-COMMUNICATION. That's it and no more. We do not refer here to a
sistematic relation where agression is the link (some kind of sado-masoquist 
e-marriage), or organised verbal or graphic attacks to certain groups or 
people.

There is where I find the lack of sense of the definition. If we are
just talking about the episodes when you or I drop aggresive verbal
intercourse, then the possible scenarios are ilimited and this will
lead to nothing more than speculative conclusions and headaches again, I 
might be flaming someone that thinks, "this guy is really aggressive 
disqualifying the whole discussion...").

On the other hand, if we turn to look to AGGRESSION within the web,
there are marvellous cases to study, i.e. recall the aggressions
between chinesse and northamerican hackers? That was a news heading about 
one year ago.

More about hackers, attacks and swearing used when invading web sites. Even 
more dramatic, extremist groups that use web sites to inflame agressive 
feelings or attack some communities (i.e. Islam extremists or colombian 
guerrilla web sites, even drug lords did have web sites).

Now, regarding a comment you did when I headed my e-mail like "HURRAY
EVA", should that be flaming to Sweedish community while to Latin americans 
and North americans might be just fine? Here we begin to enter the 
coplexities of verbal proximity in the web, within an environment. This 
digest is supposed to be an academic community so writing to you "Hi sweetie 
baby" might be flaming although you really might be sweet and a baby (uppps 
again...). Vital space reflects then also into verbal e-communication and 
transgressions to such verbal space are seen as flaming, although they might 
not be swearing.

Have anyone participate (surelly you have but you you do not confess)
into adult chats (adult always means sex...). The symbolic significance of 
such cyberspace gives new meaning to flame and I will be deligted to refer 
to all of you some weird situations lived there that can be clear examples 
of flaming comming to the limit of abuse! Just to begin I will tell you that 
my name is Cristian but I entered with the nick "Cris", which can be 
considered femenine or male but people tend more to think it is the name of 
a lady. In fact, when the nick "cris" showed, a bunch of chatters threw 
themselves to exert the most infamious amount of lassive and FLAMING 
commments. This leads
me to conclude that flaming has also to do with the sex of the
participants as, sexual reference offers wider possibilities of aggression.

Well, if interested I will keep on with the story in the next issue.

Saludos

Cristian Berrio




_________________________________________________________________
Descargue GRATUITAMENTE MSN Explorer en 
http://explorer.yupimsn.com/intl.asp.