[Air-l] Reification was Definitions

[Bob Rehak]

On Thu, October 19, 2006 16:58, Sam Tilden wrote:

>   It is the netiquette of this organization that creates private vs public
> conversations. I am merely following that norm so as to not put myself
> in harms way. I am acutely aware of these norms since I have studied
> both the implicit and explicit norms and how they have been applied.
> This is a subject decided by the executive board of our sponsors.


Dear Sam,

Your reply appears to address only one of Dr. Eskow's queries, to wit:
"Who are these leaders, and what is the nature of their objections? Why
are they anonymous?"

Here are his remaining questions, redacted and numbered for your convenience:

1. Why this need to find precise boundaries for a word that encompasses
many realms of meaning, that includes technology and the people that use
it and the uses they make of it--and much more?

2. What are the reasons you have for this belief [i.e. "I have reason to
believe that lack of objectification has created a situation in which
incomplete and imperfect understanding of the many of these tropes and
definitions has created the manufacturing of trolls when none exist"]?

3. Can you give us one or two examples of poor scholarship associated with
AOIR--scholarship that is not "empirically grounded"?

We respectfully await your answers. (I'm particularly interested in your
response to #3.)

Best wishes,

-- 
Bob Rehak
Visiting Assistant Professor
Film and Media Studies
Swarthmore College

Associate Editor
Animation: An Interdisciplinary Journal