We plan to introduce online chat feature in AWAD where we'll invite guests
for moderated chat. We intend to begin this in a couple of weeks. We need
to do a test run before the actual event. And for this, we invite you to come
chat with Jacqulyn Fulner who has agreed to be the guest on Saturday, Dec 9
at 2 PM EST (7 PM GMT). The chat will run for an hour.
Hmm, 09:00 on Sunday morning, well I'll be there in spirit anyway. I hope it goes well. Behave yourself, Jackie!
1900 GMT? I might actually be able to make it. (Must remember to make note in trusty Psion...)
Enjoy yourself Jackie - and please don't give them cause to censor you!
Hey, what is this, guys??
Just what kind of rep do you think I have, anyway?
Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say it now Jackie, 1, 2, 3...
"What? Misbehave. Me? Why I never"
Jackie,
Am I getting this right? You're the guest for the chat?
Anyway, I'll try to be there.
Am I getting this right? You're the guest for the chat?
Incredible, isn't it? But that's what Anu says.
Incredible, isn't it? But that's what Anu says.Why incredible? Since we all know that Anu
IS Jackie, he/she/they/you are the logical choice to be the first guest
wow is plased to accept Wordsmith's kind invitation to the chat with Jackie on Saturday, Dec. 9 at 2 p.m. EST.
Now, does this invitee have to do something special with computer or do I just click on the information and announcements in Main? Some explicit directions (a map)please for the live-chat-impaired among us. Thank you, aloha, Namaste. WOW
PS May we have a namaste (phonetic from the Hindi, I hope)emoticon. It would be very useful when sending thanks or acknowledging superior wit etcetera. Like right
here . wow
So, we like, get to make an apointment with Jackie, and like, talk to her!?! Ya mean we like get to, like, talk to Jackie? Wow, that's totally awesome. Jackie's totally my hero, man!
oh, sorry, i saw an ad for some stupid movie about a kid who got drunk and lost his car and now i'm speaking stoner
What are we going to talk about Jackie? Kentucky, the gutter and the new Cezanne?
What are we going to talk about Jackie?
That'll be up to Anu. He is going to moderate the talk
(okay, okay, chat).
Now look, you-all--you-all're gonna run me up to 1100 if you keep up these direct-address kind of posts, and I'm trying to let tsuwm get there first.
In reply to:
PS May we have a namaste (phonetic from the Hindi, I hope)emoticon.
Great idea - we'll ask Avy, Anu and Shanks to design one for us. I use namaste all the time - together with the clasped hands and nodded bow it has an elegance, deference and courtesy about it that I love.
Jackie confesses: "you-all're gonna run me up to 1100 if you keep up these direct-address kind of posts, and I'm trying to let tsuwm get there first."
And the Vicar posted on 4 Dec 00: "Jackie's ... taken some sort of ascetic vow of non-posting in order to purify her soul during this most holy season of Advent."
I love to say I told you so.
> together with the clasped hands and nodded bow it has an elegance, deference and courtesy about it that I love.
Max
Although a lot of people here now use the handshake, but Namaste, like the Saree, will never go out of fashion.
There is an enjoyable awkwardness that results from the use of both the namaste and the hand shake. You have just been introduced to the other you greet the person with hands folded in a Namaste to realize the other has his hand held out in an expectance of a shake. So you quickly change and hold out your hand only to find his hand is not there. He has withdrawn his hand to fold it to a Namaste. One person still has a hand held out and the other has his folded. You can carry on like that for a while making no contact at all.
In reply to:
There is an enjoyable awkwardness that results from the use of both the namaste and the hand shake. You have just been introduced to the other you greet the person with hands folded in a Namaste to realize the other has his hand held out in an expectance of a shake. So you quickly change and hold out your hand only to find his hand is not there. He has withdrawn his hand to fold it to a Namaste. One person still has a hand held out and the other has his folded. You can carry on like that for a while making no contact at all.
I love it, Avy! The namaste/handshake greeting dilemma adds another dimension to "Should I kiss or not kiss?/Should I kiss on the lips or the cheek?/One cheek or two?/Should I contact or air-kiss?/Should I hug?/With or without mutual back-slapping?". The permutations of disastrous greetings/introductions are almost endless!
I'd love to come, but 2 a.m.
[weep]
Bingley
MQ said, by way of greeting: I use namaste all the time - together with the clasped hands and nodded bow it has an elegance, deference and courtesy about it that I love
As well as the hongi, Max? You'd wind up banging heads with a pleen-quordleing scream of pain!
Bingley said, from under Jakarta's blanket of morning "mist": I'd love to come, but 2 a.m.(various emoticons)[weep].
Isn't there just something so, ah, interesting about being invited to an event on what is actually the day after the event has been an' gawn? I begin to understand Max's temporally-challenged choice of sobriquet for this board.
"What? Misbehave. Me? Why I never" Nobody suggeted that Jackie was going to misbehave, did they - they just asked her
to behaveThis injunction does not preclude her behaving badly.
Anyway, I'll try to be there, if my new abacus can be convinced to communicate through the sub-ether.
Sad to say 7pm-8pm is kiddies' bedtime (for which the whole world stops) so I'll probably be unable to attend.
But try to enjoy yourselves anyway, folks!
Fisk
P.S. Will a transcript of the chat be available afterwards?
I have problems with time; I tried five minutes ago to to log out, and the to log in again, and I received the message
Your last logon was at: Thu Dec 7 08:07:46 2000
Here (Italy) it is 3 p.m.(+ 7 hours)
I suppose
1) that the time of the Board is the time Est supposed for the chat
2) that I am no more than one hour far from the Greenwich time.
So there is a contradiction that I am not able to solve!
Help me!
Emanuela
In reply to:
I suppose
1) that the time of the Board is the time Est supposed for the chat
2) that I am no more than one hour far from the Greenwich time.
Good point Emanuela.
It would appear that Board time is 6, not 5, hours behind GMT (I will confirm with this post). There is, however, the possibility that Board time is not Eastern Seaboard Time, but one hour behind. I am on GMT right now (hey, I only live a few miles from Greenwich) since we reverted from Summer Time a month and a half ago, and I too seem to be an hour out.
Let's see... Maybe the almighty Anu has a solution. (Yes Chief? Please? [supplicant emoticon])
cheer
the sunshine warrior
Postscriptum (or should this be postpostum?): Confirmed after posting this. The Board is 6 hours, not 5, shy of my time, and therefore presumably 7 hours from you.
for whatever reason, the board seems to be on Central Standard Time (which is convenient for me :).
and for what it's worth, here is a time zone map:
http://aa.usno.navy.mil/AA/faq/docs/us_tzones.html
for whatever reason, the board seems to be on Central Standard Time
So Emanuela was right. There is black in the dal! Anu was giving us standard time zones, not necessarily the Board time. Thanks tsuwm.
As well as the hongi, Max? You'd wind up banging heads with a pleen-quordleing scream of pain!Fortunately, I reserve the hongi for tangata whenua, the only people who don't seem intimidated by it!
the board seems to be on Central Standard Time
My guess would be that it is in Eastern Standard Time (Anu does live in Cleveland), but it doesn't pay attention to Daylight Savings Time (like the strange states of Indiana and New Mexico).
"Should I kiss or not kiss?/Should I kiss on the lips or the cheek?/One cheek or two?/Should I contact or air-kiss?/Should I hug?/With or without mutual back-slapping?". The permutations of disastrous greetings/introductions are almost endless!Hi Marty,
I am assuming by your post that you do not live in a "kissing zone", and the phenomenon is relatively new. The rules are different depending upon which country you are in so you won't get a straight dictionary-like explanation. Here is what we (in Québec Drum
) usually stick to.
Men…a) do not kiss each other (well some do, but we won't talk about that here
)
b) kiss women family members and friends on both cheeks when greeting hello and goodbye but generally only when the women initiate it
c) shake hands with business associates/contacts et al
d) hug men only when the person is going through extremely troubling times (eg. death in family) and only when it is a family member or very close friend
d) shake hands with family members to congratulate them on good news
e) shake hands and do that "lean-in with one shoulder while still grasping the hand and tapping on the back thing", when they are congratulating a family member or close friend on good news (eg. wife just had baby, got married, and, and, well, that's about it. No other good news warrants all that touching)
Women…a) kiss family members and friends on both cheeks when greeting hello and goodbye
b) kiss on both cheeks and hug a person they particularly like if they have not seen each other for a while, if they see the person is in need of some emotional support (anything from a bad breakup to a death in family) if they are sharing happy news (pregnancies et al) and anytime they darn well feel like it.
c) in business - shake hands if relationship is, how can I explain this, if it is all lines and square corners.
- kiss on both cheeks when the relationship is friendly/business. But this is only when two French people are dealing with one another. There is no business kissing when English people are involved as they tend to be much more reserved.
Kissing on the lips is only done with a significant other
(how is that for covering all the bases).
So when do we have to log on? I am seriously confused. I don't want to miss it but I am afraid I will either be an hour too early or an hour too late. Right now, my time is one hour ahead of the board (it is later in the day for me).
Anu specified 2 PM EST (7 PM UTC); that would be 2PM your time, bel?!
Here is what we (in Québec Drum ) usually stick to.
Thanks for the detailed instructions, bel. I suspect that if I ever visited your fair city, I'd be kissed on the forehead and top of my head a lot (and/or miss a lot of handshakes), whilst consulting my notes.
xxooxx
Oh, and have a good chat, everyone. I won't be there (some ungodly hour on a Sunday morning for me). Look forward to hearing (reading!) how it went.
Cheers,
Marty
If you are unsure of the time conversion for your city please use the
following link to
convert the time.
http://www.virtualtourist.com/cgi-bin/tconverter.vtc?s=@962156552-2126 This seems to work pretty well for me.
Thanks to everyone who has shown interest in attending the
chat with Jackie as part of beta test. You can access it
at
http://wordsmith.org/chat. Transcript will be available
after the event.
See you there!
Not to degrade Jackie being a guest, but wow, chief editor of the OED for Dec. 19. Anu must have connections.
Of course, it couldn't be a worse time for me, unless I can convince my AP English/British Lit. teacher to let us participate.
In reply to:
Now, does this invitee have to do something special with computer or do I just click on the information and announcements in Main? Some explicit directions (a map)please for the live-chat-impaired among us. Thank you, aloha, Namaste. WOW
Yes instructions please, just in case I do drag myself out of bed.
Bingley
In reply to:
Of course, it couldn't be a worse time for me,
You think it'll be a problem for you - try getting up 04:30, which is when I would have to get up to make that chat session. Never mind, I can still dream that at least one of the chat sessions will be at an Antipodean-friendly time.
I don't think that is anything to be worried about. They will surely be spread out considering the great variety of countries represented here.
I'm sorry I missed it. A little more advance warning would be appreciated by those of us who can't get here every day.
How'd it go?
Dear Sir, When there is another chat would you consider making a separate post in the announcements...with its own tag-line such as : CLICK INSIDE FOR CHAT. This would be a great help and much easier than scrolling through all the posts to try and find it only to discover it won't work!
Really sorry I missed the chat. It's a wonderful idea and I hope you'll do it again. I think it may have been my machine. I had some problems which righted when I checked all, shut down then restarted. Sigh!
While I've your ear, thank you for this board.
(Namaste emoticon here)
Ann (WOW)
The Chat went well AnnaS. Jackie was a very good under all the pressure of having to answer quickly. What was also nice was that you could have private message conversations with the other participants while waiting.
One thing though, in the live chats, you are supposed to write in a stream of consciousness way, without hitting the enter key. If you hit the enter key it sends off your message. I think I sent two or three questions that only said -"Jackie," and one question only partly asked.
One thing I found uncomfortable was waiting for answers. A) I didn't know if Jackie was waiting for questions
b) I didn't know if anybody had asked the same questions as I did - which would tie up the line needlessly.
And you can't check your spelling. Ugh when you see it up there on the board, unable to change it. So next time, you can be sure I will be typing more slowly and re-reading myself before pressing enter key.
The editor of the OED is up next on the 19th. I will be thinking of the questions to ask in advance. I am looking forward to it.
wow, can you describe what a namaste looks like when you do it. I have no idea what you guys are talking about.
can you describe what a namaste looks like when you do it.Without using my hands ?? Mercy !! Let me see, hmmmmmmm.
My Intro : was when I first met my friend Roshan at the Indian pavilion at the 1964-65 World's Fair in New York City. He taught me .
How To: Place hands together palm-to-palm, raise hands so that the thumbs are roughly at the chin, simultaneously bow head slightly.
It is a greeting of respect. It is my understanding that a smile while executing the Namaste shows affectionate respect. It is also used when saying "thank you" ... the exact translation of the word, sometimes said while making the gesture, is a greeting like the Hawaiian "Aloha" ....many lovely meanings. Perhaps Anu (insert Namaste emoticon of deep respect here) would tell us more about the use of the gesture and the real meaning of the word Namaste.
Does this help?
I welcome any comment and/or further info and/or corrections to my understanding on how Namaste is said or used by the members of AWADtalk.
Aloha, WOW
A transcript of the chat is posted at
http://wordsmith.org/chat/jackie.html.
Well now--it was most interesting to read the transcript!
I see that there were some things left out. The only relevant thing left out, I think, was an important word in
one of belMarduk's questions: the way it is shown, she asks if I was raised in a family. But I recall reading the question at the time as: "Were you raised in a wordie family?". Makes rather a difference.
Some of the other things left out were the partial questions and answers. Several people wrote to me afterwards, and apparently I was not the only one to be surprised that hitting the Enter key sent the thing.
I was very glad to hear others' experiences--there were things that I didn't know. For example, apparently all of you could only see one question at a time. They were all on my screen, or at least all that Anu sent me--2 or 3, usually, and scrolled up as things were entered.
I was also unaware of private chats going on--was that what you meant, Jo, when you said your husb. was Bel's partner?
What you all may not have known is that I couldn't initiate anything: I could only respond! It was...quite an experience. I um, hope everyone keeps in mind that this was really a test run for Anu's new set-up. As I told a friend, it's not like I have a wealth of information that people are dying to hear. Made me rather squirmy, actually.
But anything for our Chief.
>was that what you meant, Jo, when you said your husb. was Bel's partner?
I missed the chat session but read the transcript. Well done, Jackie and everyone there!
I, too, was most intrigued and had to read Jo's post several times before I realized that Jo and Bel aren't sharing a man. I sincerely hope that what she meant by her expression 'My husband (partner to Bel) has been a guest...' is that the word she uses for a male spouse is 'husband', where Bel would use the term 'partner'. I laughed and laughed when I realized my misunderstanding.
In reply to:
I missed the chat session but read the transcript. Well done, Jackie and everyone there!
I agree wholeheartedly. I was very disappointed to have missed it, and the transcript confirms how well Jackie handled the challenge. Her interrogators deserve commendation also, for the thoughful questions posed. The only flaw was that the whole thing seems to have been over far too quickly. I wonder if Anu would consider having some of the other founding members, like tsuwm and jo, as guests at some future time.
>I sincerely hope that what she meant by her expression 'My husband (partner to Bel) has been a guest...' is that ...Er, just checked bel's original definition for partner and I got it wrong again.
http://wordsmith.org/board/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=words&Number=9799Either Jo was having a dig at bel for her definition of the word partner or Jo works with her (own) husband, or ...? Think I'd better desist from answering for other people and stick to something I know about.
In reply to:
I missed the chat session but read the transcript. Well done, Jackie and everyone there!
I agree as well. I'm really sorry to have missed it. I did wake up, but an hour too late. My fault -- my biological clock is getting rusty. The next one's at 11 p.m. here, past my bedtime but I can do this.
Bingley
From my experience in India, the most usual greeting is people holding out their hands for rupees ... sorry, cynicism will out. I'm a paid-up member, remember?
However, the formal greeting (namaste) is really quite special. Our flatmate (a friend who lives in our house from time to time) is currently in Nepal trekking. She should be back any day, and she's right into the subcontinental culture. I'll get her to demo then try to describe it for you all ...
Thinking of India and words, I went to Delhi for a SEARCC conference a couple of years ago. When I arrived, I saw that Comdex Asia, an INTERNATIOinformation technology showcase, was on at the Indian National Convention Centre. Since I had a free day the next day, I hopped a trishaw (or tuk-tuk? never can remember what they're called from country to country) and went early the next morning. There was a line for entry which I joined. Nobody asked for any money. I thought this was dead creepy! I filled out a form, had my photo taken and was handed an ID card on a cord to hang around my neck. Didn't really think anything of it - customs differ from country to country, after all - until I saw a sign saying that December 5 was a closed day for invited guests and the press only ... Looked at my watch, and sho 'nuff, it was December 5. Of course, I was dressed in pretty much standard reporter gear, jeans and chukka boots, with a camera and a camera case slung around my neck. Easy mistake on their part, hmmm? Anyway, a lot of photos, a marriage proposal, a few choice stories (only one of which was ever published) and a lot of free food later, I left, tired and happy. I still have the ID card which, when I looked carefully, had "PRESS" prominently printed on it.
Thanks for the transcript and thanks to Jackie for being the 'guinea pig'. Is there a collective term for participants in a chat session? Chatterers, chatters, chattees …
I would like to add my congratulations to all who took part, and my regret that machine problems preented me from joining them.
The transcript makes it look like good fun, and a special congratters to Jackie, who I know was terrified but has kept any hint of that out of her responses, like the good trouper that I know she is!
I'll make sure that I get in on the next one!
Well done, everyone, and thanks to Anu for setting this all up.
Jackie wrote:
> Well now--it was most interesting to read the transcript!
> I see that there were some things left out. The only relevant thing
> left out, I think, was an important word in one of belMarduk's questions:
> the way it is shown, she asks if I was raised in a family. But I recall
> reading the question at the time as: "Were you raised in a wordie family?".
> Makes rather a difference.
I was surprised to read this as I didn't omit anything except for incomplete
messages that were produced as a result of hitting ENTER too soon.
I went back to the transcript and found that the word `wordie' was still there.
belMarduk had enclosed the word in angle brackets. If you know how HTML works,
it treats any text within angle brackets as a tag and doesn't display it. I've
removed the angle brackets and if you reload the transcript page, you should
see the word `wordie' loud and clear.
> Some of the other things left out were the partial questions and answers.
> Several people wrote to me afterwards, and apparently I was not the only
> one to be surprised that hitting the Enter key sent the thing.
> apparently all of you could only see one question at a time. They were all on
> my screen, or at least all that Anu sent me--2 or 3, usually, and scrolled up
> as things were entered.
This test session was useful as we discovered a few glitches. belMarduk (and
probably a few other people) suggested posting the question in the chat for
everyone to see instead of sending it to the guest first. I'll experiment with
this and it may be a better approach as attendees will see the question first
and they will know the answer to what question the guest is typing at the
time, instead of having the question and answer appear at the same time.
> What you all may not have known is that I couldn't initiate anything: I could
> only respond!
This may be my fault in that I didn't explain it to Jackie very well. The guest
can type any message in the chat window and it will appear for all the
attendees. In other words, the guest is not limited to answering questions only.
Thanks again to everyone for participating.
Anu,
It was a good first attempt. The timing of your session with the maestro of the OED is ever so slightly inconvenient for antipodeans, however ...
Could you make it 7 p.m. GMT in future? That way most of the board users could probably "attend".
>My husband (partner to Bel)
Thanks Marty for unravelling my mention of the word partner in the above quote. I think you were spot on!
I only noticed it myself, when reading the transcript, just now – oh dear! I am definitely not sharing a relationship with Bel (although I don’t rule it out as a concept, given enough money for airline tickets!!!!)
I think the short answer was that it was a quick, off the cuff, joke that didn't really work in the slo-mo nature of the chat session. In a more quick fire situation, I would have been able to hint at the reason but it was all a bit slow and certainly doesn't stand close inspection. Think conversation, rather than essay.
It did indeed relate to Bel's posting on the subject of partners. It would have worked better (and would have been funnier) as "my partner (husband, to Bel)", thus demonstrating the inherent weakness in the on-line-chat process. Even though I can type nearly as fast as I think. I can't do this as grammatically as I would like. To prove it, I have already made several corrections to this message and it still isn’t quite right.
I am sure that because our brain has been trained to take in years of perfectly honed and re-written prose, our brain is rather unforgiving of the imperfectly written word, even when we know that it has been written quickly in a conversational way. The written word, as we have said many times, is robbed of the “twinkle in the eye” that gives away a subtle touch of irony and renders a joke “readable”
This creates a problem in some environments. Do we accept that communications will become more "quick fire" allowing for the possibility of inaccuracy or misunderstanding? Alternatively, do we set higher standards for e-communication, where communication is checked to the same standard as a business letter? In business and politics, misunderstandings cost time and money. We don’t write verbatim minutes of a meeting, should we be careful in publishing a verbatim report of a “chat” conversation. Here, we are amongst friends and no big decisions are being taken, so it doesn’t really matter. In the wider context, how many negotiations conducted using a chat or a whiteboard would bear scrutiny?
I think that there is already a change in the way that we write, and that there are different changes depending on context.
I use e-mail constantly to converse/communicate with my work colleagues. We have developed a chatty style of writing for casual "conversation" messages which has a close analogy to the way we speak when we are face-to-face. We have a totally different style when it is an "Official Communique."
As for misunderstandings - well! The potential for misunderstanding in face-to-face conversation is limitless (especially if you are married to the respondent!
) In some ways, written conversation is better in this respect, as there is time to reconsider a response, and to search for a different meaning. This is nullified, to some extent, in a chat-session such as we have just experienced, of course, but I think that, so long as participants are aware of the potential for misunderstanding and are tolerant, (as everyone is, on this board
) a convention will build up that removes the worst possibilities for dissent (but probably won't remove the potential for descent
)
Here's a namaste emoticon for y'all:
C=
Enjoy smile
pk
Here's a namaste emoticon for y'all:
C=
Enjoy smile
pk
how is this a नमस्ते emoticon?
... and what's it doing in this old thread? Fun to re-read the thread, though.
... and what's it doing in this old thread? Fun to re-read the thread, though.
well, pefty (he of the two, and only two, nearly identical posts) necro'd the thread.
Hey, Anna--nice to see you here again! [hug]
Hey, Anna--nice to see you here again! [hug]
Would be nicer to see you in other threads too.