I am very grateful to the folks at A.W.A.D. for setting up these bulletin boards. I enjoy checking in regularly. And I hope they become so successful that someday Anu might set up a chat room. Meanwhile, does anyone know of any chat rooms where people discuss ideas & engage in witty quid-pro-quos (quids-pro-quo??), instead of merely giving each other *hugglez* or tossing out misspelled insults? Preferably non-java, since that goes by so fast it's difficult to construct a reasonably coherent post....
Thanks in advance. :-)
I too have been sorely disappointed in the lack of cogitation evident in most chat rooms. Can Anuone help? (Spelling is deliberate)
I also am delighted with this bulletin board, and A.W.A.D.
I used to consider myself something of a wordsmith, but not
so much of one now--some of Anu's have absolutely floored
me. I love it! It is SO nice to be able to say things and
actually have people understand! It is also lovely to see that other people are as interested in words as I am. I've been too wary to go into any chat rooms, but would probably try one here.
Hi again Anna,
I concur with your assessment of chat rooms, but I quote the meaning of the word chat from Merriam-Webster’s 10th:
chat \chat\ chat·ted; chat·ting v. [ME chatten, short for chatteren] (15th c) 1 : CHATTER, PRATTLE 2 : to talk in an informal or familiar manner –vt chiefly British : to talk to; especially : to talk lightly, glibly, or flirtatiously with -- often used with up
Informal dialog, whether on-line or verbal, tends toward the trite and banal. The beauty of the AWAD forum is that a thoughtful bit of wordsmithing can be collocated and edited before anyone else sees it. This has the two-fold advantage of preserving my image as an intelligent fellow, and of increasing the literacy level of items I read.
Personally, I’d rather hone my scrivener’s skills composing pithy epigrams, than hacking out mindless mulch amid a background of noisy textual chatter. Chat-rooms are for adolescent one-upmanship and flirtatious inanity, not for serious conversation.
Well, Jeff, while your point is taken, may I submit that if Dorothy Parker et al and Gertrude Stein et al could be witty at the drop of an innuendo, I suppose it's possible for some of us as well to achieve/enjoy that sort of social intercourse via the new medium, Merriam-Webster's definition of 'chat' notwithstanding. If I find such a place I will most certainly post it here. Meanwhile I continue to enjoy the educational experiences offered by these boards. :-)
I agree with the previous discussion. I like being able to pre-view what I've written before launching my half-mature thoughts on an unsuspecting world. I also like the opportunity to edit them, even after they've been posted (usually on spotting some embarrasing error). As a not particularly strong speller I find the spell checker gives very interesting interpretations to my writing. UK = Ukraine, for example. I'm used to gritting my teeth whilst spell checkers convert my careful prose to US English (color, not colour etc) but this spell checker has a mind of its own. A small comment on an otherwise very interesting new idea.
I've spell checked my last message - hope you like it.
I agree with the previous discussion. I like being able to pre-view what I've written before launching my halfway thoughts on an unsynchronized world. I also like the opportunity to edit them, even after they've been posted (usually on spotting some embarrass error). As a not particularly strong speller I find the spell checker gives very interesting interpretations to my writing. Ukraine Ukraine, for example. I'm used to gritty my teeth whim spell checkers convert my careful prose to US English (color, not colt etch) but this spell checker has a mind of its own. A small comment on an otherwise very interesting new idea.
In a way, it's sad that chatrooms are as banal and limited as they are. But considering what passes for discourse among our society, perhaps it shouldn't surprise anyone. It is difficult to maintain a serious discussion about important issues when one is limited to a few lines per "utterance." For deep discourse, message boards such as this one are the way to go.
On the other hand, if done creatively, for casual banter, bon mots and wordplay, chatrooms can be entertaining and exciting. My favorite AOL chatoom is frequented by a small cohort of punsters, jokers and word-trippers from teens through quintigenarians---our common bond: playing with language and entertaining each other. Fridays feature a word game where we invent fictional, frivolous, funny (and, sometimes, bawdy) expansions for acronyms. Saturday starts with a game called "Film-Flam," a variation on punning, easier to play than to explain. Sundays we pun for an hour, then write spontaneous haiku and limericks.
So, I'd like to take this opportunity to invite those of you who subscribe to AOL to be our guest in Rogue (chat category: 'Friends') any weekend. I'd be happy to send you our chat schedule. Drop me a line at: Hallyx@aol.com.
Stop by anytime. Tell 'em I sent you.
Hallyx
"`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.'
`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master--that's all.'"
---Lewis Carroll (1832-1898) [Through the Looking Glass]
I would be remiss not to mention one of the most -interesting- such areas that I have come across, although, truth be told, I do not know whether it has a chat room. The message boards are very fascinating. With posts titled "Unknown Brecht," and "Technoscience and the Politics of Extrapolation," it seems like quite a score.
Given AnnaStrophic's partiality to "intelligence," the respondents' predilection for considered messages instead of live chat, and my preference for perversity, the following URL may well be worth a look:
bbs.thing.net
Happy hunting.
----(Or, again, spell checked)----
I would be remiss not to mention one of the most -interesting- such areas that I have come across, although, truth be told, I do not know whether it has a chat room. The message boards are very fascinating. With posts titled "Unknown bred," and "Ted and the Politics of Extrapolation," it seems like quite a score.
Given Anne partiality to "intelligence," the responder predilection for considered messages instead of live chat, and my preference for pervert, the following urn may well be worth a look:
be
----It's scary! The spell checker is almost Freudian in its insight (that "be" at the end? The ego if I've ever seen it!). Certainly more diagnostic than "Eliza," and the reference to Keats's work near the end was superb!----
Thank you for pointing out the spelling was delibrate. I would have missed that, and would now be pointing out the error of you spelling. You have saved me the bother, thanks again. (Am not to sure about mine)
jopublic. Did you pull up a two-year old thread just to write that? That's very peculiar of you.
I don't go in for the huggie-feely stuff either, although it doesn't bother me most of the time. Nor do I feel that it necessarily detracts from the conversation. (Of course I do not mean to imply that you shouldn't feel the way you do.) Instead I just respond to the parts of a post that interest me and ignore the parts that grate or hold nothing for me.
Chats, whether moderated or not, are much like conversations, because they are a kind of conversation, similar to conversations that take place in a bar where people come in and out at leisure and join and leave conversations. Some people are rude, some are out to sell something, some are looking for free online therapy.
Having said all this, one place I've enjoyed hanging out in the past was on the undernet irc chatroom #mensa (no connection with the organization other than a few of the channel's founders were members). It's moderated (sometimes) and imperfect, but it's okay. There's a breakaway channel called #mensans which I have never entered, but is probably comparable. (Wild guess.) There are loads of other channels.
To use this, you'll need Mirc software. (There may be ways to do it over the web, but I assume you'd just as soon not.) If you're on AOL, you'll need the 16 bit version of the s/w even if you have a 32 bit machine. Just do a google search.
Diversion:
There are a *LOT* of boneheads on the internet. There's no way I'm going to let any of them stop me from going where I want, reading what I want to read, and saying what I want to say. This place has been my home for 20 years or more. This is not advice. It's not a recommendation. It's not a request. I'm just stating my philosophy - a philosophy with tenets I have failed miserably to uphold on far too numerous occasions, but which I nevertheless still believe to be essentially correct: Emulate the behavior you want to see. If you're the only one, behave how you want others to behave.
Six or 8 years ago, there was a query on maybe alt.culture.internet (or something like that). I was a regular lurker there, but not a regular poster. The writing was very clear (regarding the future of the internet). The Internet was expanding and there were all these kids coming on and making a mess of things, acting like punks and just generally being jackasses. There were people who thought there needed to be some age limitations for who could get on the net. (No idea how they thought they would enforce this.) I don't recall my exact words, but my general response was this. We don't have to worry about them. We only have to worry about us. Those young kids are going to see us already here and they're going to copy whatever we do, amplify it a hundred times, and throw it back in our faces. If we're patient and humble and easygoing, then things will only improve. If we act like morons, these new kids will be unbearable. And what has happened is a little of both (well, maybe a little more stupidity and nastiness than intelligence and nobility, but that's just a reflection of the world outside the net). Even then, though, the trouble wasn't young punks, but just plain old ordinary boorish people.
I know that if I'm waiting for perfection, it will be a long, long sojourn. I don't have high expectations. I don't expect everyone to like me or to get my jokes or be interested in anything I have to say. I don't expect it's everyone else's job to entertain me or keep me amused. I don't expect to be involved in every topic that arises. I'm must hanging out and if I happen to meet some cool people along the way, swap some memes, and share what passes for a sidewalk in these parts, well, that would be great. Meanwhile - I'm here anyway. This is my home.
Please excuse the mess,
k
About as peculiar as you responding to it. I was merely flexing my muscles.
Yes, you are very strange. Point noted.
Excuse me, gentlemen, I believe I was the one that resurrected a 2+ year old thread just a little over a month ago. I was just trying to make a point
.
Good for you. Lets keep the record straight at all costs.
Heh heh heh!
This was way back when everybody was a "stranger", and our wonderfully eccentric little spell-checker hadn't even been christened, although it was certainly noted.
Incidentally, the spell-checker was christened (as far as I can tell) by Jackie, here:
http://wordsmith.org/board/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=miscellany&Number=4453
You appear to have noted this point twice now, would this an error on your part or is it to demonstrate its importance?
...I was merely flexing my muscles.
That might be what you call them, but there are so many more *appropriate werds fer dem... maybe we can start a thread?
Rubrick, don't you dare dis jo-p anymore. I think I am madly in love with him. Oh, okay then. Shucks, some guys have all the luck......
>don't you dare dis jo-p anymore. I think I am madly in love with him.
as jopublic seems to have taken leave of our censure, would you be at all amenable to an unreasonable facsimile?
-joe public
Oooh, now I am MORE in love with both Rubrick AND tsuwm (masquerading as jopu)!
Damn, what's a girl to do? I mean, even if I go Mormon, will They let me have more than one feller at a time?!
Let us go in peace to love and serve the board.
