This is a continuation of where I left off in my previous post. 

Last night the Aaron Sorkin/David Fincher movie,  The Social Network won the Golden Globe for best picture.  Each time the movie was mentioned during the show, I was  wincing as I recalled what happened when I produced some of my arguments re: The Social Network movie’s accuracy re: Zuckerberg and Internet  culture in an actual discussion thread following the release  on  video of The Social Network last week. (see * below for a summary of my argument,  which was originally developed after I saw the movie during its theater release week)

This was one  of those “foot in mouth” moments that can shake us and embarrass us as profoundly as face to face debates can when we feel we have taken something too far,  or ,  in this case,  inject it where it goes far beyond what was called for by the thread.  Not only did I have the effect of questioning the legitimacy of the initial comment,   I posted several follow up “clarifications” and ended up eliciting a response to the effect of “we don’t really care”,  which I deserved.  I immediately posted an apology,  and sent a personal email to the original author of the thread,  someone I have actually met in person,  but only once,  so I worried about the fragility of that relationship that had arisen over Facebook over a few short months.

My regret here is that I let myself get pulled behind that veil or shield that “emboldens” us to put an argument forth in ways that we would be hesitant to do in face to face.  And the non-verbal looks I would get from the outset would “signal” to me that I have strayed or introduced an unwanted,  uninteresting angle to the conversation.  The initial comment was actually a joke (tongue in cheek),  but I responded with an entirely intrusive, irrelevant “rant” (basically the points I outlined above re: the Social Network movie).

That was almost 2 days ago,  and there has been no response,  which is another pitfall of  online interaction.  The parties involved may well have not been online since then.  It is also possible  that the “veil” that emboldens us to behave differently and respond differently, like ignoring the apology,  (if that is what has happened, I still don’t know),  could be in effect on the other end.  It is entirely likely that they would have ,  having seen  my actual face and my actual distress at realizing I was behaving in a manner inappropriate for the discussion (which I was)  ,  would have been immediately forgiving upon my apology.  So time,  isolation,  and “online norms” are often distressingly strange for us still,  even though we supposedly have accustomed ourselves to online community. 

I have to admit that there was a haughty element in the motivation to post the “arguments” to this thread.  A couple years ago a casual office conversation was humorously pointing out how documentaries sometimes elicit a sense of elitism in its viewers,  so they can “dazzle” their peers with new found knowledge about a topic.  So into any conversation they can inject something that comes across like “you must have missed this documentary I saw.  Let me INFORM you of these amazing new facts”.  That conversation was the source of a few future joking references like “You didn’t see the documentary?”

I used a variation on this “documentary” technique,  only this time the source material is based on some curated articles and discussions I had via Facebook and Twitter.  I saw the “opportunity” to “correct” people,  and it fell flat,  and I deserved it.

* moved this to http://wp.theoblogical.org/wp222/?p=6677