Hey Guys
Sorry this is late, my internet wasn't working this morning. Don't we love technology!
Dibbell spends most of the article explaining and writing about the events of the ‘Rape in Cyberspace’ and it’s aftermath, but in the midst of his recounting, he does in fact raise several important issues about the nature of interactions within digital communities. Dibbell outlines how problematic it is to define what was essentially a text based encounter as ‘rape’, and indeed the problem of punishing it in any meaningful, yet proportionate way.
Question 1: Would we ourselves classify this text based encounter as “rape” despite the non physical nature of the crime, or was it simply a string of text that caused offense.
Dibbell provides testimonies from the parties involved as to the ‘real life’ effects of the crime to confirm the interactions on LambdaMOO as potentially “profoundly compellingly, and emotionally meaningful”.
Question 2: Have we ourselves have any experiences online that were profoundly compelling and emotionally meaningful e.g in online games or anonymous chat rooms or the like.
The “distinctions between the virtual and physical versions” of crime are further explored in the idea of capital punishment for the offending Mr. Bungle. The return of the real life person behind Mr Bungle in a different guise is viewed almost casually, Dibbell describing it as an almost inevitable result of a punishment that was “no more or less symbolic than [the] crime”.
Question 3: Did we feel the punishment given to Mr. Bungle was enough, or did it deserve a punishment more permanent. Does this sort of incident and it’s difficulty in punishment point to the law surrounding online harassment not being adequate.
The fascinating development from all this was of course the development of “a system more purely democratic than any that could exist in real life” and a justice system, concepts usually associated with the physical world.
Question 4: Because of their anonymous and allegedly liberating nature, do we feel the internet and online communities allow for a more democratic experience than the real life, especially when it comes to the idea of justice.
Dibbell argues that meaningful social interactions in an entirely text/language based world blurs the boundaries between thought/word and deed. However, he offers no solution that might protect “our precarious freedoms of expression” from this potential threat.
Question 5: Do we have any ideas as to how problems like those that occur in “A Rape in Cyberspace” can be avoided while protecting freedom of expression and speech.
Looking forward to some interesting discussion baed on the questions outlined above and really with this article it isn't hard to have lots to say because it is a very engaging yet very confronting look at online communities.
See you on Wednesday,
Luke
I did print cultures/screen cultures last semester where we had to do an interactive fiction text (which is basically where you contribute to the story and the direction it takes) and based on my experience of this I'd say that it is not that difficult to become emotionally involved in online environments - even if the response is mainly frustration! Also following from this I would argue that the more complex the environment the more involved you are able to become.
ReplyDeleteI think in the Mr Bungle case the punishment fit the crime. Despite seeming like a sadistic jerk its hard to say whether 'Mr Bungle's' online violence would ever translate into RL violence but I think that by dealing with his actions within the realm where they occurred helps maintain a distinction between the real and the virtual.
Hey Sam
ReplyDeleteI would definetly agree with the punishment fitting the crime. I think that the whole idea of the Internet, especially re: online gaming, is to allow people the freedom to adapt to different roles and experiment with social interactions and I think it would be a very risky thing to assume that Mr Bungles online act s translate into real life actions, although this does raise some points in terms cyber stalking, as we discussed in earlier tutes, because often cyber stalking does cross over into the physical world.
Luke, you raise some interesting questions. For the first question, I don't beleive that it was rape, as far as IRL translates to online, but it was a lot more than a string of offensive words, due to the emotional attachment the people had with their avatars, and the personal relationships that everyone had developed with each other. As Dibbell said '... it must be classed as a crime against the mind...' (Dibbell, 212) Where do you draw the line for physical interaction in the case of rape online? Mr Bungles user actively typed through the keyboard and his actions caused physical result in the people he took over, but ultimatley everything that occured did so online, for me that would make it a mind crime. However, this was done in a realm where anything went, it was up to the users to place their boundaries, technically speaking what he did didn't go against the user conditions. Morally it was distasteful, but he was within his rights at that time. I agree with both you and Sam that the punishment was fitting, when he created a new avatar it seemed that he had learned from his lesson. There are some people where online release of sadistic tendencies is a therapy, and others where it leads up to them carrying out these fantasies IRL. There is no way of knowing who will go what way, but I don't beleive the internet itself leads to people acting out their fantasies IRL.
ReplyDeleteYour second question is answered with an 'Of course'. My family live away from me, so the use of the internet is a cheap and convenient way for me to keep in contact with them. Same for many of my friends. It helps to keep them closer to me, when I can't be near them physically. Very emotionally meaningful.
As for profoundly compelling, my friends son died 2 years ago, and instead of flowers and well wishes, she wanted us to donate to his cause instead. She was having trouble deciding the best way to go around creating a charity for him, so through the use of e-mails and FaceBook, we(all spaced geographically apart) her friends were able to share information and ideas quickly among us, so she could see everything that was going on, without having to repeat herself, and keep reliving the pain. Ultimately we came to a plan, and she followed through with that, using an existing charity and setting up an extra section just for her son. This includes a website where you can give online donations. There are pictures of her son up there, so you can go and remember him. For everyone involved it was a highly emotional time, and visiting the website raises those emotions all over again.
Question 4, I don't know that online communities are more democratic in their dealings, certainly each community has it's own way of dealing with situations, and when you sign up to them you are made aware of how they do things, but I find most places have a 'group mentality'. Sometimes it's democratic, othertimes it's just the way they do things. Being online is liberating, people find it easier to say things that they wouldn't otherwise find themselves able to say IRL.
Question 5, it's a matter of going to chat rooms, forums etc that have similar interests. There are undoubtedly places online where what Mr. Bungle did was not only accepted but welcome. It was unfortuanate that he chose to carry out his actions in an arena where they weren't. I can only suggest lurking at new places that one wants to visit and decided if it's the place for you. Overall most people act towards others online as they would IRL, but if you want to go online and act out in a different manner I don't think you should be censored, I just think you should go to an area that welcomes you. Most online communities have an outline of accepted behaviours and the repercussions of misbehaviour. Aren't these measures enough for online issues? If misbehaviour starts moving IRL then local law enforcement agencies can take care of it.
I think that the punishment given to Mr Bungle was fair, particularly as so many members of the online community felt so strongly about his toading. However, the fact that he is able to create a new avatar and go back to the community in which he raped two of the members, makes me question whether the punishment was harsh enough. I assume the two rape victims are aware that he has created a new avatar and is online, and i would guess that they don't feel too comfortable about his presence in their community. Just a thought..
ReplyDeleteAlso in response to your final question, do online communities actually have a set of rules and list of repercussions for misbehavior? I would think that problems like this could be avoided in the future if people were aware of the laws of their online communities and were aware of the punishment that would occur if they were to break any of these rules.