navel gazing

[piranha]

i spent today starting to catch up on the last 3-4 weeks of LJ. i didn't get all that far, and you people keep writing more stuff while i am reading! :)

since i've figured that once i stop writing here for a couple of days, that means i'll stop for weeks, i have to go back to posting at least every other day, even if i feel i don't have much to say.

i have a post all planned mostly for teal on UV mapping, but need a render a few more pictures.

the most thoughtful thing i can write about today i already wrote as a comment elsewhere, *snicker*. i might as well copy it here, and add some additional thought. this was written in response to a post musing about intimacy and friendship on LJ.

it struck me as interesting that i've been in no danger of mistaking LJ befriendings as actual friendship. i've gone through the whole odd disconnect about pseudo-intimacy before online, however -- maybe i've just learned my lessons already. or maybe the disjointedness of it all makes me not even get close to feeling on intimate terms with people i only know on LJ -- i only see what they decide to post in their own journals, and as comments in mine, and sometimes as comments in people's LJ where we overlap; unlike on usenet where, when i take an interest, i can check out at length what else the person has had to say in various newsgroups over a number of years. while i do get to find out more intimate details here, the overall picture seems to me much slower in development. i see it in myself -- i post about smaller and more personal stuff as my daily life provides, but i am much less likely to write about deep philosophical issues. and my friendships have tended to form over such discussions rather than over sharing lots of little tidbits -- that comes later, when i already am friends with somebody. deep discussions have too short a halflife on LJ for me to even bother commenting much when others do these days. the interface is just too klumsy for sticking with a conversation for days, nevermind weeks.

which is a sadness, because i think LJ would be cooler than usenet if it facilitated that sort of discussion better instead of focussing so much on what everyone wrote today, and yesterday is out of sight already.

i've made quite a number of friends on usenet (and prior to that on PLATO). i met both of my current partners on usenet. i haven't made a friend yet on LJ. it's not that LJ isn't "real life" -- i've not made any friends in some places i've lived either. and i've never made this distinction between the net and " real life"; i think it's a silly superficial distinction. but it's that the LJ format and i don't fit all that well, despite it appearing like an introvert's dream at first glance. it's more of a broadcast than a communication medium for me, and that leaves something distinctly lacking.

on the plus side, and this is a pretty big plus, it does allow me to keep in closer touch with lots of friendly acquaintances whom i already know somewhat from elsewhere. all the little bits of daily life would never be posted to usenet, and with many of the people on my reading list i'm not close enough for daily email, *heh* (and who could keep that up anyway), so yeah, overall it's definitely a net gain. but i need to apply some stick-to-itness when my attention is riveted elsewhere and i write off my daily bits as not interesting enough for others -- right; if i like to hear yours, why shouldn't you like to read mine.

the little bit for today is that i've played with two different pieces of software which i both like quite a bit: eovia's hexagon is a polygon modeller, and i really like its workflow; it's the first modeller i've encountered where the interface strikes me as pretty darn intuitive, and where i feel one doesn't have to read a 500 page manual before actually being able to produce a decent model. the other spiffy software is spiral graphic's genetica pro 2.5, a procedural texture generator. i especially like the layering and weathering effects one can create.

Comments

[janetmk.livejournal.com]

Glad you're back. I'm always pleased to see your LJ entries.

[ckd]

I'm not sure how I missed pecunium's post originally, but thanks a bunch for (a) linking to it and (b) adding your thoughts on it.

[crazed-lynn.livejournal.com]

I certainly use LJ as a broadcast tool sometimes. But it feels more like a journal to me than any kind of communications medium. It's just not a private diary.

The kinds of things I write in my LJ and the style I use are the same as the year I kept a paper journal.

Someone reading my LJ is going to get a clearer picture of who I think I am than someone reading my posts anywhere in Usenet. Further, reading my LJ is a broader picture of me than one would get in routine live conversations. I am not constrained by the agreed upon topic in my LJ.

I do make a distinction between "real life" and the net. Even though I'm not all that visual, I do use my mental image of them as the container for what I know about them. Back in Soc.Singles days, I routinely conflated several regulars. After my first boink, though, I "knew" those who were there.

Glad you are posting again. I was wondering how the maya playing was going.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

that's interesting -- your LJ is one of those i think of as very clearly in the "broadcast" category, and it's surprising to me that you keep it much like you'd keep a private diary. my private diary looks quite different from this, and i definitely view my LJ as a broadcast venue -- broadcast to anyone who already knows me, though, as opposed to a lot of blogs which are designed to broadcast to strangers.

the bit about the containers for people being visual, that's very intriguing, and it might help explain why there are so many people who make the distinction between "real life" and the net (which i don't make at all, and i also don't have visual containers for people). i shall write a separate post about that, i think.

i've not just been playing with maya, but am basically learning polygonal modeling. really learning it, instead of just playing around with it to test something. trying to find the approach that works best for me.

[firecat]

I haven't made any new in-person friends via LJ; sometimes I feel I get to know someone better thru their LJ than I got to know them thru Usenet. I HATE the nonsupport for extended discussions.

I've gotten into a habit of not writing "daily bits" here and not really using it as a blog either. Gotta think about what I want to do with it.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Hrmn... I made a couple of friends on Usenet, and in bbses (one of whom is on LJ), but the sense of community there was pretty limited. In a couple of groups, where I had real commonality of interest, but apart from those it was a debating society.

Listserve did a bit better, but still a narrow focus.

Where I see Lj being different is a result of the semi-internal nature of it. Since each person has a piece of the net which is theirs, and theirs alone, they have freedoms they didn't/don't fora like usenet, and listserve groups.

Usenet, esp. suffers from the tragedy of the commons, in that no one owns it, and so no one has any vested interest in preserving it.

Lj, for all it's flaws, by virtue of the f-list is different from a stand-alone blog, because it allows for a sort of intimacy. The revelations of the mind's-eye are not something I have to search out. They are presented for me to read, in much the same way a letter is. They are delivered to me.

Which has the illusion of intention.

Which illusion can lead to drama, and pain, for the unwary.

That essay was a riff on some drama which happened elsewhere, and had to be delayed, lest the spark be rekindled, for the same false reasons. The catalyst wasn't the cause.

TK

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

i think one's usenet experience can differ greatly, depending on where exactly one gathered it. i've been on usenet since... uh... 1974? don't quite remember. and i've seen different groups have vastly different atmospheres. when i look at my flist here, i can see that reflected (albeit also somewhat distorted because not everyone from usenet has an LJ) -- there's hardly anyone on it from news.groups and the many technical groups, but it's filled with people from alt.polyamory and soc.singles.moderated. the latter two groups have loads of community spirit (which shows itself also in the regular get-togethers of group members in meatspace), and people who do have a vested interest in preserving their little piece of the commons (and some of us have a strong sense of preserving the larger commons of usenet altogether).

but yes, LJ allows to a much greater extent for a sort of personalized intimacy. just that for me it doesn't work that way; in part because i am already familiar with the traps, but also in part because i just don't get really interested in the small details of people's lives unless i already know them, and to get to know them works way better for me when we're both present in a group of people discussing (not debating; i hate debate) various issues. and i miss that very strongly here.

*rolls eyes at LJ drama*. ghod yes. and your essay spoke well to some of the reasons why this is so. i was not disagreeing with most of it (except for the "real life" part), as more wandering off into my own experiences of intimacy in online communities.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I didn't see it as disagreement, per se, more as gaps in what I might have said, and so worth expanding on.

As a point of curiosity, where did you comment on it, since no one commented on it where I wrote it.

TK

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

in geekchick's LJ, in this thread: http://geekchick.livejournal.com/684424.html

odd that nobody commented in your own journal. oh heck, i'll never figure out what sorts of posts cause the flist to cough up a flurry of replies, while others lay silent as if nobody noticed them.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I actually saw it there, but was doing other things and it faded out of mind.

If I knew what would get reader response (and I've been doing public writing for 20+ years) I'd be making a lot more money in my spare time than I do now.

There's some stuff I can trigger all sorts of heat, but little light on.

What interests me more, in the present day, is who links. That is harder to find out.

TK

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

*nod*. i wish LJ implemented trackback, though i am generally less interested in who links, since i basically write for people i already know. still, it would be handy to keep track of conversations that have spun off in people's own journals. i always try to at least reference the post that started my own meanderings, but google isn't the best solution to find related material half a year later. see? this is the disjointedness of it all that frustrates me.

i was going to point you at ljseek, but i see you already found it. :)

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I found ljseek some time ago, but it was so-so, and when I had to reformat the computer the bookmark was lost.

Google, and ljseek don't seem to get into comments, only primary posts, so finding certain types of spin-off is problematic, at best.

I know I discussed some aspects of lent last year, interesting aspects, and ones I want to point people to in my post on Ash Wednsday, but alas it was to me.

[lcohen]

i actually have made some friends on LJ, through LJ, with LJ. or deepened existing friendships. but mostly these things translate to meeting in person sooner or later, simply because you can get on with someone like a house afire online and then have it simply not translate to face to face.

i would say that LJ, while not translating us from friendly acquaintances, has perhaps made it more likely that some day we would be friends? i mean i've always felt well-inclined towards you from what i knew of you on usenet and through other friends, but talking a little bit more one on one, having a little more sense of the days....? i don't know. people filter--they think "yes, i might get closer to that/no, this is all i need here?"