a few random thoughts

[leesean]

Maybe you should put the paper online in wiki form and see what the crowd of angry idiots do to it ;)

I understand that the choice to use the term "noisy idiots" is meant to be eye-catching and edgy, but what exactly do you mean by "extreme" viewpoints? If the Pirate Party or right-wing groups can elect MEPs to Brussels, than it represents in a way, that their views have been institutionalized or become more "mainstream" even if they are still minority viewpoints.

I guess what I have to more clearly distinguish between noisy/idiotic views and noisy/idiotic rhetorical styles (i.e. trolling). I have some far-from-mainstream political views, but I don't usually go around harassing strangers on the street or online about them. You make this distinction on page 8, but I guess it would have been clearer if the definitions were made sooner.

You do clearly state that the paper is not about minority viewpoints, but about bad netiquette, however, I would argue that behaving outrageously is almost an essential tool for a minority group looking to make change in the world, whether their persecution if real or simply perceived.

If you look at history, many (most?) revolutionary changes have begun with a small group of noisy idiots, who keep it up until something in the socio-political climate tilts in their favor. While compromise and meeting "in the center" are crucial to the sustainability of a democratic system, the seemingly pathological rantings of the lunatic fringe can serve as important indicators of the health of the body politic. The question then becomes, how and why would someone come to believe that all Muslims should be deported in the first place? (substitute with any other "noisy idiot" belief)

Online fora are a place to blow off steam. In the fora you describe, it is doubtful that the people involved actually know each other in real life, or their identities are safely hidden behind pseudonyms. If I'm a noisy idiot, I know deep down that my online rantings are not going change anything. I'm either preaching to the choir or annoying people who disagree with me. Bottom line, trolling online makes me FEEL GOOD without having to take any risks, unlike trying to foment direct action in the name of my idiot cause on the streets. Posting on an online forum allows me to air my opinions that I wouldn't otherwise hear in the mainstream media or political debate.

"Is there any other way." It seems that the established solution is to raise the walls of homophily. After all, isn't this why people live in gated communities, as to avoid the social friction of interacting with "the other"? Snark aside, the point is that the democratic process is messy, and not always civil and polite. YouTube Taiwanese politicians fighting to get an extreme case of what I mean. The more we scale up the size of a community, the more we have to break down into smaller units or sub-groups. That is why Congress has committees and the US is divided into states. We subdivide and compartmentalize in order to specialize and to better solve problems. The upside of homophily is reduced friction and increased group productivity and efficiency. The downside is that homophilous groups may get stale and eventually run out of new ideas. We do want Noisy Idiots sometimes to stir things up and "shock" us into new ways of doing things and inspire new ways forward. Noisy Idiots sometimes, but not too much. Find the balance and you save the princess and the Nobel Prize and World Peace are yours.

Also, tangentially related to your paper, you've seen this article, right?
Ideas Online, Yes, but Some Not So Presidential
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/technology/internet/23records.html
When the White House asked people to post ideas on open government on a new Web site, it heard about U.F.O.’s, marijuana and the president’s birth certificate.

The LS in SF
http://leesean.net

[leesean]

Haha, forking reminds me, on a smaller scale, of the first week in Red's class, when we had 8 people who barely knew each other trying to work on a presentation. We went round and round with ideas, everybody contributed, but there was not yet an established hierarchy (not that one is necessary or desirable) nor enough of a shared "culture" to really make a decision. So we "forked" into our original assigned groups of 4, and things seemed to work a bit more efficiently from there.

[Catherine White]

Lee-Sean, thank you for your thoughts, as ever, you have a great way of nailing the problem right on the head. Ok - so, yes - three types of Noisy Idiotness for sure: content, delivery or if you're really lucky - both. With regard to content, I completely agree with you, and have stated explicitly, we never want to silence those with a minority view - super important. With regard to the delivery - I agree again that sometimes those with different or challenging views really need to make a noise about it to get noticed.

So - here's the thing that makes me really gulp. Its your point about 'gated communities' - Clay and I were having a discussion a while about the concept of neighborhoods and accepted behavior. For example, you can get away with a lot more in St Marks than on Park and E. 81st for example. Is the natural conclusion of that gated communities? Is there a way to contruct and environment or neighborhood where its not just one melded homophilous group, where differences are celebrated - and yet the group is still constructive and gets stuff done?

One thing you've really helped with is that I need to define the problem a little better - and the Noisy Idiot definition needs working on too. The latter is being worked on right now, it was suggested to me recently to try and create a taxonimy of Noisy Idiots - ie why people are disruptive etc. - as not all Noisy Idiots are the same. As you correctly say, there are enviroments where subdivision and compartmentalizing is a good thing - just had a good email discussion on this with David W here at Berkman recently - the idea of forking. But, sometimes, people don't want to fork, and we all want to be part of the same conversation.

So very much looking forward to discussing when back in NYC! And thank you again for all your thoughts.

[Tom Glaisyer]

Perhaps posting your paper via www.mixedink.com might be a productive way to gain additions once you have the basic scaffolding of your ideas. (Probably doesn't make too much sense immediately.)