week 1 (directions for discussion were basically that you needed to reference the assigned reading... take a critical stance... try to talk about something new versus a rehash what everybody else is talking about... ~350 words per week)
-----------
Continuity trumps formality, Gatekeeper phenom, Cybersquatting, E-commerce Interactivity
-----------
After having read the assigned writing in addition to
the class discussion, there are several observations I'd
like to make.
The first pertains to speed and my tendency to use
short-hand when communicating w/ others. Many have
expressed an annoyance w/ textual brevity. When
conversing on the internet, my belief is that formality
takes a back seat to continuity. Put differently, when
composing an e-mail or a bulletin board post such as
this one, I do not concern myself w/ proper salutations
or closings. On the other hand, it is very important
to me that my audience is able to read my message
smoothly, and I always try to edit them accordingly.
For example, I will use shorthand when I can be
reasonably certain that my audience will not stumble
thru my writings, confused as to what they mean. To
that affect, sentence fragments are a big no-no, but
what difference does it make if I use an abbreviation
such as 'b4' instead of typing the entire word 'before'?
or 2morrow for tomorrow? Tho for though? What about
failing to capitalize a proper name? A reader's
judgement based upon such negligible issues as these are
unfounded, and arguably shallow.
I want to be sure that my message can be read fluently.
Apart from research papers and other important documents
where speed ought not be a prominent factor, my belief
is that readability should be of primary concern. My
thinking is that most professors/doctorates are unlikely
to take offense if you neglected to address them as
such, or failed to say goodbye in a courteous manner.
They instead want to have been able to understand your
question or comment, w/out having to re-read it.
Another item from the reading and discussion I'd like to
post a thought about is reach; specifically as it
pertains to the 'lack of a gatekeeper' phenomenon.
Because it is so democratizing, this is one of my
favorite aspects of the internet. The best current
example of such are the few iraqi people whom are
blogging regularly about their thoughts and actions.
You simply cannot get this type of info from television
or newspapers.
Gurak also makes mention of anti-cybersquatting laws,
which now make it illegal for someone to knowingly
register a domain name that consists of a trademarked
name/product. She does say however that this can be a
blurry distinction at times. I was reminded of a
semi-recent news event whereby Mike Rowe, a young
software engineer, was coerced into taking down his
website 'www.mikerowesoft.com' at the request of the
microsoft corporation. He was ultimately not forced to
do so legally. Realizing the ambiguity of the situation
and perhaps knowing that a legal victory might be
impossible, microsoft decided to settle w/ the teen. (
If interested, here are the terms of the settlement :
blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com
)
Lastly, Gurak mentions that interactivity can help to
facilitate e-commerce. I couldn't agree more. She
offers an account of her own poor experience w/ an
internet service provider... which ultimately led to her
no longer being a customer. My opinion is that the very
best online commerce sites encourage interaction amongst
their customers, as well as their staff. 'Word-of-mouth'
is perhaps the most powerful form of marketing, and any
company that tries to stifle this form of interactivity
runs the risk of being left in the dust. |
