Date sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 03:22:27 -0500 From: Rod Engelsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [social] Linux lists
> Christian Einfeldt wrote: > > >On Saturday 23 April 2005 20:19, Rod Engelsman wrote: > > > > > >>Culture question: Why are some people on the Linux user's lists > >>such assholes? I know you get a few everywhere, but they seem > >>particularly prevalent there. They're like children. > >> > >> > > > >It is probably a matter of finding the right Linux user group (LUG) > >for you. I suppose that it's like any other club affiliation: you > >just have to find the right group for you. > > > > > Unfortunately, what passes for a local group is 90 miles away. I > subscribed to the mailing list, but haven't seen a single message other > than the confirmation, so they're not very active. > > >The linux mafia group I have found is pretty accepting of a simple > >end user like me. You might want to try going here and lurking for > >a while: > > > >http://linuxmafia.com/cabal > > > >They have a odd sense of humor. As I say, I would recommend that > >you lurk for a while, and then introduce yourself, and let them > >know your skill level, and then go ahead and ask them a question, > >if it is answers that you are after. > > > I much prefer usenet newsgroups for that sort of thing. Are they on usenet? > > > > > > > >It is possible that many members of Linux users groups have what > >might be referred to as a "too male" brain. I recall reading a > >reasonably well researched magazine article recently which showed > >that 9 out of 10 autism patients are male. Dustin Hoffman's > >character in Rainman was autistic. Autistics are referred to as > >having a "too male" brain. Apparently, there are structures in the > >hardwiring of the human brain which can form the partial basis of > >social sophistication, or lack thereof. Autistics have a reduced > >inability to anticipate or process subtle cues in interpersonal > >behavior, and in extreme cases, have trouble recognizing other > >human beings as being other than mere automotons. > > > Wow. That sounds exactly right. I remember reading something about > certain kinds of sociopaths, that the reason they can be so amoral is > that they don't see other people as being human. So killing somebody is > akin to killing an animal at worst. I have the opposite problem, I tend > to anthropomorphise animals. I eat meat, but I don't like to think about > that aspect of it. > > >Autism is not a threshold syndrome, where you either have it or you > >don't; it's a granular syndrome, which exists in varying degrees in > >many men. So it's possible that you might be dealing with > >low-grade autistics. My youngest daughter may fall into this category. It's not fun. > > > > > Some of them are just mean... no other word for it. Amen! > > The incident that precipitated the question was an exchange I recently > had on a linux group where somebody said that the CLI (command line > interface) was inherently superior to any GUI (graphical user > interface). I couldn't resist... I should have, but I couldn't. > Hoo Baby! That's the A-#1 NEVER respond to comment in ANY Linux Group ever! Sort of like chumming for sharks in a pack of great whites! ;-) > I won't go into all the lame tangents that some of them -- yeah, I was > arguing with about 4 or 5 people at one point, sort of like when Chad > would defend Microsoft -- would go into to avoid having to back down an > inch from their extreme position. But this one guy was interesting, and > I'm still pondering the last thing he said, "If it isn't in ASCII, I'm > not interested." > > I had put forward the point that a lot of flame wars on the Internet > were the result of the lack of side-channel communication. You know, the > subtle social cues that you pick up on from expressions, body-language, > etc. You can't always tell when someone's serious, or poking at you in > fun, or whatever. That bare, written word, unless in the hands of a true > language artist like Maya Angelou or Ernest Hemingway, is a very > limiting form of communication. > > His response floored me, I had no clue how to respond. But you > mentioning autism puts me in mind of Ausperger's Syndrome, a kind of > high-functioning autism. Unless he was just being a lying asshole to > make some sort of geek points, I bet that's what he is. That would > explain it perfectly. He assigns no meaning to side-channel because he > simply can't! As smart as he is, and he's some sort of electrical > engineer dealing with digital filtering theory, the fact is that he's > dumb as a rock when it comes to social cues. And that embarrasses him, > and being embarrassed pisses him off, and so he responds by being > arrogant and condescending. Hunh. Interesting. > > Talk to you later, > > Rod > Wow! That Ausperger's syndrome sounds so like me ... scary. I don't get side channels and body language very well at all, and I actually prefer writing to speaking. Somehow more unambigious to me. I'm not very arrogant, though, nothing to be arrogant about! My normal way of thinking about people is to ascribe the best motives, and that the word choice may not be what they intend. I use smileys a lot to specify when I'm being ironic or trying to convey a not completely literal meaning. Sorry, it's just weird to hear about that syndrome and have so many things suddenly 'click' for me. Sort of off topic. But I think that there is merit to that being some of the explanation. I remember being tormented endlessly in 5-8th grade for being "different" ... never could figure out why. Anyway, if I were a little more ... I don't know ... something like vengeful? ... I can see myself easily getting caught up in absolutely blasting some "weenie winblows luzer" for being so ignorant ... and downhill from there. There'd be an ample store of bitterness and spleen to vent, and alot of "I'll show you, you bully!" stuff. I could see that coming out in usenet/list maddness. Thanks for the insight. -Greg
