[quoting Rieber, 27 Sep 95] The most interesting part of AOL for me so far is the last thing I would have expected--chatting in various 'rooms' of the "People Connection" (people who really know me know I don't like to chat).
Although I don't have time to be the chat junkie I used to be, the appeal is interesting, isn't it? I'm not a fan of face-to-face communication, especially small-talk things where I'm not sure of the boundaries, but let me hide behind the computer and I'm a social butterfly. I've never used America Online (AOL), but I've found tons and tons of telnettable chatsites around the globe. It's amazing the variety of people you can meet (and a tad depressing, how the majority of them aren't varied--you kinda have to seek out the interesting ones); and, since some users go from talker to talker ("talker" being one of these telnettable sites, sort of a cross between IRC and MUD; most are general-purpose, i.e., no one topic dominates them, although they are set up spatially, with "rooms," descriptions, bits of atmosphere, to get away from the somewhat sterile feel of some chat services), there can be a real sense of community, visiting a new place and finding people you know already there.
I have been spending enormous amounts of time in rooms with names such as Thirtysomething and Trivia talking to people all over the country (I've learned that Tom Reeves' jokes bomb and Ron Zellner's jokes are a hit). I've even been bold enough to enter such dark and mysterious places as The Flirt Nook and The Romance Connection (I've only 'lurked' here during my brief stays; don't worry, my wife knows--she's amused at my sudden immaturity).
Hm.... I can just imagine sociological studies being done on net.romance and net.sex (there are actually books to introduce one to the concept, if you can make it through them without laughing yourself into tears); I picture the word "tacky" being mentioned a lot. With all the talk on netculture being a space for release of inhibitions, and as well with the dangers of that release (witness the AOL working with the FBI to nab people transmitting child porn), I think we'll be seeing a lot more press about the "dark and mysterious places" on the net.
Makes me wonder (not so much the net.sex part, but the whole idea of this culture springing up), if discussion is more free in these spaces, if barriers to communication are broken--what are the implications for education? A group I'm in will be giving a presentation on computer conferencing for a class next week, and we discussed whether to include these chatlines in the discussion. It brings to mind lots of questions: How do you adapt an existing culture for your own purposes (in this case, to teach)--or do you try to reinvent the culture? Is it possible to instruct someone, in a space where lecture and long sentences are impossible? Is it viable to hold, perhaps, smaller-scale discussions on a talker, or is that purpose better served by e-mail? Is the real-time aspect (and real-time which is ever so much cheaper than video) worth it? Or, is this just a case of liking the technology, so figuring it must have an educational niche?
What's amazing is that I think I'm actually learning something about human nature. I'm also beginning to wonder if and when people are using deception, such as not logging on as themselves...
I have some strong opinions about what you're calling "deception." For one, I really don't want people to see my full name, e-mail address, etc. (not too hard, with that information, to gopher to a phone book and find out way too much about me!), unless it's someone I trust, or in a forum that has expectations of professionalism for its members. Also, I think that there's this understanding, given the informal nature of the chat groups, that what we're engaging in is play, pretend, separate from our real lives--choosing your own name is kinda liberating, psychologically. I don't doubt that there is a degree of deception, but in ways frighteningly close to that in the real world, and, from what I've seen, such heavy-duty deception seems to be more an aspect of the troubled folks on the net, rather than just the choosing of a fun new name by someone logging on to enjoy oneself.
But my real question is whether sociologists are using such "rooms" for their research. I'm not a sociologist, but I'd be interested if anyone knows about/recommends books about research on this.
Actually, there are a number of online studies about life and society in some of these chat groups (mostly muds, I think, since they have the longer history); I'd be happy to poke around my bookmarks to find them, if anyone is interested. The question of ethics, however--yowp. Having agreed with Dr. Schrum that a great deal of common understanding is needed for use of usenet posts, listservs, etc., for ethical research--I wonder if the rules might not be different in chat groups. Certainly they allow for more of an "immersion" into the culture, more chances for interaction with the "natives." Do the same old rules apply? In a room of 30 people, do you ask each one if you can use their words? Is it enough to ask the sysop of such a group (or whatever might be analogous in AOL, eworld, or other Internet service providers that provide their own chatrooms) for such permission? It'd be interesting to find out.