User talk:NoRagrets9

WikiAssignment 1: Educational project
There is very little in the world more amusing than watching a person fall flat on their face. I lay my confession on the altar: I am obsessed with human error. The world of Youtube is a seemingly endless abyss filled with simultaneously hilarious, horrifying and beautiful moments. There are millions of videos documenting children covered in paint, old ladies blowing out their fake teeth onto their birthday cake and university students slipping on the ice in front of a crowd of guffawing, iphone camera-ready spectators. These videos are commonly known as 'Fail' videos or 'Ultimate fail' videos, or 'Best pranks/scare' videos. Over the years these videos have spawned into sub-genres such as 'Wedding fails' or 'Animal fails'. The point is, if you find people looking a bit silly on tape funny, there is a video for it. This is not to say that these videos are not sometimes morally ambiguous or cruel, because some of them are, but this is the deal that comes with Youtube and the internet itself. Many videos are evidence someones bad day: if it looks more painful than dopey then a common reaction is wincing rather than laughing. It is not all harmless. My personal preference of 'fail' videos are stupid but benign, like an overzealous Labrador jumping on their owner relaxing in the swimming pool.

For Thorin, the adventure was to find the Arkenstone amongst the Lost Mountain's treasures and recover Erebor from Smaug: in my case, it's trying to find the gem of hilarity amongst the mediocrity. Finding a genuinely funny video on Youtube is like Golumn during his times of possessing the ring: precious. These videos are enjoyable not because I have an inflated sense of self, but because I merely enjoy a break from reality in the form of a middle aged forklift driver screaming at a fake spider. Speaking as someone who is in constant fear of having my ill-timed clumsiness recorded forever in the archives of the world wide web, I can appreciate the hypocrisy. However, until I find myself in 'Ultimate Fails 2016', the search continues. NoRagrets9 (talk) 01:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I think we all secretly enjoy watching such videos to an extent - and to seeing them in real life, of course. The emergence of sites like YouTube that are easy to use and upload to are a blessing for those of us that want to watch them; long gone are the days of having to wait for You've Been Framed and other such shows on a weekly basis for your dose of people and animals doing silly things. The search for decent clips in an oversaturated genre might be difficult but I feel that it's always worth it when you're finally rewarded with the silliest one that appeals to your humour! CalSmith96 (discuss • contribs) 00:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 1: Formative Feedback
While this post clearly responds to the article and engages the reader, it is worth taking account of your style and tone. In particular, the popular culture references are a bit over the top for the style. Your discussion would also benefit from links to specific examples, as you mention genres, but since there are a lots of these videos out there, linking would help. This would also enable you to demonstrate a greater understanding of wiki markup and its benefits. Your comments show an engagement with colleagues, but this could be extended through further critical engagement with their subject and its relationship to the module's topics

A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor: Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory entries may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. They may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. They may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. They might not demonstrate more than a single quick pass at the assignment, informed only by lecture and/or cursory reading. They may suggest reading but not thinking (or indeed the reverse). The wiki markup formatting will need some work. Sprowberry (discuss • contribs) 10:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments
Great article! 'Overzealous' is a very good word. My favorite funny Youtube video is probably the classic Sneezing Panda WiKirsten (discuss • contribs) 13:40, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I really liked your article. It was very creative and made me want to hit up YouTube.com later today. I often watch America's Funniest Home Videos which is a popular television show in the U.S. If you haven't seen it before, I suggest you check it out! It is full of slapstick comedy and traditional stories. Georgiamattie (discuss • contribs) 13:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Amazing article!I can relate to your sense of humour and also being prone to usually being the clumsiest person in the room.which is why I admittedly watch to make sure that I haven't been anonymously tipped as the biggest fail of the year.With the likes of snap chat, you can never be too sure who is keeping tabs on your daily mishaps without your knowledge.I also recommend adding Funniest vines to your Youtube watchlist.Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 18:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I really enjoyed reading your article! i also quite often find myself "you-tubing" when I find myself at a loose end and need some form of entertainment. It is at the tips of our fingers through the use of new technology like smart phones to watch simple things like watching a human beings or even animals making a mistake to fuel our entertainment any time we want it. Youtube "fail" videos can often be used as a method of socialising also amongst friends and family. We are all guilty for bringing up a fail video at the kitchen table to laugh at others expenses to cheer us up and show other people around us. I found your article very interesting in the respect that in the modern day with access to technology very easily, we have turned into a nation that gets a thrill out of watching cats trying to jump over the gate- one of my personal favourites! KZillwood02 (discuss • contribs) 22:30, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Great article! Really funny and interesting viewpoint on Ultimate Fail videos on YouTube. I especially like your 'Lord of the Rings' analogy. It is definitely interesting how such a mass audience enjoys these videos but for me I think they have a bit of a throwback appeal because it's like watching 'You've Been Framed' like I did when I was a kid... just without Harry Hill's annoying voiceover! Jdwharris (discuss • contribs) 19:44, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Interesting article. I have seen videos and read articles before about why we do this, why we enjoy seeing others pain. Part of it is that it is merely the foundation of comedy- we expect something normal to happen but instead we see something go unexpectedly wrong. Our response to the surprise is laughter. I think of videos with cats trying to jump to different places and falling short- You have an animal that is often graceful and agile, and it misses when you would expect it to make it. I think we laugh at (some) human pain because we can relate. Others comments and your own illustrate the point- we laugh at others slip-ups because we have slipped up before as well. Stafoya (discuss • contribs) 10:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikiassignment 2: educational project
It is a rather unnerving moment when you realize that the internet knows more about you life than your mother. Social networks cling to your every moment, basking in the gossip clad group messages of Facebook and urging you to show off your expensive holiday on Instagram. To me, social networking is simply a form of peacocking. I don't separate myself from this label: everyone is guilty of showboating at some point in time. What most people know but tend to ignore is the fact that their whole essence is laid bare on a computer screen. The complete submersion that occurs from these platform prevents people from being aware of their sheer visibility on the internet. Personally I am not a regular poster of picture or author of expletive filled rants. This is simply because anyone can see it, and by anyone I am especially mindful of future employers. This at least is under my control, but my past is not. There have been countless past occurrences wherein a person who, when younger and less wise, has posted something which could prevent them, or even dismiss them, from a job. I will not take that risk- I refuse to be rejected from my dream job because I said something stupid when I was thirteen. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 13:56, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments
You're interpretation of social networking as "pea-cocking" hits home with my experience of social media as a whole as well, however I cannot in good faith say I abstain from it all together myself. Do not misunderstand I don't like to flaunt achievements, for instance recently I got accepted into the universities study abroad program (ironically flaunting it right now) and the rest of the day watched my contemporaries and friends post about it notifying the world of their achievements, the classic one for people my age seems to be passing your driving test; I understand why people want to show off their achievements but personally it feels like searching for praise or "fishing" for compliments. I tend to keep my relationships on Facebook fairly private as I would rather place my trust in someone by telling them big news myself rather than projecting it onto the world as a whole. For me its an issue of intimacy and privacy rather than fear of getting caught by a company/job in the future, though obviously I do monitor the pictures I am tagged in, I don't like to write text posts for everyone to read because I value face to face relationships more. People who I used to go to school with can now easily be defined as simply an online relationship which is a worrying thought and I do not wish for that to happen with my "real-life" relationships. --DunkyNG (discuss • contribs) 01:06, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I think you brought up interesting aspects of social media. I do agree with you that they often are a form of pea-cocking and that, some less and some more, we use it to flaunt our lives. Personally, I don't post pictures or status updates that often either, but for instance I see everyday the easiness with which my younger sister does it. In particular, she spends hours on Instagram and posts from two to three pictures a day, which is definitely too many. The fact that I know her well in real life makes me realise that most of the things she says are indeed flaunted and exaggerated: a walk in the park near home becomes "a lovely adventure", an everyday meal "a perfect end to a day". With this I do not mean to criticise people who feel comfortable sharing this much but I can't help and wonder why we feel the need to romanticise and make "appealing" our day-to-day activities that are just mediocre. Perhaps, we are simply attracted to the idea of portraying our lives as less accidental and banal than what they really are. Also, as you mentioned, vetting processes and future employers have to be taken into account when posting. I do not know the level of depth they might go in, but just the other day a girl was dismissed from police training because of some hateful tweets on gay and black people that she posted when she was 15. Now, I'm almost inclined to say that she deserved it both because of what she said and because she should have known not to post that kind of remarks from a public account on such a big social media platform. However, the problem is always the same: who is in charge of regulating the way we might be vetted and the criteria used? I think that SNSs have always a double edged blade and as such we need to use them carefully. Everynameistaken15 (discuss • contribs) 10:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

With this new trend of screenshotting, if you post something risqué and then regret it and try to delete it, if someone has taken a screenshot of it, regrettably, it hasn't really gone. This is a particular faux-pass with celebrities or people with a mass of followers. The more followers you have, the greater chance there is that someone will have taken a screen shot and the error is out there forever.

I do agree that there is an element of peacocking but if one of my friends posts a picture of their baby scan to announce an impending arrival or someone has gotten engaged or passed their driving test, I feel happy for them and why shouldn't they share it? It's an important life event and they should feel an element of pride. I believe that posting selfies and seeing how many likes you can get is fishing and I agree it seems to be a technology enthused younger generation which have these habits (my sister included).Although the soppy declarations of love do get on my nerves and yes there is an element of peacocking in this respect. How many people post when they have had an argument with their other half? Seeing over-glamourised relationships on social media can also make you question your own. Should my partner be making me breakfast in bed and buying me expensive gifts or booking a surprise holiday? It can feel very intimidating and wondering your other half is living up to invisable standards. At the end of the day it is your closest most intimate people one should care about not the school friend you have on Facebook but never meet up with in real life. HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 10:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I like the use of the term Peacocking to explain your point fully. It is a quite a worrying thought that something unimportant you absentmindedly posted years ago could be used against you. That's obviously a worst come to worst scenario but it isn't unheard of. I suppose it's finding a balance between being reserved but also wanting to share your achievements with those on that platform, such as family members and friends, which is fully understandable. It is quite disturbing when you put too much thought into what some hacker could achieve with what you post online or what information about you could be found and traced, but the internet comes with its pros and cons. I like your style of writing, interesting to read, but also quite formal in its style. MLCRooney (discuss • contribs) 18:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki assignment 3: Information overload
The internet is endless. Or so one might then when desperately trawling through hundreds of results from seemingly innumerable pages. The next day, this information may be replaced with something deemed more credible, more popular or whoever has paid the most to get to the top of the Google hit-list. Therefore it is not easy actually finding what you originally sought to find. Unless what you are searching for is has an obvious first link, such as Facebook or gmail, it can become difficult to navigate your way through the chaff and the wheat. It is also very easy to forget the original goal when on the internet. Often as a student it is easy to open a Facebook tab when an essay lays abandoned next to it. Before you know it, three hours are gone with nothing to show for it. The black hole that is the internet (a term I use often to describe the internet but is not wholly negative) is a void that, while mildly entertaining, is like a sedative against the real world and goals.

It is also vital to be able to differentiate between a genuine internet source and true knowledge. A hospital is better than a Yahoo search: this is common sense. Yet common sense is often overridden by the overwhelming possibilities of the WWB: it is just as easy to find medical advice as it is to follow an internet guide of how to build a car. It is undeniable that the internet is a great source of knowledge, but distraction due to this influx of knowledge has rendered the internet too busy, too cluttered.

As Levi states in his chapter 'What is collective intelligence?', from the book 'Collective intelligence mankind's emerging world in cyberspace', "Intelligence is constantly enhanced. There is little doubt that intelligence is universally distributed. But facts must have some sort of concrete realization." (pg.14)

This leads on to whether you decide to read the click bait, click on the picture to reveal the gruesome image or find out if you really are the lucky winner of an ipad. It is rarely worth it. Even platforms that are regarded as useful can become a distraction. Checking emails filled with pointless competitions from addresses you do not remember giving your email to. It is undeniable that the Internet is a great source of knowledge, but distraction due to this influx of knowledge has rendered the internet too busy, too cluttered. One example of research into information overload showed that people took an average of nearly 25 minutes to return to a work task after an e-mail interruption. (Death by Information Overload). Work life is affected, home life, social life- there is not one part of life where staring blindly at a screen does not compromise the quality.

Every advert is tailored to something that was once looked at. Its not a case of buyers remorse: its internet shopping remorse. The moment Amazon sees that orange carpets have been viewed, expect to see an abundance of rugs on your social media page. This is the bargain we have made with the temptress that is the Internet. You will sometimes be seduced and get lost in a flurry of cat videos or expensive shampoo, with no idea how you got there. Sometimes a distraction on the Internet is good, but finding your way out (and staying there) can be more difficult.

NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 01:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

References- What is collective intelligence? Collective intelligence mankind's emerging world in cyberspace by Levi,P https://succeed.stir.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/library/eReserves/FMSU9A4_201516_Spring_A/FMSU9A4LevyWhat.pdf Death by Information Overload Paul Hemp Harvard Business Review https://hbr.org/2009/09/death-by-information-overload

Comments
Cannot relate to you more about opening the Facebook tab when essaying! Well done on relating your article to the week's reading, the idea of intelligence being 'constantly enhanced' is really intersting. I know I'm a sucker for clickbait, particularly when it looks like a seemingly short Buzzfeed article! But then you find yourself cliking the related links and one little distraction becomes a huge one! Good job √--WiKirsten (discuss • contribs) 17:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I totally understand the constant updating and the problems that come with it - and how it gets pretty difficult to keep up with. Especially when something at the top of the page disappears the next, and takes you ages to try and find that one original thing. Everything seems to be in competition with one another. I like your analogy for the internet being a sedative, it adds a new perspective to what it actually does to you and your productivity. I fully agree with the web now being too cluttered with information that isn't reliable and this poses problems for when possibly seeking an answer to a question, and having to dig through piles and piles of straight up lies, sarcastic comments, and 99% of the answers end up not being helpful in the slightest. As for click bait, i'm probably too paranoid when it comes to anything pop-up like, I avoid it at all costs, but it's something that does provide unnecessary anxiety when using the internet. It is also quite scary how one piece of information one website may have found about you is spread to everything you use, which you gave an example of with Amazon and Facebook, and even emails. This is a well written article with a variety of interesting points to consider. Well Done. MLCRooney (discuss • contribs) 00:35, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki exercise 4: Wikibook project reflective account
Wikipedia is like a tower clock, where all the cogs must work together to run smoothly and create an effective result. If one cog decides to go against the grain of an intellectual process, the entire entry can be compromised. For this particular project, an open and collaborative approach was essential, so as not to tread on another toe in terms of sub-topic ideas and individual contribution. Without sharing thought processes and steps towards the completion of our particular chapter, An Internet of Everything?/Surveillance and Sousveillance, the chapter would be awash with similar threads and repeated concepts.

Relating to my own experience using Wikibooks to create a multifaceted chapter was simultaneously challenging, frustrating and rewarding. The collaborative nature of this online venture was both a hindrance and a blessing. On one hand, as a student who prefers working solely to group work, it was at first difficult to accept that group work is based on an accumulative effort rather than just an individual contribution. On the other hand, it was a constant reassurance that having a group so often brings. When I had a question about Surveillance or Wikibooks itself, all i had to do was ask in the discussion page and someone was there to help. The discussion page for this project was invaluable as it was used for multiple purposes such as users submitting hints and tips, defining and claiming sub-topics and general discussion and asking questions. I myself submitted several questions and found help from other users. This page was essentially creating a hub, where contributors were able to help each other rather than asking a teacher. There was the occasional query wherein a user had written an entry without submitting it in the discussion page, resulting in time and research wasted because another user had chosen the same topic. These small hiccups were realised and solved through more mindful communication and discussion beforehand, so were in hindsight useful in creating a more streamlined page.

Interestingly, the most difficult part of this project was the 'real life' communication. It was simple enough to communicate with members of my sub-group over social media platforms such as Facebook, and in the discussion page of the chapter, but finding time and availability proved to be a commodity that could not be so easily found. Some contributors could not be found on social media, a rarity for someone not to own a Facebook account, and some were absent throughout the communicative process, thus proving it difficult to arrange a face to face meeting; however, I do not feel that this impacted the communication and contributions. In life, you cannot always get exactly what you want. If someone is busy or unresponsive, there are ways around it. I also met with other groups within the same chapter, wherein we discussed our intentions and desires for how the chapter should read. This was helpful, as sharing ideas in a larger scale create a clearer picture. The internet was vital in the communication both within and between groups involved in contributing to our chapter when offline communication was unavailable.

Cognitive surplus explains that groups of people make more of a difference than the activity of one. Young people especially often are willing to contribute to making the internet a more stimulating and intellectually rich place if given the chance and shown how. I found this to ring true throughout this experience exploring the depths and expansive world of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an excellent example of how useful the web can be if used for intellectual purpose and to involve young people in civic participation. With the topic of surveillance and souveillance, users were able to demonstrate a practice which is commonly denounced as an older persons activity. By becoming involved in matters such as governmental intrusion with the help of internet research, it has spawned an interest, at least with myself, in the Civic Web. In their chapter, 'The Young Civilians' in the book The Civic Web, Shakuntala Banaji and David Buckingham discuss the involvement of young people and the internet: "Much of the early literature on Internet use and affordances was extremely excited about the miraculous possibilities of the Internet for young people, and for some commentators this still appears to be the case. Popular Internet evangelists such as Don Tapscott (1998, 2008) continue to enthuse about young people’s natural skills with and affinity for the Internet and their ability to use it in democratic, creative, and active ways. In addition to its apparent propensity to encourage playful learning, the Internet is also seen to be engendering new, nonhierarchical forms of politics and civic participation that particularly appeal to the Net Generation." Young people are often seen as being most comfortable with the internet, with most of today's teenagers growing up with new and intelligent forms of computer technology, so it is vital that young people become more concerned with their civic duty, and become involved in societal disputes. This project has opened doors for using the internet in a more productive way. It also introduced collaboration within internet users, a form of internet usage that is not often explored within the younger generation. Many people involved in this project have never used Wikipedia as anything other than a research tool, myself included. This was a tool as a way of inserting younger people into using the internet in a way that is not just fun or beneficial to ourselves, to others as well. It's time to give a little back to the internet. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 17:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I relate to you in the sense that I am usually someone who prefers to work alone, but ended up enjoying working with others on this project due to the support available (and also how friendly and helpful my teammates were!). Having an area where you could ask questions or help out others with coding and such was extremely helpful; especially since it was easy to access and could be looked back upon with ease whenever you needed to. Until now I also hadn't used Wikipedia as anything other than an information seeking site but after this experience I too feel like I can possibly contribute to it and attempt to "give back" to the internet. I was always intimidated by the coding and rules involved with editing Wikimedia sites but now I realise they're a lot simpler than I expected and that there are lots of helpful resources to help me out! CalSmith96 (discuss • contribs) 17:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments
Hi NoRagrats9, your response made for an interesting read. I like how you explain that Wikibooks is not clearly defined as 'good' or 'bad' but has pro's and con's that influence our usage of it as a research tool. I too went through phases of enjoying and being frustrated when doing the exercise, but ultimately it was a positive contribution to society that the An Internet of Everything groups made. As you say what may be responsible for initially getting used to it was because it was not "just fun or beneficial to ourselves." Cognitive surplus is a topic I didn't understand all that well so thank you for shedding light on it! I think it is definitely true, and can be reinforced that we were aided on how to use WikiBooks by our peers rather than just superiors or strangers on chatrooms. --WiKirsten (discuss • contribs) 20:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I really appreciated your 'tower clock' analogy, and think it fitted the feel and the workings of the Wikibook project well. I also shared your range on emotions when working on the project also! The ideas you explored in relation to Cognitive Surplus relates to your earlier points really well, and you did a good job of explaining it's definition, and how it related directly to the project. I agree with that this project has given us skills that will help us as we move on, and I enjoyed your strong closing statement. Well done, for an informative well written post! MLCRooney (discuss • contribs) 10:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I had the same experience like you, and also experienced thrilling, frustration and pleasure in the process to create a wikipedia entry. The try is meaningful, and the cooperation with online strangers to complete a task together brought in a unforgettable memory. The function of the wikipedia will allow the continuous improvement of the content in it. And that is the contribution of lots of ordinary people like you and me. Sometimes, when I thought that I can contribute to human knowledge accumulation and record in this way, I felt excited; Kellysun960601 (discuss • contribs) 10:45, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
There's evidence of an adequate level of engagement in both responses and the group talk page. You show a relatively superficial understanding demonstrated on user talk page (although this includes some engagement with secondary sources, which need to be in wiki markup for greater effect) The exercises improved progressively and showed a greater level of critical engagement and argument.

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives a good brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a good range of concepts associated with your subject, and the effort to deliver critical definitions, drawing from relevant literature and scholarship, and your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is very much in evidence. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a good range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of limited critical engagement with set material, although most ideas and procedures insecurely grasped
 * evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material limited, displaying a qualified familiarity with a minimally sufficient range of relevant materials
 * Argument and analysis:
 * poorly articulated and supported argument;
 * lack of evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position in discussion);
 * lack of evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections in discussion);
 * evidence of independent critical ability limited, due to the fact that your grasp of the analytical issues and concepts, although generally reasonable, is somewhat insecure.

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content suggests minimally sufficient standard of engagement (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * Acceptable engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Limited reflexivity and creativity, and a somewhat insecure management of discussion pages

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 3 May 2016 (UTC)