re: You are what you're called.

>Our language is what describes us. Considering the origins of the Internet, many terms were derived to imply a lack of knowledge or belonging.

> The uninitiated are called "newbies", which to me is reminiscent of new campers being called "wienies".

I think context and tone have a lot to do with whether newbie is used as a judgmental term or a descriptive noun. I'm not familiar with wienie as new camper. I thought it was a food.

>And those that hover around the edges, like wallflowers at a dance, either too scared or unable to participate, are dubbed "lurkers".

> Those that choose to observe, or feel that they have nothing to contribute, should be commended for their silence, not branded with the L word.

"Branded" has a negative connotation, imho. Besides, how can they be "branded" (or labeled such) if readers of the forum don't know they're there?

> Why isn't there a term for people who have to reply to every post, despite having liittle or nothing to contribute?

Is there a criterion for amount of contribution? Is that not subjectivity?

> And why, as Lily Tomlin asked, isn't there a special name for the tops of your feet?

Maybe nobody cares. Maybe there is a name, but it's not common. Maybe it falls into the same category as why there's no special name for the back of the hands? Or is there a special name?

Wanda

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright ©1996-1999 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.