rant by request: instant messenger

[keryx]

I just re-started using IM a few weeks ago, since a few critical things had to happen before I could really get behind instant messaging, namely: having my own laptop connected to a speedy wireless network.

Now that I have that, and the novelty is starting to wear off, I can say this without a doubt: instant messaging is stupid. Yes, I realize it's an efficient means of getting quickly in touch with someone who can be counted on to be online, and that it allows you to have simultaneous conversations with 10 people if you want, while you download music. It's faster than email. It's easier than text messages on your phone (which are also stupid, but no one asked me to rant about that).

But. It's stupid. As a medium, it limits the types of conversation you can have, a fact that few people who use it seem to realize. It's great for quick q&a kinds of things, for planning a get-together, for entertaining quips, and nothing else.

Just to tie this in some way to what petite_tadpole asked for, here are my thoughts on people who don't follow implicit IM etiquette, for instance leaving a conversation mid-flight: so what? What function does telling someone that you're about to stop sending them entertaining quips really serve, other than to verify that you've not just been shot?

None. None at all. Thus, IM is stupid.

This rant has been intentionally inflammatory and may or may not reflect my actual opinions. Just assume it does, and if I've said something you dislike, that I'm talking about you.

Comments

[rackletang.livejournal.com]

I've been having a fascinating discussion of spirituality on Yahoo! Messenger today. It may or may not help that it's with a hot fella. :)

[keryx.livejournal.com]

Well, then, maybe it's just me. :)

Really, I've had some good quality IM conversations, where there was an intellectual or emotional interchange going on. I just contend that the interchange would have been more effective on the phone. Except that I almost exclusively use a cell phone, and I think everyone knows now that I get crap reception at my own house.

[rackletang.livejournal.com]

In this case, I'm pretty sure emotional depth + hearing sexy voice would have led to disaster. But in general, you're probably right. :)

[geno8827.livejournal.com]

(15:02:56) Ryan: Did you see keryx's post about IM messages?
(15:03:16) Carlisle: I did, but I have not responded
(15:04:10) Ryan: I think it's pretty essential. I use it at my workplace a lot to message the people behind me stuff that can't be said out loud. You?
(15:04:47) Carlisle: at best I found it effective to do problem solving with a scattered group of people
(15:05:29) Ryan: Yes, you have helped me out quite a bit with that ;)
(15:06:11) Ryan: But I also find that Instant messaging is great in the fact that you don't really have to commit to an active dialog with someone.
(15:06:27) Ryan: You can type something now, ruminate, and type something else later.

[geno8827.livejournal.com]

I would also like to add that I don't have to remember what was previously said, being that my short term memory isn't the best, I can just keep a window open and scroll back to what was said!

[keryx.livejournal.com]

Hmmmm. That is a point I had not considered. I have to give you that.

On the other hand... that kinda sounds like ammunition for the sorts of experts the Today Show is always hosting. Up next: Al Roker talks to Dr. Alarmist Schmuck, who tells you how IM IS GIVING YOUR CHILDREN ADD!!! OMG!!

[geno8827.livejournal.com]

What the media doesn't understand is that anything in exhorbitantly unhealthy doses is a bad thing. I'm not just talking about tobacco, I'm talking about the whole shebang: alcohol (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A//www.mayoclinic.com/invoke.cfm%3Fid%3DHQ00199&ei=QTonQ-TKDp74-AGGlqiVBg), TV (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3603235.stm), video games (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=31&art_id=qw1124724780812B221), water (http://watershed.net/purified.htm), bread (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15420830.300.html)...

I could list more, but Google is getting tired of my queries :D...
The point I'm trying to make is, even the essential stuff we need for life is bad for us if we take in too much. What people need to learn is self-control and moderation.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

Dear god, did you boys actually have a conversation via IM about my LJ post about IM? And then post text of said conversation back to the LJ?

Wow. Y'all are taking geekery to a whole new level over there.

who you calling a geek?

[luguvalium.livejournal.com]

Is Instant Messanging stupid? or the people that use it?

One that that instant communication has promoted is not thinking before doing it. Self-discipline is in order.

Re: who you calling a geek?

[keryx.livejournal.com]

Obviously, the technology itself isn't stupid, but I would argue that the stupidity of our interaction with it is implicit in the medium.

One that that instant communication has promoted is not thinking before doing it. Self-discipline is in order.
Expound upon this point, please?

Re: who you calling a geek?

[luguvalium.livejournal.com]

I think when using a lot of computer technology via the internet, people turn off the self-editing part of their brain and let loose.

[snidegrrl.livejournal.com]

I've been instant messaging in one form or another since 1997... good ol' ICQ. It sure is good for roleplaying.

The tool itself is not stupid, really, it's the way it gets used sometimes. It helped me through alot of tough overnights!

I am loathe to consider what our lives would have been like had such a thing existed when we were 13. Terrifying.

[snidegrrl.livejournal.com]

In re: stopping an IM conversation without warning:

It completely depends on what the last thing said was. If the last thing said was:

snidegrrl: omg, this is the best song

then wandering away is completely acceptable. If the last thing said was:

snidegrrl: so i've been thinking about us lately. :(

then wandering away is a FUCKING FEDERAL CRIME or should be.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

snidegrrl: so i've been thinking about us lately. :(

I think making that sort of remark ON EFFING IM is the thing that should be a crime, personally. One should have the decency to discuss issues over a more interactive medium.

[snidegrrl.livejournal.com]

my experience from having this kind of conversation on IM is from back when i was in relationships that were CONSTANTLY in trauma. ahhh dramatic youth. also there were a few times when i was trapped on overnights.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

People have improved in their use of the medium since ICQ. I seriously never had one conversation that was in any way necessary or even interesting in the years I used ICQ; it's better now. At least people use real words.

I think there's also an issue in that I was using chat rooms in 93-94ish, and there *was* meaningful, useful interchange over that medium. I wouldn't have expected the messenger thing to be that different, and yet it is.

[snidegrrl.livejournal.com]

i had lots of good conversations over icq; many of which i even saved to text files. but then lost the (hahaha floppy) discs i saved them on.

i honestly don't think the messenger thing is that different; i just think maybe the ratio is different? now that it's so easy for god and everyone to use, and now that you don't pay like, by the minute/hour for dialup or still have the feeling somehow that using the internet is some kind of ordeal, and is not slow anymore, people are more likely to use it for whatever, including im. i mean, in 1993-4 there was far fewer crappy useless webpages, too i bet. i maintain that it is not a function of the tool. :)

[keryx.livejournal.com]

yeah, but the crappy webpages are about access to the internet (which is yay, easier), while the IM thing is still an interaction with the limited, mostly quite intelligent, circle i associate with.

i think there's something changing in the medium, i really do. i don't know what.

[firecat]

[*enjoys rant*]
[*adds you to aim buddy list*]
[*wanders off*]

[keryx.livejournal.com]

Tee hee. Yeah, this isn't to say that I won't be on IM this evening. :)

[puzzlement.livejournal.com]

Actually, I have the reverse problem: I feel a burning need to do a four step conversation ending dance before I can walk away from the computer. Since the other person rarely notices this and continues sending entertaining quips, I get kind of stuck there, not wanting to rudely say "bye now" and go offline. Ergo... I'm stupid.

[queerbychoice.livejournal.com]

I actually rather dislike IM myself, but not for any of the reasons you stated.

"As a medium, it limits the types of conversation you can have, a fact that few people who use it seem to realize. It's great for quick q&a kinds of things, for planning a get-together, for entertaining quips, and nothing else."

I pretty much conducted an entire two-year relationship, and three-year ongoing best friendship, with chisparoja via AIM (minus two in-person visits of two weeks' and three weeks' duration). Due to this, I can tell you from EXTREMELY EXTENSIVE experience that IM is a very, very functional medium via which to (1) argue nonstop for days on end, (2) have really hot cybersex, and (3) have terribly deep soul-baring conversations that reduce both of you to tears of happiness. Therefore, I must insist that you have no idea what you're talking about when you make assertions like the above.

"Just to tie this in some way to what petite_tadpole asked for, here are my thoughts on people who don't follow implicit IM etiquette, for instance leaving a conversation mid-flight: so what? What function does telling someone that you're about to stop sending them entertaining quips really serve, other than to verify that you've not just been shot?"

Yeah, I tend to agree. chisparoja gets special privileges with me so I wouldn't sign off from a conversation with em without stating first that I was leaving, but in conversations with anyone else I frequently just stop responding after a while when a convenient opportunity arises (i.e., when the last thing the other person said was a statement that doesn't really require a reply), and then once the silence has gone on for long enough, IM etiquette ceases to require you to announce where you're going when you sign off, because there's no longer a conversation really "in progress" at the moment.

But now, as for what I really hate about IM: I hate the fact that if you just want to find one person, you can't easily arrange to sit around watching for them to come online unless you make yourself visible to 200 other people with whom it isn't a high priority for you to converse with at the moment, so when what you really want to do is work on something else until a specific person shows up, you tend to get messaged by 20 other people who won't let you get anything done. Granted, there are ways around this if you take the time to either register different IM names for different people and try to keep anyone from finding out what your other IM names, or if you individually block and unblock a few dozen names from your buddy list before each time you sign on, according to which of them you currently want to talk to - but those strategies are a lot of trouble, and they carry a risk of people getting offended if they find out you temporarily blocked them or didn't give them one of your screennames that you did give to someone else.