<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: This Time I&#8217;m Slamming Twitterature</title>
	<atom:link href="http://publishchicago.com/2010/02/06/this-time-im-slamming-twitterature/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://publishchicago.com/2010/02/06/this-time-im-slamming-twitterature/</link>
	<description>An in-depth look at publishing, writing, and book-selling in the Windy City of Chicago</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:34:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: c-check</title>
		<link>http://publishchicago.com/2010/02/06/this-time-im-slamming-twitterature/comment-page-1/#comment-2786</link>
		<dc:creator>c-check</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:11:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://publishchicago.com/?p=1263#comment-2786</guid>
		<description>I used to have an mp3.com website about... 10 years ago? Man I&#039;m old. Anyway, you could produce music, upload it, and then people could listen to it, either previews or whole track as you deemed, and buy tracks from you. This was pretty radical at the time--before iTunes, etc. It&#039;s way past defunct now, but you would occasionally get responses from people on the site who seemed to go around listening to tracks for the sheer point of commenting on them by emailing the producers.

I remember one such time I got an email from someone who just lambasted my tracks. Now, I was no serious producer, and I think it showed from my music and my &quot;about&quot; page. I didn&#039;t take my work seriously, and mostly dabbled with different VST programs and didn&#039;t put in a lot of effort (not that if I had it would have been better :&#124;). This page of mine existed as a repository for sharing, mostly, as there was no good method for such back then...

Long story short, this person wrote about a page of response to my work, almost entirely devolving into commentary about me as a person and mostly centering around how stupid I was and how much I had wasted his time. &quot;Garbage in, garbage out,&quot; was, I think, his closing remark.

I toyed around with a few responses, but ultimately decided that a third wrong--or right, if you prefer, as we had both just done what was right for us--wasn&#039;t going to fix it.  You see, I had wasted his time, I guess, and now he&#039;d wasted mine.

Well many years have gone by and, as it turns out, the Internet has gotten bigger but not really more reasonable.  I actually read a Reddit thread today that almost cured me of this feeling of disappointment I&#039;ve always carried about internet conversation... right up until all the really great advice people (mostly DBAs I think) were giving about creating databases and best practices devolved into, you guessed it, personal attacks and defenses having nothing to do with how to make a better database.

In the end, I guess the Internet really is what all developers come to understand about it.  It&#039;s &quot;stateless.&quot; It doesn&#039;t have an inherent purpose; it must be given a purpose and/or utilized to what end the user deems.  So some people make music and share it whilst others lambaste it. Some people share opinions and others lambaste them. If it makes us feel impassioned or scratches that itch, we&#039;ll do it on the internet. A bit like Rule 34, in some ways. If it can be said (and it can) it can be attacked with a personal comment. Garbage in, garbage out, I suppose.

And speaking of rule 34, this strip will always be the first and last thing I think when I read a comment like this:
&lt;a href=&quot;http://xkcd.com/386/&quot; title=&quot;This strip, conversely, will always make me think of Kevin Spacey&#039;s head shouting &#039;WRONG!&#039; and blowing up a building.&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://xkcd.com/386/&lt;/a&gt;.

Oh, and as I was going to comment: I think the idea behind &lt;em&gt;Twitterature&lt;/em&gt; is dumb. D:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to have an mp3.com website about&#8230; 10 years ago? Man I&#8217;m old. Anyway, you could produce music, upload it, and then people could listen to it, either previews or whole track as you deemed, and buy tracks from you. This was pretty radical at the time&#8211;before iTunes, etc. It&#8217;s way past defunct now, but you would occasionally get responses from people on the site who seemed to go around listening to tracks for the sheer point of commenting on them by emailing the producers.</p>
<p>I remember one such time I got an email from someone who just lambasted my tracks. Now, I was no serious producer, and I think it showed from my music and my &#8220;about&#8221; page. I didn&#8217;t take my work seriously, and mostly dabbled with different VST programs and didn&#8217;t put in a lot of effort (not that if I had it would have been better :|). This page of mine existed as a repository for sharing, mostly, as there was no good method for such back then&#8230;</p>
<p>Long story short, this person wrote about a page of response to my work, almost entirely devolving into commentary about me as a person and mostly centering around how stupid I was and how much I had wasted his time. &#8220;Garbage in, garbage out,&#8221; was, I think, his closing remark.</p>
<p>I toyed around with a few responses, but ultimately decided that a third wrong&#8211;or right, if you prefer, as we had both just done what was right for us&#8211;wasn&#8217;t going to fix it.  You see, I had wasted his time, I guess, and now he&#8217;d wasted mine.</p>
<p>Well many years have gone by and, as it turns out, the Internet has gotten bigger but not really more reasonable.  I actually read a Reddit thread today that almost cured me of this feeling of disappointment I&#8217;ve always carried about internet conversation&#8230; right up until all the really great advice people (mostly DBAs I think) were giving about creating databases and best practices devolved into, you guessed it, personal attacks and defenses having nothing to do with how to make a better database.</p>
<p>In the end, I guess the Internet really is what all developers come to understand about it.  It&#8217;s &#8220;stateless.&#8221; It doesn&#8217;t have an inherent purpose; it must be given a purpose and/or utilized to what end the user deems.  So some people make music and share it whilst others lambaste it. Some people share opinions and others lambaste them. If it makes us feel impassioned or scratches that itch, we&#8217;ll do it on the internet. A bit like Rule 34, in some ways. If it can be said (and it can) it can be attacked with a personal comment. Garbage in, garbage out, I suppose.</p>
<p>And speaking of rule 34, this strip will always be the first and last thing I think when I read a comment like this:<br />
<a href="http://xkcd.com/386/" title="This strip, conversely, will always make me think of Kevin Spacey's head shouting 'WRONG!' and blowing up a building." rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/386/</a>.</p>
<p>Oh, and as I was going to comment: I think the idea behind <em>Twitterature</em> is dumb. D:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joshua Cohen</title>
		<link>http://publishchicago.com/2010/02/06/this-time-im-slamming-twitterature/comment-page-1/#comment-2782</link>
		<dc:creator>Joshua Cohen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 10:18:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://publishchicago.com/?p=1263#comment-2782</guid>
		<description>You seem really angry.

I bought Twitterature when it came out in the UK and loved it, so let me explain a few things:

1. The book is obviously marketed as humour. I&#039;m pretty sure the &quot;improving literature&quot; idea is a deliberate satirical gimmick and if the authors did anything wrong, I guess it was to assume that there weren&#039;t actually people like you, who are so incredibly stupid that they take that satire seriously  and then wank their righteous fury over it on their blog.

2. according to a few interviews on their site, the authors didn&#039;t read &quot;Twilight&quot;, which isn&#039;t even in the Penguin UK version I have. I think its meant as a joke, again.

3. I really don&#039;t get your whole issue with it not really being Twitter because its not on Twitter. I mean, sure, its a book, its not on the website. On the other hand, I don&#039;t they they&#039;re trying to fool anyone. The conceit is that the stories are told AS IF the main characters were tweeting them. People make phone calls in books sometimes, but you know, its only words - the sounds weren&#039;t transmitted over a phone line, really. 

again, you seem very angry. I am sorry about that. I think it might have something to do with two teenagers being demonstrably more talented and successful than you are with your little blog. 

Wait, what&#039;s that you say? Oh, you say I don&#039;t really know you and don&#039;t actually know if you&#039;re talented or successful? Well, since you decided to write two different posts about this book without having read it, I guess I can attack you without knowing anything about you. That being said, the reason you&#039;re so angry might have something to do with how incredibly uptight and tone-deaf to humour you are, as demonstrated by this post.

suggestion: have a drink, buy yourself a nice American romantic comedy, and relax. Maybe have a laugh. if it feels good, maybe even buy Twitterature and actually read it. then, if you still don&#039;t like it, you can tweet about it.

Cheers!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You seem really angry.</p>
<p>I bought Twitterature when it came out in the UK and loved it, so let me explain a few things:</p>
<p>1. The book is obviously marketed as humour. I&#8217;m pretty sure the &#8220;improving literature&#8221; idea is a deliberate satirical gimmick and if the authors did anything wrong, I guess it was to assume that there weren&#8217;t actually people like you, who are so incredibly stupid that they take that satire seriously  and then wank their righteous fury over it on their blog.</p>
<p>2. according to a few interviews on their site, the authors didn&#8217;t read &#8220;Twilight&#8221;, which isn&#8217;t even in the Penguin UK version I have. I think its meant as a joke, again.</p>
<p>3. I really don&#8217;t get your whole issue with it not really being Twitter because its not on Twitter. I mean, sure, its a book, its not on the website. On the other hand, I don&#8217;t they they&#8217;re trying to fool anyone. The conceit is that the stories are told AS IF the main characters were tweeting them. People make phone calls in books sometimes, but you know, its only words &#8211; the sounds weren&#8217;t transmitted over a phone line, really. </p>
<p>again, you seem very angry. I am sorry about that. I think it might have something to do with two teenagers being demonstrably more talented and successful than you are with your little blog. </p>
<p>Wait, what&#8217;s that you say? Oh, you say I don&#8217;t really know you and don&#8217;t actually know if you&#8217;re talented or successful? Well, since you decided to write two different posts about this book without having read it, I guess I can attack you without knowing anything about you. That being said, the reason you&#8217;re so angry might have something to do with how incredibly uptight and tone-deaf to humour you are, as demonstrated by this post.</p>
<p>suggestion: have a drink, buy yourself a nice American romantic comedy, and relax. Maybe have a laugh. if it feels good, maybe even buy Twitterature and actually read it. then, if you still don&#8217;t like it, you can tweet about it.</p>
<p>Cheers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
