3 ms·

But it was also a bit threatening to newbies, because he easily lost his control with them. I rarely dared to ask something. It wasn't just newbies. He came a

by e40 12y ago

But it was also a bit threatening to newbies, because he easily lost his control with them. I rarely dared to ask something. It wasn't just newbies. He came across like a completely different person in email vs live and in person. I never once saw him lose his cool in front of someone. I saw it many, many times in public and private email. As an aside, it's always strange to click on a link on some random site and see a photo I took.

mcphage 12y ago
> He came across like a completely different person in email vs live and in person. I never once saw him lose his cool in front of someone. I saw it many, many times in public and private email. If someone is pleasant in person, yet crass or cruel online—but 99% of our interaction with them is online—then I think their online persona is the real them, and their pleasant in-person demeanor is the fake.
- DougMerritt 12y ago
  How do you know it's not the other way around, at least part of the time? It's well-known that people are generally multifaceted, and that, typically, different circumstances bring out different facets -- that's more general than the online/offline issue. I never met Naggum in person, only online, so I have no personal theory about him.
  - mcphage 12y ago
    > How do you know it's not the other way around, at least part of the time? It's not so much, 'how do you know?' as 'what difference does it make?'? If almost all of your encounters with them are cruel, the fact that they're kind offline is irrelevant. Most of the targets of their cruelty won't ever meet them offline, and so will only be exposed to their cruelty. Although if you think about it, what sounds more believable—a genuinely nice person who spends most of their time treating people cruelly, or a nasty person who is afraid to show it when they have to face the target of their cruelty?
- Arnt 12y ago
  I met Erik several times and was told off by him on Usenet, also several times. Both were the real him. Which may defy logic a tiny little bit, but human personalities aren't really bound by logic.
  - engi_nerd 12y ago
    I have been mad as hell at a colleague, and we've had it out in a lengthy, heated argument. Then when work hours were over, we would go hang out and forget it all. Just because we have contentious argument doesn't mean we don't like each other.
- e40 12y ago
  I agree this is a possibility, but I don't think it was the case for Erik. I think he viewed electronic communication as a different form of communication that had different rules. I also think he fell into a trap of bad behavior and he wasn't able to disconnect from it. Years before he died he disconnected from comp.lang.lisp. That seemed to be the only way he could change, and it meant not participating in conversations there.

by e40 12y ago

mcphage 12y ago

> He came across like a completely different person in email vs live and in person. I never once saw him lose his cool in front of someone. I saw it many, many times in public and private email. If someone is pleasant in person, yet crass or cruel online—but 99% of our interaction with them is online—then I think their online persona is the real them, and their pleasant in-person demeanor is the fake.

DougMerritt 12y ago
How do you know it's not the other way around, at least part of the time? It's well-known that people are generally multifaceted, and that, typically, different circumstances bring out different facets -- that's more general than the online/offline issue. I never met Naggum in person, only online, so I have no personal theory about him.
- mcphage 12y ago
  > How do you know it's not the other way around, at least part of the time? It's not so much, 'how do you know?' as 'what difference does it make?'? If almost all of your encounters with them are cruel, the fact that they're kind offline is irrelevant. Most of the targets of their cruelty won't ever meet them offline, and so will only be exposed to their cruelty. Although if you think about it, what sounds more believable—a genuinely nice person who spends most of their time treating people cruelly, or a nasty person who is afraid to show it when they have to face the target of their cruelty?
Arnt 12y ago
I met Erik several times and was told off by him on Usenet, also several times. Both were the real him. Which may defy logic a tiny little bit, but human personalities aren't really bound by logic.
- engi_nerd 12y ago
  I have been mad as hell at a colleague, and we've had it out in a lengthy, heated argument. Then when work hours were over, we would go hang out and forget it all. Just because we have contentious argument doesn't mean we don't like each other.
e40 12y ago
I agree this is a possibility, but I don't think it was the case for Erik. I think he viewed electronic communication as a different form of communication that had different rules. I also think he fell into a trap of bad behavior and he wasn't able to disconnect from it. Years before he died he disconnected from comp.lang.lisp. That seemed to be the only way he could change, and it meant not participating in conversations there.