Session 1: I remember now, the game was Pokemon

Social computing appears to be a very general term that describes systems where humans interact with each other through a technological medium (the most obvious being a computer), but not directly through each other.  Beer and Burrows provides the most relatable examples through their paper, including wikis, folksonomies, mashups, and of course social networking sites.  The latter of these seems to be the subject of most attention and rightfully so.  While going down the timeline figure presented by boyd and Ellison in their paper, I realized that I have used to some extent at least ten of the networking sites listed, four of which I have spent at least one active year on.  Admittedly, I was a little disappointed that so much attention was given to these networking sites.  Perhaps part of this disappointment was due to my first experiences with social computing, which did not concern any of these sites at all, nor did it concern online chat programs or MUDs.  In fact, my experiences started with a small site dedicated to gamers, which have since then led me through quite the revolutionary and evolutionary world of social computing.

It was fourteen years ago when I first started searching information regarding a game I played.  I was young and did not have money to buy a guide, nor did my parents really care to support the degradation of my already spectacular studies in school.  A few minutes of searching Yahoo brought up an amateur-looking guide, hosted through the website GameFAQs (, which was created by a fellow gamer by the name of Jeff Veasey.  I didn’t care to pay much attention about it back then (actually, I didn’t care to pay much attention to it up until now), but the origins of the website was a primitive approach to larger social intent.  The premise of GameFAQs was to host an extensive collection of video game guides, or FAQs, but not ones written and distributed by professionals.  Rather, it sought those FAQs written and donated by the average gamer.  These guides weren’t formal and difficult to understand, rather, it was as if we were receiving advice from a friend.  It was this unique aspect of the website that slowly gathered gamers into a comfortable area where they could rely on each other for help.

I don’t want this to be a history lesson on GameFAQs, but I certainly believe its origins can be classified by social computing.  People did not have to chat with each other in real time or observe a profile to garner a mutual understanding or to communicate; what we understood was simple, that there were others like us and we were happy to help one another.  Tenopir reports that online databases may have the potential to threaten our culture.  To Andrew Keen, whom Tenopir reports on, perhaps websites like GameFAQs are a potential threat to our culture.  Keen describes the internet as muddying up accurate resources with less reliable representations from the general public.  I do hope then that Keen can also see the potential in resources shared by “amateurs”.  The general public deserves to obtain more knowledge through sources other than those professionally admitted.  Maybe Keen doesn’t pay much attention to video games in general.  He should.  For better or worse, video games and gamers are now a permanent and significant addition to our culture.  As for academia purposes, sure, you have to keep the scientific from the generic, but anyone serious about going into academia should already understand this.

Onwards then.  As Beer and Burrows states, cultural digitization moves fast and back then when the internet was more innocent, revolutionary ideas in the computing world either died instantly, or grew exponentially.  And Veasey’s new idea for GameFAQs, called message boards, grew exponentially.  These boards allowed us to create a topic post, and have others respond within it (nowadays, they call it forums).  It felt akin to meeting a long lost brother when the boards were introduced.  Suddenly, we had this option of sharing words with the people whom we’ve sought help from and have helped out.  I could talk to hundreds of other gamers about the games we loved, and thank those who have contributed guides.  It was definitely an exciting experience.  It was still only the beginning of my affair with GameFAQs, though.  It wasn’t until the social message board were introduced that I realized I was part of something more significant.

The social message boards were a set of new boards that did not necessarily relate to gaming, rather, it was a place for gamers to discuss other topics.  Among the most popular ones were “Current Events”, “Random Insanity”, and “Life, the Universe, and Everything”.  I took home in Random Insanity beceause the established community within that board was inviting and as one can guess from the name, you could talk about almost anything.  There were, of course, some rules and regulations to the type of topics and language allowed, but at our age, we weren’t exactly talking about intercourse yet.  How fast that innocence ended.  Our little community of 12-14 year olds quickly hit that age where we needed to discuss more than just games and TV shows.  We had to discuss sex, drugs, and school.  Our only option was to move onto a more mature board.  That board was, and is “Life, the Universe, and Everything”, or more affectionately known as LUE .  It was actually Dibbell’s article on the LambdaMOO incident that incited all the memories I had within LUE and thus urged me to share my online social life that is GameFAQs.  More specifically, it was Dr. Bungle that reminded me of all the evil I had witnessed within that particular message board.  As much as it was a place for me to grow, it was also a place where I grew cynical of the world.  This might seem pretty heavy for some seemingly random message board on the internet, but I assure you it had a heavy impact on me growing up in the digital age.

LUE was definitely something else.  It was a brewing pot for teenagers that could hide behind online personas and talk about absolutely everything in life.  From there grew friends, enemies, and topics about genitalia.  Those who couldn’t handle the frankness of such a board stayed back in Random Insanity and the gaming boards.  This isolation from less “cooler” boards gave the LUE community an elitist view.  This was the internet equivalent of a clique, and it was, interestingly enough, developing on a site dedicated to game guides.  And at my age, being part of such an online culture phenomena felt surprisingly good.  I did not personally know anyone, but regardless, I belonged there and we were a family.  Good things tend to come to an end, though, and LUE quickly spiraled into something nasty.  We were a rebellious and troublesome community, and participated in planned events such as a prank calls, invading and flooding other newly developing forums on the web, and, perhaps most serious to creator Veasey, the invasion of us “LUEsers” to other boards within his own website.  He had inadvertently created a community which he cared for and shunned.  Many times he threatened to close LUE if we kept this behavior up, but the bluff was called every time.  The most shameful event LUE participated in was the final straw for Veasey.  It was the invasion of a LiveJournal (a networking site), which belonged to the parents of a girl who had taken her own life.  This particular LiveJournal asked for support from the girl’s friends and family.  They received that, and more.  They received the hurtful taunting of over a hundred unidentified personas, which was eventually traced back to GameFAQs, to a particular board which it hosted.  Needless to say, Veasey, as the creator and face of GameFAQs, was ashamed and infuriated.  He did not shut down LUE, but he prevented new members from accessing the board, and enforced a new set of posting regulations just for it.  Although I am glad to say I wasn’t a part of the LiveJournal event, it definitely lead me to think twice about the type of people I was interacting with.  That such online socialization could bring such hurtful consequences was terrifying.  Although Dr. Bungle’s explicit incidents played off of harm within a virtual community with virtual personas, the harm LUE brought upon those parents of the LiveJournal was intent from real people.

Perhaps what I’m trying to come across with this essay of a blog post is that social computing can take many forms.  A simple FAQ sharing site turned into one of the most prominent online cultures that I was a part of.  Although the LUE message board on GameFAQs has died down since being fenced off, that did not stop one of the original members to create a spinoff website of the board.  I may or may not be part of that new website, but I can say that I still go to GameFAQs today for help on some of the online games I play.  These online games, though, are almost an entirely different subject in the extensive realm of social computing.  Maybe another blog post some day.


14 thoughts on “Session 1: I remember now, the game was Pokemon

  1. Not gonna lie, I’m super jelly.

    I completely agree that Keen’s dismissal of ‘unofficial’ sources is premature. Thousands of casual gamers are sure to find things that mere dozens of VG reviewers will miss. Crowd sourcing has become an increasingly popular avenue for collecting large amounts of distributed data, and can provide insightful, high-quality information, credible by peer-review. Wikipedia, perhaps the best known Web2.0-crowd-sourced site, would say Keen is wrong. But at the same time his warning is valid, people do write dumb stuff. I suppose the implementation of the service in question ultimately decides whether it’s successful or not.

    • I won’t deny that Wikipedia is full of inaccurate data, but it’s up to the individual to decide how important that information is. As a biologist, I do not dare touch Wikipedia (or any website for that matter) with any length of a pole when it comes to my papers, but when I just need to refresh my memory on what happened in the first Bioshock, or want to know what JayZ’s net worth is, I’m going to wiki those suckers.

  2. Wow, what an event you described. Like you mentioned, the line between online and off-line life is drawing closer and so is the culture surrounding it. It is sad that so many people forget that there really is no difference in what they do and say online and offline. And how events such as the LiveJournal tragedy become a reality. How people could turn on a family in grieving with a negative mob mentality is horrible…social computing has opened a great venue for communication and such but at the same time, you shared a prime example of the monster it also is. Thank you for sharing.

  3. “He had inadvertently created a community which he cared for and shunned. Many times he threatened to close LUE if we kept this behavior up, but the bluff was called every time.” Like a parent who loves his\her child too much to actually administer discipline…

    I used gameFAQ, but I never participated in the social aspect. Cray.

    Did you still feel like a member of that community after the incident?

    • Although I still have access to the original LUE board on GameFAQs, I don’t really consider myself part of the community anymore. I rarely visit it, but I wouldn’t say it’s because I outgrew it. It’s just isn’t the same with most of the original members gone. I get my laughs from elsewhere on the internet now.

      And I notice that many people I know visit GameFAQs. Kind of gives me that warm and fuzzy feeling knowing that this once amateur geocities site is now one of the biggest hits on the net 🙂

  4. I have used GameFAQs as well, but didn’t realize how active the forums were. The event you described on LiveJournal is just incredibly bad. But like Dr. Bungle in LambdaMOO, it was good that Veasey decided to put regulations and restrictions on LUE to prevent similar negative incidents from happening. Also, just as how boyd/ellison mentioned in the history of SNSs, many SNSs started off as just message boards. They then added features such as profiles, chat, friendslists and other methods. Maybe GameFAQs might evolve into some gaming SNS one day, who knows. They certainly do seem to have the playerbase to become one if they chose to do so.

  5. I can’t say I participated much in GameFAQs, as my experiences lead me to different communities, but it’s certainly a familiar experience that seems to be shared across the internet. We grew our own little communities, and much like Lord of the Flies we did crazy things that eventually led to a single incident that functioned as a flashpoint or a catalyst for change. It appears that as long as we continue to create new forms of social computing technology that new users of the internet flock to, we will continue to have these events as humans slowly start to figure out what it means to be in a community with people you barely know and never have to face in meatspace, to borrow a term.

    Or do we develop rules and regulations to curb this type of behavior as these technologies pop up, specifically with an eye towards the lessons we’ve learned? What’s to stop another Lennay Kekua on the next Twitter if we trust in each other to “BE EXCELLENT,” but new users eventually join that have little concepts of the old rules and ways? It’s always September, the Eternal September.

  6. There is a famous game board in Korea, which offers the similar function of what GameFAQs. That board is still crowded and noisy although it was created late 1990’s and has old-fashioned outlook. In 1990’s, this site just offered the place where people share their knowledge on the online games. However, as time goes by, this site turned into the one like marketplace where people share the information on the ‘everything’ as well as online game. More interestingly, young people including myself visited this site to check the daily news and emerging issues. From early 2000’s, major portal companies started to offer news freely by marshaling paper news and publishing it in their portal site. After a few years of offering news service, one major portal company (Naver) took over that game FAQ website. What makes that well-organized company have interest in small and old-fashioned game FAQ website? One reason might be this: strong bond that lasts relationship with each other. Regardless of difficulty of question, people share their information spontaneously (and for free) at that site and it has lasted so far even the site was sold to the major portal company. After being sold to major company, the characteristics of the website did not change at all. It seems to me that this website might be a model of research on “how people can make a strong bond through the website”

  7. Outstanding post. User-generated content like you described in gamefaqs is central to social computing–when people shape one another’s experience on a site, whether through game tips, reviews, comments, likes etc., I think it can be considered social computing. I think your experience on the LUE board shows better than any article ever could how a strong feeling of community of a social site can be used for good or ill.

    As I read your post and the comments, I get the feeling that a big part of what created such strong bonds was that it was a unique place in people’s lives–there was nowhere else they could talk about anything, prank without consequences, etc. I think the need to preserve that unique place resulted in people going along with some dark things, because being part of the community meant more than the well-being of the outsiders they ended up hurting. We’ll get into some of the challenges of managing social computing sites in a future session.

    • What was really noticeable during those days in LUE was the bandwagon effect. Every poster had a chance to make something happen, they just had to get a couple of others in on it, and then suddenly everyone was doing it. I remember one rather childish prank, which was to send fedex boxes (free of charge) to a person’s home. What started as just a couple of boxes to this stranger’s home, turned into several hundred as everyone decided to do it. Needless to say, the LiveJournal incident occurred in similar fashion.

  8. Speaking of derisive comments, I have found that the worst comments seem to come on news websites. I used to read comments on articles that I would come across but quickly realized that people are either proudly displaying ignorance under their percieved anonymity or just intending to ruffle feathers without consequence. Whatever the intent of these posters, I found that most comments were not furthering any sort of worthwhile conversations and at best could provide some trashy entertainment.

    • Agreed – I always regret scrolling through news story comments – they often number in the hundreds but very few are substantive or thoughtful. I suppose that reinforces the idea that people comment not just to further discussion, but often just because they can or to draw attention. The high-speed nature of life online also means many people “comment now, think later.” It reminds me of how carefully librarians had to craft search queries when databases charged by the minute, and now anyone can type the first words that come into their head into Google.
      In contrast, I am somewhat familiar with a subset of the Offbeat Empire discussed in virtualalicia’s post and have always been impressed at the quality of comments. The comments by and large extend the information provided in the post. It seems the community aspect of Offbeat Empire motivates people to participate and contribute in more substantial ways than the average person clicking on Yahoo! News while on the way to their e-mail inbox.

  9. Pingback: Session 2: Social aspects of social computing « ICS 669 S13 Social Computing

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s