Difference between revisions of "Friday 7pm Chatlog 20061201"

From CyberOne Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 257: Line 257:
 
[16:39]  USA Brody: okay.
 
[16:39]  USA Brody: okay.
 
[16:39]  USA Brody: let's be democratic.
 
[16:39]  USA Brody: let's be democratic.
 +
[16:39]  USA Brody: Yvette. What do you think we ar doing?
 +
[16:39]  USA Brody: Frappe. What do you think we are doing?
 +
[16:40]  USA Brody: Pere. What do you think we are doing?
 +
[16:40]  Yvette Kumsung: uh...making an empathic argument machinima on the pros and cons of incorporating voice into SL?
 +
[16:40]  USA Brody: yes.
 +
[16:40]  USA Brody: I agree with that.
 +
[16:40]  USA Brody: Frappe. Pere?
 +
[16:40]  Frappe Lapointe: WeWe are going to show how voice and Chat can bit live in SL with Podcasting out points
 +
[16:41]  Frappe Lapointe: that was both live
 +
[16:41]  USA Brody: Pere?
 +
[16:41]  Frappe Lapointe: Nice drink
 +
[16:41]  USA Brody: Thanks.
 +
[16:41]  USA Brody: It tastes great.
 +
[16:41]  You: Hi Team - I took another shot at the thesis statement to cover the scope of what we are looking to resolve with our upcoming research. Thesis: The integration of Voice in SL can result in varying degrees of discrimination against the residents, and this project will address issues regarding the impact of Voice on the social network. This way, we have identified the 'dispute' item noted by Rebecca, and provided a context for why it may be important to evaluate the item (e.g. potential impact on residents). I think the "everyone is disabled" aspect is great for our conclusion, and also ties into the 'who, how and why', so we can take it out of the thesis statement and incorporate it into the analysis. I hope this helps... Brien
 +
[16:41]  USA Brody: Pere. What do you think we are arguing?
 +
[16:42]  USA Brody: what is your opinion?
 +
[16:42]  USA Brody: should we follow what you posted.
 +
[16:42]  USA Brody: is that what you are implying?
 +
[16:42]  You: everyone is disabled, text is inclusive, voice must be a bridge technology
 +
[16:42]  Frappe Lapointe: It covers all points
 +
[16:43]  USA Brody: are we arguing that?
 +
[16:43]  Yvette Kumsung: i love that. bridge technology
 +
[16:43]  You: voice can be discriminatory
 +
[16:43]  USA Brody: Okay. Well. I have no idea what we are arguing. That is why I am asking.
 +
[16:43]  USA Brody: All of these ideas sound good, and they can overlap
 +
[16:43]  USA Brody: so I think we have a strong idea
 +
[16:44]  USA Brody: I too, have read the wiki
 +
[16:44]  USA Brody: and brein's idea
 +
[16:44]  USA Brody: I have also been to every meeting and read every conversation
 +
[16:44]  You: argument1: for: why voice is not discriminatory or it doesn
 +
[16:44]  You: t matter
 +
[16:44]  You: argument2: voice suxxors, text r00ls
 +
[16:44]  You: and the wrap up
 +
[16:44]  USA Brody: Timeout
 +
[16:45]  USA Brody: Yvette. what did becca recommend to us?
 +
[16:45]  USA Brody: let's incorporate her ideas a little bit .
 +
[16:45]  You: ooh, beer, good idea, brb
 +
[16:45]  Frappe Lapointe: Pere did
 +
[16:45]  Frappe Lapointe: or so I think
 +
[16:45]  USA Brody: okay. Pere did what?
 +
[16:45]  Yvette Kumsung: Well since the hypothesis was that voice would bring discrimination along with its benefits
 +
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: (we already set up on ground-level that voice would bring benefits)
 +
[16:46]  USA Brody: okay.
 +
[16:46]  USA Brody: should we put all of this on the wiki now?
 +
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: we should think of why should we think of protecting the rights of typers and
 +
[16:46]  USA Brody: can anyone do that?
 +
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: how we can protect them
 +
[16:46]  You: its there
 +
[16:46]  USA Brody: okay. great.
 +
[16:46]  You: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberone/wiki/?title=Friday_7pm_Chatlog_20061201&action=edit
 +
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: she was interested in the protection of rights section
 +
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: in particular
 
</pre>
 
</pre>

Revision as of 00:47, 2 December 2006

[16:11]  Frappe Lapointe is Online
[16:11]  Yvette Kumsung: maybe since she will be the evaluator.
[16:11]  USA Brody: Exactly
[16:11]  USA Brody: good thinking
[16:11]  You: howdy
[16:11]  USA Brody: I agree.
[16:11]  Yvette Kumsung: Hi!
[16:12]  USA Brody: Hi Pere
[16:12]  Yvette Kumsung: I'm so glad everyone is here
[16:12]  USA Brody: what about Brein
[16:12]  You: brian is on a plane
[16:12]  USA Brody: Okay good.
[16:12]  You: i didn't have ur email william
[16:12]  USA Brody: ready to get down to business.
[16:12]  USA Brody: it's okay
[16:12]  USA Brody: don't worry
[16:12]  You: we do voice tonight?
[16:12]  USA Brody: wjames@law.harvard.edu; wjames@fas.harvard.edu
[16:12]  Frappe Lapointe: I did forward it to Brody
[16:12]  You: ty
[16:13]  USA Brody: yeah
[16:13]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:13]  USA Brody: what did becca recommend we do Yvette?
[16:13]  Yvette Kumsung: i was so embarassed yesterday
[16:13]  USA Brody: why?
[16:13]  Frappe Lapointe: why?
[16:13]  You: y?
[16:13]  USA Brody: because of the lack of cohesion of our grup
[16:13]  Yvette Kumsung: sort of
[16:13]  USA Brody: yeah. what was it?
[16:13]  USA Brody: please refine
[16:14]  USA Brody: okay. well sorry for your embarrasment
[16:14]  USA Brody: Can we do anythng to change that?
[16:14]  Yvette Kumsung: it shouldn't be something personal
[16:14]  Yvette Kumsung: :)
[16:14]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:14]  USA Brody: no problems here
[16:15]  USA Brody: since I am right now an avatar
[16:15]  Yvette Kumsung: one moment. I am looking at the wiki
[16:15]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:15]  Frappe Lapointe: It is funny, we have great ideas... just to many
[16:15]  USA Brody: exactly
[16:15]  Frappe Lapointe: and we have gotten stuck on the to many
[16:15]  USA Brody: let's pick one and stick with it
[16:16]  Frappe Lapointe: Well of the point Becca made was to figure out or perspectives
[16:16]  USA Brody: yes.
[16:16]  You: okay, lets pick 2
[16:16]  Yvette Kumsung: So the latest update I think wa made on s http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberone/wiki/Thursday_1900_EST
[16:16]  USA Brody: why two
[16:16]  USA Brody: why not one
[16:16]  You: okay
[16:16]  You: start with 1
[16:16]  USA Brody: why two
[16:16]  USA Brody: why complicate thngs
[16:16]  USA Brody: or is it not
[16:16]  You: 4 people = 2 groups
[16:17]  USA Brody: oh. two groups. ?
[16:17]  You: i think we should split the arguments
[16:17]  USA Brody: Please clarify...
[16:17]  USA Brody: what argument are we making?>
[16:17]  You: too much crosstalk
[16:17]  USA Brody: we should start there
[16:17]  Frappe Lapointe: Heed Typers When Voice Comes Hypothesis: Voice is coming to SL and will bring new capabilities Problem: Discrimination of typers in type-voice coexsiting environment 1.Typers are slower, making it more difficult to fit into conversations 2.Voice users may feel annoyed by chat windows, or get used to minimizing the window 3.Clash of typing sounds with voice Why should we think of protecting the rights of typers? 1. May not be able to speak (mute, soar throat) 2. Situation where you cannot use voice (office) 3. Personal reasons (Don't like sound of voice/doesn't suit identity of avatar/want to keep level of privacy/stutter,lisp, accent) 4. Multitasking (chat while listening to music, etc.) 5. Efficiency in certain situations(Group chats, lectures) Questions to Ask Ourselves 1. Who should be given the right to decide whether the zone is voice, text, or voice-text? 2. How can we create awareness? 3. Are we calling for technical attention from Linden or social attention from residents? Soluti
[16:17]  USA Brody: then decide which side to argue right
[16:17]  Yvette Kumsung: or are you saying...like an empathic argument?
[16:17]  USA Brody: precisely
[16:18]  Frappe Lapointe: which would fit perfectly with the group
[16:18]  USA Brody: so. we can split into two groups to argue
[16:18]  Yvette Kumsung: how to you propose to present it?
[16:18]  You: zackly
[16:18]  Yvette Kumsung: do you
[16:18]  USA Brody: WE could use a podcast
[16:19]  USA Brody: an that mp3 player becca had
[16:19]  You: excellent
[16:19]  USA Brody: or we could do some machinima. but I don't know how to do that
[16:19]  You: so 2 podcasts?
[16:19]  USA Brody: well. one.
[16:19]  Yvette Kumsung: If you give me the audio, I can make machinima
[16:19]  USA Brody: so if we make the podcasts you can create the movie?
[16:19]  Yvette Kumsung: yeah
[16:19]  USA Brody: okay. good plan
[16:19]  USA Brody: now. what are we arguing
[16:20]  Frappe Lapointe: it would be like working as two groups but then come together
[16:20]  USA Brody: right. well. simply distributing the work
[16:20]  USA Brody: we are one group
[16:20]  Yvette Kumsung: that would be easy in the presentation, since all we have to do is play the machinima
[16:20]  You: yes plz
[16:20]  Frappe Lapointe: lets keep it simple
[16:20]  You: but identify the 2 group arguments first
[16:21]  USA Brody: we just need one argument
[16:21]  USA Brody: one specific argument
[16:21]  Frappe Lapointe: One argument is having voice and the other is keeping chat
[16:21]  USA Brody: okay. why?
[16:21]  USA Brody: why not having both?
[16:21]  USA Brody: or the option to choose
[16:21]  Frappe Lapointe: well the argument could be that they can be used together
[16:21]  USA Brody: why are those the best
[16:22]  Frappe Lapointe: we do not have to have those
[16:22]  USA Brody: we have to be empathic to all points of you
[16:22]  Frappe Lapointe: just a thought
[16:22]  USA Brody: right
[16:22]  USA Brody: okay
[16:22]  USA Brody: gotach
[16:22]  USA Brody: gotcha
[16:22]  You: very broad
[16:22]  USA Brody: sorry if I am aggressive sounding. I just had an esspresso! !
[16:22]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:22]  USA Brody: well then .
[16:22]  Yvette Kumsung: ]
[16:22]  Yvette Kumsung: haha
[16:22]  USA Brody: do we have a question to address and a plausible situation to apply it
[16:23]  USA Brody: anyone?
[16:23]  You: argument1: voice needs to be implemented like chat
[16:23]  USA Brody: okay. Yvette. any ideas?
[16:24]  Yvette Kumsung: I'm thinking that maybe you three could all make podcasts
[16:24]  USA Brody: okay
[16:24]  Yvette Kumsung: for, against, and pointing out merits of both
[16:24]  Yvette Kumsung: which I could edit and stick in the end
[16:25]  USA Brody: okay. great.
[16:25]  Frappe Lapointe: That was the line I was down
[16:25]  USA Brody: sound okay to you pere?
[16:25]  You: sure
[16:25]  USA Brody: great
[16:25]  USA Brody: so we all do a podcast
[16:25]  Frappe Lapointe: since we have been that way since we all talked about the project
[16:25]  USA Brody: or three podcasts
[16:25]  USA Brody: sorry
[16:25]  You: 1: for
[16:25]  You: 2: against
[16:25]  Yvette Kumsung: we each do one podcast
[16:26]  You: 3: both
[16:26]  USA Brody: okay. ..... what is the point of doing both sides?
[16:26]  Yvette Kumsung: that way there will be three speakers 
[16:26]  USA Brody: okay
[16:26]  Yvette Kumsung: that person can be the neutral narrator
[16:26]  USA Brody: good thinking
[16:26]  USA Brody: I see.
[16:26]  USA Brody: who wants to argue for?
[16:26]  Frappe Lapointe: I will
[16:27]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:27]  USA Brody: who wants to argue against?
[16:27]  You: script it first?
[16:27]  Frappe Lapointe: of course
[16:27]  Yvette Kumsung: I love Frappe's voice. I'll probably be convinced into her argument. hehe
[16:27]  USA Brody: okay. lol
[16:27]  Frappe Lapointe: Thanks
[16:27]  USA Brody: so. maybe she should be the narrator
[16:27]  USA Brody: so, maybe**
[16:28]  Yvette Kumsung: no. she's too alluring
[16:28]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:28]  Frappe Lapointe: I will go for everyone else, I hate my voice recorded
[16:28]  You: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberone/wiki/Thursday_1900_EST#Machinima_Script
[16:28]  Yvette Kumsung: Great!
[16:28]  USA Brody: okay. so what is going on.
[16:28]  USA Brody: what is the link for Pere?
[16:28]  You: script link
[16:28]  Yvette Kumsung: To upload the script
[16:28]  USA Brody: oh okay
[16:28]  USA Brody: coll
[16:28]  USA Brody: cool
[16:28]  USA Brody: excellent progress
[16:29]  Yvette Kumsung: for the machinima in which we'll have the emphathic argument inside
[16:29]  USA Brody: okay so Frappe is arguing for.
[16:29]  USA Brody: who is arguing against!
[16:29]  USA Brody: any takers
[16:29]  USA Brody: voluntarily?
[16:29]  USA Brody: OKay. I will play devil's advocate then ....
[16:29]  USA Brody: I will argue against
[16:29]  USA Brody: fair?
[16:29]  Yvette Kumsung: Hehe thanks
[16:29]  You: i am gonna go trawl the previous transcripts for material
[16:29]  USA Brody: okay no problem
[16:30]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:30]  You: or do u wanna brainstorm the podcast live?
[16:30]  USA Brody: so I am arguing against voice integration
[16:30]  Yvette Kumsung: It doesn't have to represent your own feelings, it's sort of like acting in a way
[16:30]  USA Brody: right
[16:30]  USA Brody: no problem at all here.
[16:30]  USA Brody: so I am arguing against voice integration?
[16:30]  USA Brody: or no
[16:31]  Frappe Lapointe: Yes brady.. if that is what you would like to do
[16:31]  Frappe Lapointe: Brody
[16:31]  Frappe Lapointe: sorry
[16:31]  USA Brody: okay. no problem
[16:31]  Yvette Kumsung: We should also have someone professional-sounding for the intro and outro (hinting at pere)
[16:31]  USA Brody: Yeah.
[16:31]  USA Brody: Definitely
[16:31]  Frappe Lapointe: Yes
[16:31]  USA Brody: Pere. Up for the introduction?
[16:32]  You: i sound professional?
[16:32]  Frappe Lapointe: So you want the alluring voice on the podcast for me
[16:32]  You: eh
[16:32]  Yvette Kumsung: As for the script, I think we should all contribute to writing it
[16:32]  Yvette Kumsung: or at least pitching in ideas
[16:32]  Frappe Lapointe: okay.
[16:32]  Frappe Lapointe: so first is writting the script
[16:33]  USA Brody: I love to write! but I might make a better editor
[16:33]  USA Brody: Pere. I think you sound professional
[16:33]  USA Brody: so are you up for it?
[16:33]  Yvette Kumsung: Well Brody, since I am mainly against voice, I will try to post a draft that you can edit!
[16:33]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:33]  USA Brody: Well. I can write also.
[16:33]  You: sure
[16:34]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:34]  USA Brody: so real quick
[16:34]  USA Brody: I am aruing against. Frappe is arguing for. Pere is doing the intro
[16:34]  Yvette Kumsung: I need at least two days for the video editing
[16:34]  USA Brody: right?
[16:34]  USA Brody: is everyone clear on that?
[16:34]  USA Brody: or is that not true?
[16:34]  Frappe Lapointe: yes
[16:34]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:34]  You: random content from transcripts : Freedom of Speech Swearing Accents, Pitch, Cultural (Ebonics etc) Disabilities (Stutter, Lisp) SL vs RL (Gender, Voice Fonts) Foreign Languages Crosstalk Latency Text = Oration style
[16:34]  Yvette Kumsung: and we need time for the audio recording, so when should the script deadline be?
[16:35]  You: Sunday?
[16:35]  USA Brody: okay. Script needs priority
[16:35]  You: Saturday?
[16:35]  Yvette Kumsung: tomorrow?
[16:35]  USA Brody: well. I don't care.
[16:35]  USA Brody: I have time.
[16:35]  USA Brody: but it is a priority
[16:35]  You: 1st draft tomorrow
[16:35]  USA Brody: we can do nothing without it
[16:35]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:35]  USA Brody: so.
[16:35]  You: audio draft sunday
[16:35]  USA Brody: Now we know the org of our project
[16:35]  USA Brody: presentation
[16:35]  Frappe Lapointe: we need time to edit the draft
[16:36]  USA Brody: let's focus in on our question to address
[16:36]  USA Brody: no problem with that.
[16:36]  Frappe Lapointe: okay
[16:36]  USA Brody: don't worry about editing
[16:36]  USA Brody: that can be done very quickly
[16:36]  USA Brody: I have great resources for that.
[16:36]  Yvette Kumsung: Also, I'd like to request some ideas or suggestions about images for the machinima
[16:36]  You: 1: Freedom of text chat in SL vs RL
[16:36]  You: 2: SL improvements to voice
[16:37]  USA Brody: okay. great. Yvette.
[16:37]  USA Brody: okay yvette. what do you need.
[16:37]  You: gonna save this in case of crash
[16:37]  USA Brody: or do you want to create a list for us?
[16:37]  Yvette Kumsung: if there are no suggestions otherwise, I'll first post a pre-edit and then we can take it from there
[16:37]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:37]  Yvette Kumsung: well, basically, the images have to match the content
[16:37]  Yvette Kumsung: so it all depends on what we're going to talk about
[16:38]  USA Brody: so. should we look at the wiki for Brein's ideas on our project?
[16:38]  USA Brody: or should we focus on Becca's ideas?
[16:38]  Yvette Kumsung: he had some good ideas it's such a shame he couldn't join us today
[16:38]  USA Brody: yeah. but that doesn't mean we cannot use his ideas.
[16:38]  USA Brody: as a group
[16:38]  USA Brody: we can build on them
[16:38]  Yvette Kumsung: right
[16:38]  USA Brody: okay. so let's get cracking
[16:39]  USA Brody: what is our project argument?
[16:39]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:39]  USA Brody: let's be democratic.
[16:39]  USA Brody: Yvette. What do you think we ar doing?
[16:39]  USA Brody: Frappe. What do you think we are doing?
[16:40]  USA Brody: Pere. What do you think we are doing?
[16:40]  Yvette Kumsung: uh...making an empathic argument machinima on the pros and cons of incorporating voice into SL?
[16:40]  USA Brody: yes.
[16:40]  USA Brody: I agree with that.
[16:40]  USA Brody: Frappe. Pere?
[16:40]  Frappe Lapointe: WeWe are going to show how voice and Chat can bit live in SL with Podcasting out points
[16:41]  Frappe Lapointe: that was both live
[16:41]  USA Brody: Pere?
[16:41]  Frappe Lapointe: Nice drink
[16:41]  USA Brody: Thanks.
[16:41]  USA Brody: It tastes great.
[16:41]  You: Hi Team - I took another shot at the thesis statement to cover the scope of what we are looking to resolve with our upcoming research. Thesis: The integration of Voice in SL can result in varying degrees of discrimination against the residents, and this project will address issues regarding the impact of Voice on the social network. This way, we have identified the 'dispute' item noted by Rebecca, and provided a context for why it may be important to evaluate the item (e.g. potential impact on residents). I think the "everyone is disabled" aspect is great for our conclusion, and also ties into the 'who, how and why', so we can take it out of the thesis statement and incorporate it into the analysis. I hope this helps... Brien
[16:41]  USA Brody: Pere. What do you think we are arguing?
[16:42]  USA Brody: what is your opinion?
[16:42]  USA Brody: should we follow what you posted.
[16:42]  USA Brody: is that what you are implying?
[16:42]  You: everyone is disabled, text is inclusive, voice must be a bridge technology
[16:42]  Frappe Lapointe: It covers all points
[16:43]  USA Brody: are we arguing that?
[16:43]  Yvette Kumsung: i love that. bridge technology
[16:43]  You: voice can be discriminatory
[16:43]  USA Brody: Okay. Well. I have no idea what we are arguing. That is why I am asking.
[16:43]  USA Brody: All of these ideas sound good, and they can overlap
[16:43]  USA Brody: so I think we have a strong idea
[16:44]  USA Brody: I too, have read the wiki
[16:44]  USA Brody: and brein's idea
[16:44]  USA Brody: I have also been to every meeting and read every conversation
[16:44]  You: argument1: for: why voice is not discriminatory or it doesn
[16:44]  You: t matter
[16:44]  You: argument2: voice suxxors, text r00ls
[16:44]  You: and the wrap up
[16:44]  USA Brody: Timeout
[16:45]  USA Brody: Yvette. what did becca recommend to us?
[16:45]  USA Brody: let's incorporate her ideas a little bit .
[16:45]  You: ooh, beer, good idea, brb
[16:45]  Frappe Lapointe: Pere did
[16:45]  Frappe Lapointe: or so I think
[16:45]  USA Brody: okay. Pere did what?
[16:45]  Yvette Kumsung: Well since the hypothesis was that voice would bring discrimination along with its benefits
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: (we already set up on ground-level that voice would bring benefits)
[16:46]  USA Brody: okay.
[16:46]  USA Brody: should we put all of this on the wiki now?
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: we should think of why should we think of protecting the rights of typers and
[16:46]  USA Brody: can anyone do that?
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: how we can protect them
[16:46]  You: its there
[16:46]  USA Brody: okay. great.
[16:46]  You: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberone/wiki/?title=Friday_7pm_Chatlog_20061201&action=edit
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: she was interested in the protection of rights section
[16:46]  Yvette Kumsung: in particular