Forums → The Tavern → Super cool and awesome bunnies!

Well, here is our new record to break to prove Cerene wrong, we gotta get this to 75 pages or more

Well, it still wouldn't help me. 75 pages of posts might be doable, but writing a 75 page thesis on forum behaviour might be over the top. I could barely manage 20 for the paper on informal learning in MMORPGs.

I would say procrastinators (internet is a great way to burn some hours)
judgemental (any loosely regulated forums show what I mean)
non-patient (a guy once got angry that he couldn't use wi-fi on the plane while it was in the air)
quick to find patterns (universal power button sign, my mom didn't know what it was and where it usualy is located)
has enhanced material needs (it has gone so far that virtual friends and items are of worth to people)
I think that's all I could really classify as a digital native, feel free to critique the list.

Well, the list wasn't a checklist as much as a list of things digital natives are (that is, people that have been born into the media, and have been using it since they were small children).
So, if you are younger than me, you are most likely a digital native by default, while people older than me, but able to use the internet and computer well would be digital migrates.
I do somewhat agree with the list. Many of the mentioned points are things that has changed in the digital generation. Lack of attentionspan, lack of patience and all that is rather visible, and while tying somewhat with the point of mr. Snotface's multitasking idea, it doesn't seem that he was quite aware how most people multitask.

So as digital natives we all get permanently banned so that we can all personally learn from experience what it is like. Only, we can't really apply that then, unless we want to try and get an IP ban from circumvention of the ban hammer.

Pretty much. Though, it should probably be assumed that being permabanned is not something people would want to learn about anyway.
His article annoys me a lot on this point, because sure, people learn from experience, informal learning is almost entirely this, but he makes it up to sound like that digital natives are almost completely unable to go through a formal education because they can't handle book knowledge in any way, shape or form.
Learning is a blend of both formal and informal learning, and while informal learning is important, so is formal learning. Without that, you would be unable to write, read, do math...

You know, either of those absolutes sound fine to me. I guess the right would be better... Is the left a relation to what we have now?

The left would be what digital natives go through (that is, anyone around the age of 16 and down would have these traits), while the right would be what everyone over the age of, what, 40? or above are like and how they work. In the middle would be various degrees of digital migrates, who would probably be a blend of the two, or would be more like either of the groups depending on age and how interested they are in the digital media.
So, it's kind of a... This is you - this is your dad thing.
Which just shows that mr.Snotface has issues with being too general.

I'm now going to start at page 1 and work my way. Prepare yourself. (jk)

I'm going to try to answer the OP1a as best I can. T_T I understood it for a minute and lost track and found my way and was lost again. RUN ON, BAM. So let me dissect.

Lately there has been a large influx of people who, and I can only assume here, didn't think it was a good idea to read the rules when they got here, and now, several ranks later, they are doing their very best to get any and all topics closed because they can't type up seven words in response.

Agreed.

I don't know why, but I kinda assumed forums were for discussion, but there seem to be a general consensus that forums are for poll replies, just like the game comments are for word burps instead of, say, quick feedback or reviews, comments, suggestions and so forth.

'Tis what happens when you get a larger amount of people. It's why the 'old days' were better. Not as many people, more concentration on standard intelligence.

Is this a thing we just ought to live with, because the internet degrade brains, or should we stand tall, and possibly wait in a dark alley for the people doing this, and beat them up?

We generally do beat them up, you know. A n00b lik dis wil nt sty n da WEPR or AMW 4 vry long. We thin out the herd by our cold-sort of demeanor and obvious dislike of idiots.

Same goes for the deal of "let's reply unnecessarily to questions", not just with the 100+ replies to "How do I change my armatar" or something equally simple, but also the 50+ replies after someone made the first move and told the newbie to go do us all a favour and read the stickies.

Isn't that why most people except the Newbies stay out of there? It's for them to find their footing first. I'd rather them be idiots there in our poor AMW, she gets hurt enough just by my sorry poetry. :'(

I am well aware that the people pointing out the obvious and biting the mods in their well meaning way is doing it out of a good heart, but like the other example, it ends up being rather unnecessary, and spoonfeeding others information just ends up leaving them unable to learn it all themselves.

They're just babies, Cen. They have no idea what to do on the flipside of AG. But if this is a huge problem, maybe a clearer FAQ can help, then if the person still doesn't understand, lead them by the hand to the forums.

I believe I just answered the question. But I'll keep flipping through the pages, and add on to my post.

I'm skipping the second OP until I get a clearer understand. I don't think I could answer it right now with a competent answer.

On an unrelated note (excuse the hypocrisy), I've noticed now that you're not a mod, people treat you differently.. :/

Very true. As something just went 'down', it makes me a bit... angry that just because he's willingly stepped down that people will get angry with him. I mean, he's still friends with the other mods. Ban hammers still exist. Though without Cen being in possession of one, the presence of the hammer has decreased.

But then agian this could just be like communism, it only looks good on paper and never actualy works in real life.

That's exactly what it is. You'll always have idiots. The only thing that will change is how you deal with them. True, the number of those idiots may go down, but you'll just have even longer ramblings of people who have no idea what they are talking about. Thus, more TL;DR, and it will probably go right back to what we were trying to prevent.

Also I have found that writing more thoughtfully helps me also is school because I am already used to throwing all my thoughts into one thing and including alot of deatail.

Again I'm getting off topic, but whatever.
I have to agree. If some of you miiiiight remember when I first came here, I was a bit the noobs I'm not fond of today. I used u for you and 2 for too, to, and two, and all the other murderous activities of the English language. Staying for as long as I have, AG has really helped me sort out my crazy rambled thoughts. I used to jump around a lot more, but at least now I might go back and edit, whereas before I would just type away and hit submit without a thought of "Do I sounds somewhat educated?"

I still ramble, but most people tend to catch the drift of my posts.

Or you could make a ________ character minimum on the forum posts and comments or else it won't give you AP. Because I'm pretty sure that a lot of times the users don't know better and think that putting "that sound cool" for a forum post is a valid post.

That actually sounds like a nifty idea. Reinforcing the standard, but this time it isn't optional. Buh bam. It might still flood our forums, but I think there would be more incentive to think more.
Then again, I did say about people posting nonsense. That could relate again to the TL;DR deal.
It was a very nice idea, though.

This is one of the stupid part of this current time's online society. Few bothers to read rules or Terms of Conduct/Agreement/and Conditions. This usually ends with them agreeing to things they would never agree to if asked, and in cases like forums, skipping past the important parts about how to properly behave on the site they are using (and the fact that they agree to follow the rules, not bad mouth moderators and not circumvent bans).
Seriously, some might think the bane of humanity will be robots. I think humanity might just end up clicking 'I agree' to something that will get them killed.

Rules & Terms... T_T I'm one who doesn't read them. I'll admit it, we should all admit it. It's written with a very... bland tone, and after a while gets very boring. Let's be honest though, if people actually READ the rules and agreements, would they really buy the thing? Now, if it's something very important, like a phone, or something very expensive, I will take the time to scan through the terms and conditions, just so I sometimes know what to know screw up. I could go on about T&C, but I'd rather not. I have many pages of posts to go.

@CommanderPaladin. I think you're my hero. I read your post, and I have nothing else to say besides "I agree." If I was to list the reasons why.... it would make my post even longer and Cen probably wouldn't even both to read it.

I have to admit I don't necessarily read TaCs. I do skim them for important information and to know what I will be agreeing to, but I don't normally read them thoroughly.
But that said, I doubt most people even do that any more. It's more of a 'scroll to bottom, click I agree' thing.

Now I typed up the same darn thing just to see you did it too later. Well this must be what I get for trying to get a rundown of everything :<

I think I might give up on quoting some of the more... off topic things. So pretty much wherever Nicho comes in.

I'm agreeing with him when he says internet friends for the win. I text Freakenstein pretty much all day, and he's probably one of the best guy friends I've (n)ever met. And we've been messaging for so long, I'm pretty sure it's been a year by now.
And we totally had a kid in February. OH YEAH WE'RE MARRIED. Well. That is. also, another story for another time. But again, internet friendships are just as lovely are "irl" friendships.

Simply put some thought into your posts. Make it look like your tried, as opposed to vomiting whatever ill-planned thoughts you have stored in your empty little heads all over my internets.

This^.
And. *dumps teh brainz all over his interwebs*
I doubt/hope he'll ever read that, cause I have never talked to him before

I predict that most of what 'will' be said on the next 4 pages will just be a re-barf of what has happened on the first 3.

Now the next point. Yes Gold King is extremely sad. It reminds me daily of how much time I've devoted here, when I could have been studying or having a social life. You wont understand but the high rankers all do.

I used to reaaaaaaaaally want Gold Queen. A part of me still does, but I'm not going for it the way I used to. I see Knights and such now and I feel like telling them, "Leave while you still can."

I'm sorry but that was how the peope on AG used to talk before we came to this sorry state of the Forum.

I believe it's only by the grace of years of sarcasm that I have ever been able to decipher Nicho's posts. One of the few users I can tolerate teetering on the see-saw of sarcasm and donkey-style.

But when you set up this whole "vets and newbs" thing, you are destroying any lasting potential this site has.

While I do somewhat agree, I don' t think that having vets and newbs is overall bad. Newbs go to vets for help, that's how I see the labels. I don't tag a feeling of superiority with vet, and I don't tag a mandatory sense of humility to a newb.

If you think this site is dominated by idiots and lazy people, why are you even here? I mean, what does that say about your intelligence, if you spend your time on the internet getting frustrated by idiots?

Again, a part of me agrees but I think you're being a bit too critical. There are places that the more adapted run to, their safe haven usually being their respective area of interest. For me, AMW. There are still a few shreds of hope left, and I'm not willing to let it become completely overrun with people who just comment "good job."

The site is dominated by the idiots. Due to the increase of users, we can't keep the same quality of forum. It's like the assembly line. Produce more, but quality goes down. Eventually the lowering of quality will (and has been between the years of 2009 to early 2011) be accepted by the majority. There are a few people, mainly the vets, who have returned and found there once high quality forum in ruins. I would be upset by that too, if I had joined around that time. All I get to do is hope for some sort of restoration of standard with the sudden return of older members.

Sorry, getting off topic here... My point is, don't criticize the intelligence of those who have nostalgia.

I think that sometimes there will be a newer user who will have insightful ideas about the topic they are in yet they won't be taken as seriously because they don't have as many posts or as much as a reputation as the more experienced users

I thought this might come up.

I haven't seen a 'newb' been disregarded and thrown aside simply because of their post count. If, in their post, they have insightful information, I highly doubt that they won't be taken seriously. It's a logical conclusion, yes, but I haven't seen the 'vets' sink to that yet.

AND AGAIN WHAT I TYPE IN RESPONSE IS STATED BY CEN.

Whatever. I'll just 're-barf' what he says, even though it isn't because I didn't even read his post until after I answered. This was a stupid idea, starting at the beginning and going through as if I was present in the past. But it helps me follow along, although it's a bit frustrating. T_T

@JefffK, you were shot down before. Voidy might break you if you don't stay down. :|


And I finally reach the end, just to notice that most of the people have already finished the race.
I'm up for a rematch, so let's stir up the debate-fry.

Well, it hasn't ended. But the Log pretty much ended it.

I do have to say ooooooooooooooooone more thing.

I would say procrastinators (internet is a great way to burn some hours)
judgemental (any loosely regulated forums show what I mean)
non-patient (a guy once got angry that he couldn't use wi-fi on the plane while it was in the air)
quick to find patterns (universal power button sign, my mom didn't know what it was and where it usualy is located)
has enhanced material needs (it has gone so far that virtual friends and items are of worth to people)
I think that's all I could really classify as a digital native, feel free to critique the list.

The digital natives are the ones that get to redefine the whole world. So these characteristics have pretty much described everyone around my age.
Procrastination on a project that is useless because you can now just google the answer on your phone. Education will be reformed entirely, people are just a bit slow to realize that we don't need this general education to know things when we now have all of it available in our pockets.
Finding patterns is a yes, because it might be the only one I don't take negatively.
Judgmental, almost everyone is judgmental. If anything, people in our age are a bit less so than your mother or father. Again, we are exposed to more information, and we get to make our own conclusions rather than being spoon-fed the general opinion.
Impatient*. Here I will agree, although it's a bit negative. We don't like super slow internet connections, do we? If it isn't instantaneous, there's a problem.
Enhanced material need? I'm not exactly sure... I'm pretty sure it's AGAIN that we have more things to want. Do you think when people were moving out to the West they were concerned with the latest trend in Europe? No. Inventions are made to simplify the way we live, and it can only be simplified further. We don't want complex. That would be going back into the past. Now that we don't have to dedicate our entire day to work, we have free time. What better to fill it with than meaningless social or gaming activities that make tons of money?

Hopefully this sliiiiightly offtopic ending will give some sort of anything.

Funny how the front page of the topic listing made me go revive this...
Also, homework. Shh...

Yay, Moon, nooo, long post.

We generally do beat them up, you know. A n00b lik dis wil nt sty n da WEPR or AMW 4 vry long. We thin out the herd by our cold-sort of demeanor and obvious dislike of idiots.

I do believe it is a weird type of internet elitism. We snark and growl at them for writing in a way that hurts to read, and if we do it enough they either progress into taking time to write properly (so we might be able to understand them), or they get butthurt and leave.
I think most prefer the latter option, especially when it comes to the tighter knit groups of the forum, that doesn't like being disturbed by strangers and newcomer's.
A weird form of cliques, I guess.
Though we don't steal their lunchmoney... We should start doing that.
Either way, once again it does reflect the social behaviour of people in real life. We don't want to let strangers in, because they aren't like us, or we don't know them or both. They are just going to screw stuff up and ruin our fun and what not.
Even if it isn't true, there is a great aspect of paranoia, security and trust, and most people, as mentioned, are rather distrustful, because the internet has a tendedcy to snap back at the first mistake you make, and people will remember that forever.

They're just babies, Cen. They have no idea what to do on the flipside of AG. But if this is a huge problem, maybe a clearer FAQ can help, then if the person still doesn't understand, lead them by the hand to the forums.

Except, leading them by hands will teach them nothing. It's the way parents protect their kids when they are too small to learn from their mistakes or understand what exactly their parents say.
I do believe that most people on the internet should be out of that phase of their life, no matter how much they long back to that time where people did stuff for them, took decision for them and held their hand so they didn't have to worry.
The internet is like playing with a dog. If you are unexperienced, you will do something wrong, and you will get bitten. If someone comes to you and tell you you shouldn't do this and that, you most likely will forget in no time. But getting bitten, or have the dog growl at you or have yourself actually want to learn how to behave around a dog will most likely teach you a lot more, and this is what a FAQ or a help page should do, not to mention, that is the initiative people should take when they appear on a new site.
Don't be a moron and let others tell you what to do and what not to. Go find the information for yourself, and then ask questions, if there is something you don't understand. Show that you bothered checking in the first place, that you are actually motivated to learn, or deal with the consequences without being a brat about it, whine and complain...
After all, if an otherwise well mannered dog bites, it's not because the dog did anything wrong.

Unlreated, but eh:

Though without Cen being in possession of one, the presence of the hammer has decreased.

I am actually kinda annoyed with certain people in the community, that has gotten a tendency to be minimods without being able to actually follow the rules.
Like spamming when telling others not to spam. I would most likely have banned them already, but if they have been banned, they obviously learned nothing from it...

I used to reaaaaaaaaally want Gold Queen. A part of me still does, but I'm not going for it the way I used to. I see Knights and such now and I feel like telling them, "Leave while you still can."

Achievements, the bane of rational thought.
Stuff like that is designed to be addicting. You can't just leave, because you need that last little one thing or another, and you are so close.
It migth as much be online behaviour as much as humans being hardwired to be tricked by achievements and hoarding and all those other little things that would have saved your life when you lived in a cave or worked for your life and stuff, but now it is just a way to screw you over.
A bit like sweet stuff.

Education will be reformed entirely, people are just a bit slow to realize that we don't need this general education to know things when we now have all of it available in our pockets.

Painful, but true. Except, when it comes to education beyond high schools and what not. There are things you need to learn to be able to build other knowledge on top. That might be the main reason mainstream schools are like they are. They are building a foundation, and highening your skills so you might be able to do better.
Not to mention, people that have those skills, and the abilities to learn and the will to work... they do better. They will give their children a better home and excel the species... And considering how many uneducated people that procreate and let kids live a life where they can only go from average to less than average (unless they are lucky as heck or geniuses), we do need people withe the abilities of the modern school system and beyond.
Otherwise we might end up degrading as a species...
That didn't at all sound social-ist, did it...

Education will be reformed entirely, people are just a bit slow to realize that we don't need this general education to know things when we now have all of it available in our pockets.

You can't really carry around grammer in your pocket, or google up math problems, you might not need the stuff, but for some people learning those equations early are life savers and in the information age science and technology are changing our life everyday using math that was learned in school (ironic how I made a run on).

Stuff like that is designed to be addicting. You can't just leave, because you need that last little one thing or another, and you are so close.

I find that a good way to not try to go for points is just to ignore your rank and ap, that way you wouldn't think about them.

The internet is like playing with a dog. If you are unexperienced, you will do something wrong, and you will get bitten

I really haven't seen much of a bite from the internet, the most I have ever had was losing a few friends; but if they couldn't believe me then why have em? The internet in my mind is quite a safe place since if you ever do screw up, you could always start agian, there's no real bite. But in real life the bite is very real if you screw up so this is almost like field testing each thing.

You can't really carry around grammer in your pocket

To quote a language programme advertisement, most of your language is initiative. If it sounds wrong, it most likely will be.

The internet in my mind is quite a safe place since if you ever do screw up, you could always start agian, there's no real bite. But in real life the bite is very real if you screw up so this is almost like field testing each thing

I would consider it the other way around. The internet, while having few direct consequences, does have a worse bite than its bark, mainly because you invest a lot into an online identity, stuff that could be very easily ruined by people that just really doesn't care. In real life, people are quite aware that you are there, that you are a real person, and that harassing you could mean things both to you and to them. The internet does not work that way, which is why "cyberbullying" has become such a plague. People that are already ruining your life in real life can follow your escape to the internet world, and make your world a living hell there too.
And where a buly without internet can make your life hell in the city you are in at most, a bully with internet can make your life hell everywhere, from now and until you die.
Take facebook, as an example: You will be judged by your facebook profile, not just by other regular people, but by your employer, your girl/boyfriend and anyone else that might have a serious impact on your life. Stuff as simple as your friends and what they upload could ruin a chance to get a job, even if you are not involved in what they write or have taken pictures of.
That is a serious setback that is caused by inexperience with the internet, which is like the growl. The bite would be when you yourself have uploaded stuff, even in the past, that shows who you - are. Those pictures of you vomiting into someone's hat won't look well thirty years from now, and the internet never forgets.

Anyway, reality is like playing with a dog too, though. It's social interaction, it is bound to have consequences and it is bound to hurt. The - size of the dog, and whether it is more bark than bite depends on what you invest more time on. If you feel more at ease on the internet, you will be more affected by something that happens here, than someone that feels more at ease in the physical world.
This does not mean that basement dwellers are the only people affected by stuff on the internet, but rather that inverted people have a tendency to feel more at ease when other people are not physically there, and thus being able to communicate whenever they want, to who they want and perhaps invent a proper identity, where they aren't the shy guy no one likes.

I can only assume extroverts won't be making a separate identity on the internet, but their identity can still carry over into the physical world... And I think I have ranted about this enough.

To quote a language programme advertisement, most of your language is initiative. If it sounds wrong, it most likely will be.

That's actualy one of the things my grammer teacher taught me never to do because some grammatical errors are so common that they no longer sound wrong to you.

Take facebook, as an example

Yea My paren'ts told me when facebook was big to watch out because some employers look at your facebook to see if you are a good candidate for a job. Also please never have a sence of privacy on Facebook, I have read the privacy statement and translated into simple terms it states this "No one could see your profile unless they can see your profile" I was quite surprised when I saw this because I was expecting a whole lot of words and useless details, but the PS on Fabebook dosen't give a single detail.

The - size of the dog, and whether it is more bark than bite depends on what you invest more time on.

It really depends about how much you are thinking about what you are doing, I learned at an early age that slipping up now can effect you even later so I've always played it safe, never posted personal information on websites, and never did stupid and reckless things. So because I never do stupid things there really is no bite from either, but there is a growl.

That's actualy one of the things my grammer teacher taught me never to do because some grammatical errors are so common that they no longer sound wrong to you.

Hence the "most".

It really depends about how much you are thinking about what you are doing, I learned at an early age that slipping up now can effect you even later so I've always played it safe, never posted personal information on websites, and never did stupid and reckless things. So because I never do stupid things there really is no bite from either, but there is a growl.

It does just confirm my theory, though. You learned how to handle the internet, thus you are much less likely to make mistakes that will get you bitten. An average internet user is like a toddler with an old dog. The dog isn't likely to bite anyway, but the toddler is most likely doing everything in their might to make the old dog snap accidentally. They have little experience with the internet as a whole, and have no idea of how to behave properly, so they won't get in trouble.
As mentioned, there was a mr. Snottyface that said digital natives know what they are doing online, but the truth is that most people are fairly incompetent when it comes to the new media...

Sorry I haven't been able to rejoin this little discussion sooner, I've just been busier than a coffee-swilling beaver these past few weeks.
Anyhow, here we go:

Digital natives are:
Working via multitasking (as opposed to time management)
Learning from experience (-''- instructions)
Working together with others collectively oriented (-''- independent individuals meeting)
Motivated by positive encouragement (-''- competition)
Considering authority something you have to earn (-''- having respect for authorities)
Decentralised, not in a hierarchy (-''- centralised, in a hierarchy)
/Wants information to be accessible to everyone (-''- wants information to be accessible to leaders)
This is Peter Hanke's thoughts on digital natives as opposed to the baby boomers. He also considers digital natives to be independant and strong people, loyal to each other, that piracy is a rebellion and awesome and will lead to a society where everything is free in a few years.
There was also mention of digital natives having little patience with structured learning, and would much rather learn by doing...

With the barest minimum of due respect, this Hanke guy seems to have his head firmly lodged in his arse. He's wrong or off-balance on almost every point here. From the top:

Working via multitasking (as opposed to time management)

Working via multitasking implies accomplishing multiple constructive tasks at the same time. However, you really aren't getting anything done if you're living the standard digital native lifestyle of having a gadget in each hand and earbuds in both ears as you walk down the street oblivious to that oncoming bus. While you aren't exactly managing your time, you aren't multitasking either, because you aren't actually accomplishing anything. Sure, you might be playing a game with one hand, checking your Facebook rep with the other, and listening to music your earbuds at the same time, but what have you accomplished? Beating some pre-set program at a finite series of scenarios based on character interaction? Getting arbitrary approval for your life from people you'll never meet and who honestly wouldn't give you a second thought if you were in the same room as them? At the end of the day, have you truly achieved anything that will shape or influence your future or the future of those around you? No. (Unless that bus hit you.) This is neither multitasking nor is it time management. Multi-device time mismanagement might be a better term.

Learning from experience (-''- instructions)

Currently, people do not possess the instinctive knowledge to operate in an online society or use electronic devices from birth. While this may change in the future due to the over-saturation of real-world society by said electronics, people still have to read the instructions before joining or operating in the digital native universe. Granted, in some fields learning by experience is somewhat required due to a lack of prior experience on the societal level, for example with an entirely new type of social site or forum. However, as the electronic arena further develops, learning from instruction is becoming more and more accepted and necessary. The internet can be an unforgiving place, and as things like punishments for violating online community codes of conduct and cyber-criminal law catch up to the internet itself, choosing to learn by experience will increasingly become a fatal error. Therefore, learning by experience online is a short-lived phenomenon that will fade away with time.

Working together with others collectively oriented (-''- independent individuals meeting)

The nature of the internet world overall precludes this. While some things, like Wikipedia for example, act as a sort of hivemind comprised of people all working together towards a common goal (in this case, expanding the available knowledge on the site), overall the online world is made up of disassociated individuals who are all seeking their own ends in the virtual ether. These individuals are all independent of each other, and when they meet, they may have discussions, share opinions and ideas, and generally interact, but ultimately they are not all working towards some general, overarching goal. They are, as the saying goes, simply ships that pass in the night. Incidentally, this is exactly how the real world works most of the time, so there's not even any distinction between the real and digital worlds here as Hanke implies.

Motivated by positive encouragement (-''- competition)

Again, no difference between the worlds. Everyone likes to hear a "job well done" occasionally, and if they have actually earned it (as opposed to it being one of those "there's no failing grade" farces), then it motivates them to continue to perform in the same manner. At the same time, competition also stimulates improvement in skill or performance by utilizing the basic human desire to be better than the next guy. In the real world, it drives people to succeed, and in the cyber world, particularly the gaming aspect, it drives people to win. The only differences are the venue in which the principles are demonstrated and whether or not they have lasting significance.

Considering authority something you have to earn (-''- having respect for authorities)

This premise is flawed at its core. It presumes that real-world people automatically respect and obey certain people, while online everybody is equal until they post so much that they are considered better than all others and therefore are to be obeyed. In real life, when a society is formed, people who demonstrate leadership, problem resolution, and good judgement qualities are respected and placed in positions of authority by the rest of the people so as to lead and govern them. In virtual societies, much the same thing happens: when people establish a meeting place or forum, they select people with the same qualities as mentioned before to govern the site and prevent it from deteriorating into a cesspool of chaotic discord. In both worlds, the people are respected for the same reasons and therefore are chosen to lead. People who just post a lot for example have no more authority than the guy who just joined five minutes ago. They may have more acuity in regards to the site based on practice, and it is their responsibility to help the newcomers when possible, but they are not authority figures unless appointed as such.

Decentralised, not in a hierarchy (-''- centralised, in a hierarchy)

Another flawed concept. Just because people are not in a central location does not mean that there is no chain of authority. Similarly, just because people are together does not mean that there is a hierarchal structure. Real-world examples of these statements (respectively) are the French Resistance in World War 2 and a group of guys out bowling. The Resistance was by no means centralized, but there was a definite chain of command, and it was because of this coordination that they were such an effective thorn in the enemy's side. Now look at our group of bowlers. It's a group of people in a centralized location, but there is no hierarchy involved. They're all equals, except of course in score (but that's a matter of skill, not authority). Whether or not there is a hierarchal structure in place depends entirely on whether people are acting in a group or separately, and both situations are common online, which makes it incorrect to quantify one world one way and the other as the opposite.

Wants information to be accessible to everyone (-''- wants information to be accessible to leaders)

Yet another flawed premise. People are by nature curious, and because of that they generally want information to be widely available (excluding personal info), and it usually is. Online, you have amongst others Google and Wikipedia, and in the real world you have libraries, newspapers, tv programs, and encyclopedias, to name just a few. For government related information, there is the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the process for filing to have info made public unless it is classified. That said, information overall is widely available to all in both the real and digital worlds, so Hanke's assumption that real-world people only want information to be available to leaders is just plain wrong.

considers digital natives to be independant and strong people, loyal to each other

Independent? Strong? How independent are you when you are plugged in 24/7 to a digital universe that you use for everything except going to the restroom (and I'm sure someone's working on an App for that)? How strong are you when you allow the authors of the internet to spoon-feed you your opinions? And loyalty? These are people you will never meet, never know, and never have any reason to care about. How does that breed any kind of loyalty? To be loyal to a person or cause, you have to know everything about it and consciously devote yourself to it. That is impossible when the only info you have is a handful of forum posts or blog entries. Sure, it's easy to pay lipservice to a person or cause, but actual loyalty runs far, far deeper than that and is in short supply even in the real world amongst people who see each other face-to-face, much less online where everything is remote and dispassionate. Taken in light of reality, Hanke's opinion on this is a bunch of sentimental hogwash from someone who is likely a hopeless apologetic for the " brave new world" of internet society, i.e. one of those non-conformists who are all alike.

piracy is a rebellion and awesome and will lead to a society where everything is free in a few years.

Yep, one of those non-conformists who are all alike. The last time people talked about an awesome rebellion was during the uproar called the 1960s and '70s, and that ended up being a drug and STD infested period that put a major hole the nation's foundations. In other words, it ended badly.
Piracy online is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, it is a type of theft, and while it is wrong there are plenty of people who would use that as an excuse to regulate away the rights of everyone who uses the internet (SOPA and PIPA ring a bell?). On the other hand, it is inevitable. Once you put something out there in the ether of the web, it is out there forever and for all to see, and because of that you've essentially made it public material. In short, it is a situation with no right answer. But using piracy to create a society where everything is free? I hope Hanke doesn't include the real world in that, but I suspect that he does. Such a society removes the rewards for putting hard work, effort, and resources into a project and therefore removes the incentive to create new things. At the same time, it allows people to get something for nothing, which removes the need to work, and that leads to stagnation and ultimately the demise of the society. An excellent example of this is the Roman Empire of ancient times. Once the mightiest force on Earth, they began to follow a socialist path exactly as described above, and it led to their ruin and their empire being trampled into the dust of history. The fact that we have fancy electronic gadgets does not change the outcome when the same actions are repeated.

digital natives having little patience with structured learning, and would much rather learn by doing

Another case of falsely implied and non-existent differences between the real and online worlds. People overall today have decreasing attention spans and therefore decreased patience. That aside though, people throughout time have been able to progress through a properly balanced mix of being taught and doing for themselves. One generation teaches the next the principles it has learned by doing, and then that new generation takes those principles and uses them to find the next level of knowledge. If people had relied entirely on structured learning from their peers, we would still be trying to figure out how to visit the other side of a flat Earth, and if they had relied completely on learning by experience they would have either given up after too many failures or died from too much error in "trial and error." A proper mix of the two educational means is essential, and a society ignoring this does so at its own peril.

So, what have we learned here? That there is actually very little difference between the real and online worlds, that "multitasking" in the cyber world (Cyberia?) is just a new way to waste time, that authority works the same both on- and off- line, and that Mr. Peter "Snottyface" Hanke's entire intellectual vocabulary can be expressed in the word "derp."

And now, it's time for me to rearm and reload so I can deploy my next wall of text.

Fien, I will reply to your post, CP, but just this once, since obviously everyone else has lost interest and I am way too busy doing stuff about games and social...ness.
Though, one of my professors did an interesting piece on this whole internet thing, and while I would recommend it, it is in Danish, so it wouldn't do much.

Anyway.

Working via multitasking implies accomplishing multiple constructive tasks at the same time[...].

Well, to be fair, I do believe the whole multitasking thing is closely related to the ability to make posts on the internet while listening to scrapped soundtracks for animated children movies while watching a movie in TV on mute, while also packing, which is what I am doing.
Not as much a mention of digital natives being really effective or focused, but rather being able to have several streams of thought going at the same time, and still getting something done.
An observation on how most teens/young adults have a tendency to be on the internet and watching Tv while writing their assignments, because their attention span is worse than that of a ferret, but still accomplishing getting done with the assignment somehow.
Or just the ability to exist in several realities (fictional or otherwise) at the same time.

Currently, people do not possess the instinctive knowledge [...].

Though, most people do learn very well through experience. However, so did people before the net-age.
It is a nice blend of formal and informal learning, and well, if people are telling you differently, they are either narrow-minded or too lazy to read the rules.

The nature of the internet world overall precludes this[...].

To be fair, my prof did a good job on explaining this (which again makes Mr. Harke's article a bunch of crap...): The children of the 60's and the 70's were rather individualistic and contest minded, where their culture rewarded being a jack-butt that elbowed their way to the top. The children of the 80's and 90's, which might in most senses be the - digital natives that Harke talks about, started to rebel against that thought, because you don't have to elbow your way to the top on the internet. You don't even have to be an individual, rather, most people have hidden identities, either posting entirely anonymous or using handles that does not give their true identity up. And no one minds this at all.
So, basically, it is probably supposed to be a way of describing how the internet has united an entire generation that will work on something together, rather than having a generation that was build on being your entirely own (as seen still in X-factor, America's next whatever and so on (noteworthy, it is the individual generation that is ruling TV still, so that explains that)).

Again, no difference between the worlds[...].

Same as the previous reply. There isn't that much competition on the internet. There are different programmes for the same thing, but they are not in direct competition the same way real life brands might be.

This premise is flawed at its core[...].

I think I have given my opinion on this quite a lot previously in this thread. The internet has just as much of a hierarchy as the - real world, it is just manifested slightly differently. After all, while the internet, or rather, the people on the internet, act pretty much the same on and off the net, it is two different things (which I just realised after reading the book by my prof...).
Either way, humans seem to be pack animals anyway, obviously we are going to have a hierarchy...

Yet another flawed premise.

To be honest, I might be agreeing slightly with his idea on this matter. Slightly. Mainly because, while we do have freedom of information, who are actually fighting the fight for freedom of information? It's the net-gen. Politicians here in Denmark were completely taken off guard the day we demonstrated against ACTA. They didn't think anyone would care about such little things like having no privacy on the internet, or the fact they kept ACTA a secret (and the politicians still think it is a marvellous idea not to share anything with the rest of the country...).
Either way, it seem quite clear that, well, while the 'information for the leaders only' thing might not be true, this generation really believes in the freedom of information philosophy, while the previous generation kinda just shrugs and move on.

Independent? Strong? How independent are you when you ar[...].

Basically that. His opinion might have been based on the 'they need no leaders, they r rebel' thing he kept going on about, but... well... No.

Yep, one of those non-conformists who are all alike.

Prof kinda made a point that the net-gen is actually currently going through their own youth rebellion like during the 70's. Except, no one seems to be aware, because the rebellion isn't working like the rebellion did back in the days.
He's probably right, or at least he makes a very convincing point about it, pointing at the Arab Spring and the protests against SOPA and friends.
On that note, we did discuss this in class, and came to the partial conclusion that if someone that was actually a competent user of the internet had sat down and made SOPA/PIPA/ACTA, it would have looked wildly differently, and while there might still have been protests about it, it would have been a lot easier to accept for the net-generation (and thus anyone that protested against them in the first place). But no, the old grey men had to make their own crap.

Another case of falsely implied and non-existent differences between the real and online worlds[...].

See reply about formal and informal learning.
It's a little sad it seems like such a new invention too.

Either way, well... Yes. Mr. Hanke's article was flawed to say the least, it was not a particularly good read and just made the majority of us pissed off. No, wait... The four or five people in my class that know enough of the internet to be pissed off about it...
As for any discussions on copyright and piracy, well, that's a discussion we need to take some time. It's important to our future.

Anyway, my last words in this discussion... It's been interesting to read and observe this thread. And 8 pages is pretty far for one of my threads anyway. So perhaps it's a good time to end it all.
Now, for this CAPTCHA....