Elwyn Jenkins: The Technacy Exposition

How to Read Electronic Language

Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:08:29 GMT

[Electronic Language is the tool we use to communicate when using computers connected together, particularly on the Internet. Find a fuller explanation of Electronic Language here.]

We can ask the question “How do I read electronic language?” in another way that will help us to understand. “How do I decode a particular text?” or “How do I read the search engine Google?” (This is like asking, how do I read John Grisham’s novel “The Chamber”.)

To explain this, it will be easier to show you someone writing about their reading of Google. Let us work through the following. This is a discussion about how Google does something:

Welcome microdoc:
control panel, site search, glossary, library, help, recent posts

Thanks for keeping
us banner free

Home / Forums Index / The Search Engine World / Google News

Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Marcia & ciml & WebGuerrilla	Forum Options: Reset last read pointers
Google News

Google treats same page differently
depending on search terms

snowfox121
Junior Member

joined:Apr 15, 2002
posts:75
msg #:1

5:15 am on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

If I do a search on "blue widgets," my page "widget.htm" comes up in the results with a fresh date of Dec. 26.

If I do a search on "widgets" the same page "widget.htm" comes up in the results but with no fresh date.

How can this be? Both results point to the same page, which google has obviously visited on the 26th. Why this difference in the results?

rfgdxm1
Senior Member

joined:May 12, 2002
posts:982
msg #:2

5:29 am on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

You probably hit a different box the second time that hadn't yet got the fresh page. Google isn't one computer. It's a bunch of Linux boxen in 7 datacenters around the world.

snowfox121
Junior Member

joined:Apr 15, 2002
posts:75
msg #:3

5:32 am on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

oy, thanks.

soapystar
Preferred Member

joined:June 19, 2002
posts:309
msg #:4

5:37 am on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

may not be the case here..but ive noticed that google will serve the most relevant version of my homepage.....if the fresh tag is more relevant i get that..sometimes ive seen it serve a chached page more than 3 months old....

Powdork
Preferred Member

joined:Sept 13, 2002
posts:316
msg #:5

6:44 am on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

You probably hit a different box the second time that hadn't yet got the fresh page. Google isn't one computer. It's a bunch of Linux boxen in 7 datacenters around the world.

I posted this same question once before and got the same answer. However, as I'm sure is probably the case with the lovely snowfox, no matter how many times you try the two searches, it keeps happening. This would suggest that different searches automatically are routed through different centers rather than randomly or according to traffic. I doubt this and am inclined to follow soapystar along the lines of relevancy. That is; for awhile, while the minty freshness is being updated, the index can consist of both pages (fresh and stale) and will return the most relevant of the two.

jomaxx
Junior Member

joined:Nov 6, 2002
posts:67
msg #:6

8:32 am on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

Similar experience here. The fresh page normally comes up, but for searches that don't match the fresh version, the regular index page can be served up instead. And quite a few times I've seen pages from previous indexing cycles as well.

stevenha
Full Member

joined:Apr 15, 2002
posts:87
msg #:7

6:36 pm on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

I thought of another possibility. I am presuming that Google pre-calculates and stores the SERPs for thousands-or-millions of the most common search requests. Doing so could save a huge amount of computations. ( But it would still do the full ranking computation for rarer complicated searches.)

In order to mix in minty fresh results, Google would probably create a cycle for "expiring" its pre-calculated SERPs, so that new ones can be re-calculated periodically. Depending on the randomness of that cycling process, the amount of minty fresh results available will vary. Does that sound plausible? (As usual around here, I'm totally guessing.)

snowfox121
Junior Member

joined:Apr 15, 2002
posts:75
msg #:8

6:53 pm on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

That is very interesting. Now 24 hours later, the Google results are exactly the same. i looked at the cache and the one that is not fresh goes back several months. It also DOES relate to a common internet search phrase, so you might have something there.

rfgdxm1
Senior Member

joined:May 12, 2002
posts:982
msg #:9

7:07 pm on Dec 27, 2002 (utc 0)

Interesting theory, stevenha. It would make some sense to cache the most commonly searched phrases, rather than have to them over and over again. This cache could have a time to live value the same way ISPs do the same thing with DNS caching. Once the cache hit the time to live value, it would be deleted, and replaced with a new cache the next time someone did that search.

Message Thread Options:

Global Options:

recently active posts

search site

Hosted by Westhost.com

Terms of service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ About
All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners.
Member comments are owned by the poster.
BestBBS v3.1 (c) WebmasterWorld.com 1998-2003 all rights reserved

http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/7946.htm

Snowfox121 is reporting an incident where he was reading Google. Just like someone might go to a particular page and paragraph in a book by John Grisham, Snowfox121 turned to a particular type of interaction Google has with its readers.

Snowfox121 sets up a search of Google for “blue widgets”, he receives a response from Google. He then sets up another search “widgets” and gets a result. He compares the results and seeks to answer what is going on. This is an act of reading electronic language.

Let us set this out. An act of reading electronic language involves:

Setting up an electronic language environment;
Selecting particular input into the electronic text;
Receiving the output;
Analyzing what the electronic text does.

Snowfox121 opens his browser on his personal computer, connects to the internet and points his browser to Google (this is step 1 in this reading activity). Then, he tests Google with two inputs “blue widgets” and “widgets” (this is step 2 in this reading activity.) He receives the output of the two tests (step 3) and analyzes the results to interpret what is going on (step 4). In fact, the rest of the discussion in this forum entry focuses on step 4 in this reading process. Powdork at 6:44 am on Dec 27 came up with one reading, and Stevenha comes up with another reading at 6:36 pm Dec 27. Rfgdxm1 finally come to a conclusion and finalizes the reading for this time.

We will work a number of reading activities through this book. Essentially, you should understand that reading electronic language can be done individually, although, you will get a much better understanding by having different inputs in a reading discussion as seen in this example. While the activities in steps 1-3 are done individually and you may come to a reserved conclusion in step 4, you may wish to discuss the reading with others to arrive at a conclusion. This may also be reserved until you later show more evidence; although it is also wise to always be tentative about any reading, as programmers may change the text, a business may cause the text to be changed, or additional entries in the enormous database may change the results. So while we arrive at conclusions, we need always to be open to re-read.

What does it mean to be technate in 2003? An Ongoing Answer.

Thu, 09 Jan 2003 21:59:07 GMT

What actually consitutes the consciousness and the range of skills required of a technate person in 2003 will be different than what it was in 2002. Simply put, as technology changes and as new ways of making meaning emerge, the consciousness of what is going on and the skills required to participate in communication will become in some cases simplified and in other cases more complex.

Here are some of the trends that the truly technate person will need to keep abreast of this year (this is only a partial list, more items will be added as they emerge):

HOW TO BE HEARD
To be fully technate (thoughts of in terms of the print era 'how to be literate') in 2003 one needs to know how to use weblogs, how to build social networks online, and how search robots and search engines work so that the technate person can make most use of the technology to be listed and heard, and how to build a text in weblogs that enters a community of discussion and thought.

HOW TO WORK
Apart from needing to know how to use Radio Userland or another blogging tool, you will also need to know how to host your site of blogging at a location that gets you a good positioning as far as Google is concerned. There are some good hosting locations that are also very blog friendly, such as Pure Energy that the highly technate person should consider. Also, it has a good Googleputation (reputation with Google). Then, how to build text using "rapid text construction" techniques so that the technate person can keep up with the amount of text generation required. This also requires the use of personal databasing tools, such as PersonalBrain so that the technate person can keep track of all the links, data and documents under construction.

WHAT TO DO
The highly technate person is going to spend at least some time each day searching for and reading new weblog entries and new weblogs each day. To accomplish this, search techniques will need to be adopted that enable location of new material as quickly as possible. An awareness of automated listings of weblogs and directories and how to use these to find new weblogs. As well, an understanding of all things Google goes well.

This is a partial listing of what it means to be technate in 2003. There are also the many matters to do with the basics of using a computer, being connected to the Internet, maintaining backups, and so on. More coming soon . . .

Using weblogs to develop knowledge

Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:56:32 GMT

I have just completed a survey on my normal morning wanderings around the weblogged world. Found an interesting weblog of a Finnish Scientist, Juha Haataja. Seems that he is a prolific writer of particularly scientific books. He states that he has been writing this weblog for four months in these words:

I have been keeping this weblog a bit over four months now. Originally I just wanted a bit of experience of blogging, the new thing on the web. I have got what I wanted, and something more: a new way of looking at the internet. Previously I didn't believe in the concept of large-scale co-operative technologies, but weblogs seem to have achieved something of real value to the participants.

This year I have published about 45 short pieces: columns and articles. In addition, several of my books have appeared in new editions. Thus, this has been a productive year. After I started keeping a weblog, my other writing assignments have not suffered, almost the opposite. A couple of my short pieces have resulted from ideas and writings which first appeared on this weblog.
What about next year? So far I have published 1363 postings on this weblog. I probably won't be as active next year. There are a lot of other things to do, and other writing assingments already waiting.

From my point of view, where I have for the past ten years not actually been employed where I can obviously develop my theory of Technacy, I find his interest in weblogs to be similar to what I was about six months ago. I have shaped weblogs into being the central location where my work is centered. I am no longer employed and I devote my time to producing texts online to extend my theory developed in a PhD and awarded to me in 1997.

Now that I have decided to focus on my theory, and to develop that regardless of what employment I receive out of doing that, weblogs has become central to me. Here is an inventory of the centrality of weblogs to my project of exploring and expanding the theory of technacy:

Through weblogs I am developing my theory of technacy. I have written an ebook that applies technacy to a common activity, writing.
I am conducting a straw poll, if you like to see how popular the concept of my ebook is and whether that concept should be developed further.
I am running an experiment to shape a concept of technacy. The Text Chunk Library is a concept of Technacy to do with sharing common objects larger than words and phrases. It is about using whole paragraphs that are in the public domain to enhance personal writing.
My weblogs are used as kind of a poll, to find those applications of Technacy in which people are most interested to make my materials more applicable to what people really want to know. The poll is held by keeping several categories of information. I see which category most people read and then I know the information in that category should be where I develop my etexts. [See the categories in the right hand navigation list.]
One of the ideas I am currently developing is based on a close reading of Google. I am writing about Google in Google View. This is where I am starting to float some of the readings of Google and to understand the concepts better by writing about them. If you like, this is a think tank online.

Where is the economic model in all of this? There is one, I think, in developing materials that answer people's common problems where an application of Technacy can provide a solution. The economic model for me is centered in providing answers and at the same time educating people to understand the importance of Technacy to their thinking, living and indeed their economic future.

Yes, if you are new to my site, I believe that "being literate" is now not sufficient to be an effective member of society in this new electronic era. It is important for people to now become "technate". What I am doing, in effect, is putting technacy to the test, applying its concepts and if those concepts are worth anything, I will have developed an economic model of experimentation with ideas, development of knowledge, and publishing of knowledge through this process. If the concept of Technacy is worth anything, I will make money. If it does not provide answers to people's needs, I will earn no money and the activity will be over.

Why I write The Technacy Log

Wed, 18 Dec 2002 07:10:03 GMT

Since installing the Google Search tool on this site, I have started searching through weblog land to see what people are doing with their weblog sites. Some are imaginative, others seriously collecting links on particular topics, some writing serious themes and then there is the mass of junk collections everywhere.

Since beginning to be a weblog wanderer, I have begun asking myself the question as to why we are all so busily logging. My personal enquiry led to to understand exactly why I do it. To me, the world of knowledge managment, software tools, new ways of doing things, invention and plain doodling provides me with a playgroun where I can test ideas, develop concepts and have some readers along to provide feedback. I know when something hot is happening when I see the readers coming by the droves. Then, when they melt away I know that my experiments are simply not interesting.

I do not know that it is simply a matter of writing better as Mahoney suggests, it is a matter as to whether you have something to say, to demonstrate, or whether you have been busy to add some real value to the wealth of knowledge out there. For me, it is about playing with the tools, building information along the way and promoting the idea that there is a new way of making meaning that has little to do with literacy and lots to do with techancy -- the new way of making meaning since we have adopted electronic devices connected across a large-scale network.

The latest interest in the world of technacy centers on rapid text construction techniques. I am now employed as a writer and getting sick and tired of composing texts at 7,000 words per day. So, using all the tools I could muster, I devised a way to make my job easier. Download a copy of the book for yourself and see what I mean. Even this weblog I am now writing took me half the time as I used text chunks rather than writing this from complete scratch. Anyway, now that we have the tools to store and retrieve larger items that letters and word, why not build text from text chunks?

Copyright a problem? How about it if I build you are text chunk library? And give you the right to copy any text from the library as long as you pay me a fee of say, $25 per month for access to any number of chunks. Drop me an email and tell me what you think. And if you liked my text on Rapid Text Construction, let me know too.

Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:21:42 GMT

Rapid Text Construction

Most people do not harness the power of personal computers when writing, or when composing information products. I have worked as a university lecturer, technical writer, consultant and have also served in management of an online company. Through witnessing several thousand people who write text, compose documents and some of those documents being information rich documents of more than 200 pages, I have not seen anyone who really harnesses the power of a personal computer and really makes light work of text writing and production tasks.

Since retiring from normal work, I have been writing for both a hobby and a living. I applied the concepts of Technacy to these writing tasks and have devised a system, used the system and have shown through the construction of more than 5 different texts that it is possible to compose eBooks, websites, and other texts at the rate of up to 50,000 words per day. Impossible you say? I have demonstrated that it is entirely possible.

You too can test it for yourself as I have written an eBook using the principles of Rapid Text Cosntruction (RTC). Download the book here.

RTC is based upon the application of Dr Jenkins' theory of Synthesis -- the grammar like structure of Electronic Language. The highly technate person is aware of this structure and can use this grammar-like structure as a resource to make meaning. In grammar people need to cosntruct text grammatically. In Synthesis the concept is not about grammaticality but about efficiency. The objective in Synthesis is to gain efficiencies in composing electronic language.

The eBook written by Dr Jenkins on this topic explains how he gains speed in writing tasks through devising a System. A System is composed of a process whereby several programs are linked together to form a systematic way of composing text and gaining efficiencies in that process.

The Foreword of the text links the ideas of RTC to technacy and synthesis and provide a unique view into the world of Electronic Language that no other writer is talking about yet.

Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:27:40 GMT

Composing

Composing involves consciously thinking about a problem that can be solved by using the resources of synthesis to construct an electronic language text. What this means is that a composer spend some time in thinking about and constructing a system that will then be used to generate written or other language in one or more genres. This activity may mean that prior to generating the written text, or even before beginning the process of generating the written text, it takes some time for a composer to build an electronic text that forms the system for generating that written text.

In building the system described in this book, the activity of composing the system involved:

Downloading and appraising nine different programs for use in Brainstorming or Mind Mapping, and evaluating each of these for what could be achieved in databasing text, linking that text, and generating new texts from that program;
Evaluating the use of MS Word and its interconnections with the Brainstorming Program. This involves learning the ways of inserting “text objects” into a MS Word document using the “Insert File” or/and the “IncludeText” field;
Identifying the best way of converting text to .PDF format.
Testing the system from beginning to end to ensure the end result that was envisioned actually works and does save time and works efficiently.

Skills of composing involve downloading and installing programs (downloading is included here as purchasing programs is far too time consuming to have as a regular activity in composing), exploring programs beyond the boundaries of what the originators claim it can do, thinking about the interconnectivity of programs through either cut and paste and/or other methods of interactivity, and finally producing a document or text that is envisioned.

The efficiency of a system is greatly enhanced by creating a system specifically for production of a particular type of text and/or for a specific text. Thus, while you will be able to learn about composing a system through this ebook, you will do best by learning the principles and then applying those principles to how you normally work, and what the text is that you want to produce.

Thu, 15 Aug 2002 17:58:59 GMT

Technacy Info (http://technacy.info)

This site is now 'THE' location for information on 'technacy'. The domain "technacy.info" has started directing people to this site. Through this action, of registering a domain and having people come to this site a whole new meaning to technacy has been demonstrated. A major part of technacy is knowing how to use and exploit the technologies of common communication systems. Weblogging is one of those major systems that takes its place alongside email, instant messaging, websites and file transfer. Weblogging and knowing how to make use of online systems to display one's personal information is part of the technate capability an individual may acquire.

The real point about being technate is that one can participate in common means of communication in the age of electronic language. As weblogging is now entering that common status -- there are at least 500,000 webloggers on the service I am using at Radio Userland, and there are perhaps more than 1,500,000 others elsewhere (such as in www.blogger.com and other private services) now to be technate I must demonstrate an ability to organize my personal information in a weblogging system.

The Taxonomy of Technacy Skills, Activities and Experiences is the place where I am working on registering a list of the items for which a person to be identified to be 'technate' should display a competency. Just as I am now adding weblogging as an activity area in which a technate person should display competence to be considered technate, other cultural activities will be added as they are adopted by groups of more than 500,000 people.

So, what is the significance of adding weblogging to the list of cultural activities within which a technate person needs to display competence?

Just as in the age when print dominated communication and literacy was the skill within which a person needed to display competence in order to be able to participate in social activities (such as reading a newspaper, reading a book, participating in education, having the capability to write, having a voice when writing and being able to be heard by publishing that writing in some manner), in this age of electronic language where websites, email, weblogging, and instant messaging are starting to become dominant ways of sharing information and getting things done, competence in 'technate' activities are required as a general set of skills to maintain or enhance one's position in society.

What is now becoming clearly evident is that weblogging is becoming a standard way of managing and recording one's personal knowledge. Online evidence shows that this is becoming standard -- look at the librarians, academics, educators, and others who are managing their personal information in this manner. Simply do a search on Goggle and see for yourself. Perhaps this is one of the subsites I can develop -- a site showing the range of personal information weblogged to show that weblogging is now becoming a key cultural activity of technacy. . . more on this as I develop this thinking.

So what now . . .

Tue, 13 Aug 2002 21:02:28 GMT

Towards a Taxonomy of Technate Skills and Experiences

Dr Kurt Seeman asks Can Our Schools Deliver An Education In Technology? My gravest fears are that schools are most unprepared for anything remotely like educating people to be technate.

My fears are based upon sampling the results of the education system through the eyes of three teenagers -- my brother-in-law's teenegers who are 12, 14 and 16 years of age. Out of the three the 12 year old is the most technate -- she spends three hours or so each night on Instant Messenger chatting to friends from school, types assignments (preparing print essentially which is not really a skill of technacy), checks and replies to emails, and draws simple graphics and so on.

Natasha's interest in things technate are not because of school. This interest and aptitude can be traced back to her introduction to technate skills when she was aged three and four years of age. I was in the midst of my research on electronic language when I wanted to show the independence of technacy from literacy. Being a three year old non-reader I introduced Natasha to using a computer and communicating with people online. At three years of age she could do an amazing number of activities -- including being able to predict when the computer would freeze.

The other two are nowhere near the level of technate ability of Natasha even though they are older. Jessica, the 14 year old, has as one of her high school subjects, Computer Studies. Largely this is not about technacy but about low level issues of operating a computer and using some standard programs. What about using all of the major communication tools: email, weblogs, chat, video chat, online searching, preparing and building a website, purchasing online, accessing online ebooks and libraries? Education is ill equipped to introduce and provide experience in these topics.

A taxonomy of skills, activities and cultural experiences is required to display where the school system is lacking as Seeman points out. Look for this taxonomy -- I will begin building my concept of what is required of a technate person -- email me with any suggestions to add to the taxonomy.

Tue, 13 Aug 2002 01:02:11 GMT

Electronic Language and Technacy

The original dissertation where the term Technacy was introduced is now online on this site. Simply follow the navigation links to each of the chapters.

During the period 1989 to 1996, the period of time through which the concept of Electronic Language was being formulated, the term 'technacy' was used by myself and my supervisor to identify that activity which human beings encountered when working with Electronic Language. In several presentations I completed in 1992 through to 1994, I used the term several times. Amongst the many people attending the various presentations were a group of people who then popularised the term througout educational circles and then in government circles when referring to education.

The way I use the term is much tighter and specific than is used in educational circles today. In the age when oral communication was the dominant way people communicated in society the skills of 'oracy' were those that allowed people to participate in social activities. After Plato, when reading and writing became the dominant means of communication people needed to learn the skills of 'literacy' to participate in society. Through my dissertation I introduced the notion that since computers have been used in connected networks, and computer-to-computer communication is beginning to dominate, people in this age need the skills of 'technacy'. Specifically 'technacy' is about communicating in this age, using computers to build texts, using computers to decode texts -- not always specifically the desktop or laptop computer, often using computer driven tools to communicate, such as a computer driven video machine such as DVD or the likes.

In educational circles the term 'technacy' is used in a much wider sense -- the cultural use of any technology is included in the sense that Seeman & Talbot use it in their article. Since most technologies in science and technology is computer driven, this is perhaps an acceptable sense. However, many uses of the term even refer to uses of technological outside of computer and computer driven tools. This, I feel, is taking away from the leap in understanding made through my work where I considered we needed to separate technological activity from technological activity using computers when they enable communication with other computers and other people through computers.

Cultural activities that are technate activities include working with email, using instant messaging services (on a computer such as Instant Messenger, ICQ and on mobile telephones where SMS is used), weblogs, websites, and other forms of communication where the message is composed on the computer and decoded on the computer and where computer operation is part of the composing and decoding processes. This is 'technacy' in the original way it was conceived.

Mon, 12 Aug 2002 07:33:34 GMT

A Theory of Personality and Technate Style

Technacy is the set of skills and competencies one needs in the age of information in order to decode and code texts in electronic language. The set of activities involved in technate activity includes being able to compose electronic texts for an electronic environment. Weblogs are one of those texts that are specifically built because of the capabilities of electronic language and which requires highly technate people to code and decode them. [See also: Key To Living in the Information Age regarding weblogs.]

Composing is a key technate skill requiring a technate person to perform a wide range of complex meaning making activities. Such is the wide ranging nature of composing as a skill of technacy that it involves not only being able to operate computer equipment to build texts, but it also involves a wide range of intertextual skills, meaning building actions, the presence of a community awareness and political motivation. So wide ranging are the options in meaning making in the context of building a text like weblogs that indeed it would seem reasonable to suggest an hypothesis of there being a relationship between the personality of the composer and the resultant weblog text.

I arrived at this hypothesis from my interest in both technacy and personality assessment. My interest in technacy arose from a study of computers and their use in the age of interconnected computers which culminated in writing a PhD dissertation. Personality assessment has been an interest since operating education courses individually for executives in the 1990s and then now working with executives in group sessions -- in particular looking at how different people react in meetings. The personality assessment theory that has energised much of this thinking has been that of Sharon Livingston and Glenn Livingston and dubbed Snow White Theory.

Snow White Theory

In brief, The Snow White Theory postulates that there are seven different character types, each represented by one of the Seven Dwarfs in the story of Snow White. Checking back into history there is evidence since the Greek times that people have considered there to be seven character types. The Livingston's have taken these postulations further and have developed a coherent and sound theory of character types and how character types interact when participating in meetings.

Essentially, every person is one or other of these character types and reacts, according to the Livingston Snow White Theory, in a particular way in a meeting. A brief outline of each of these seven types is as follows:

Sleepy: Sleepy's primary mode of living is focused internally, dealing with things rationally and logically. He takes things in via five senses in a literal, concrete fashion. Sleepys have a compelling drive to understand the way things work. They're good at logical analysis, and like to use it on practical concerns. They typically have strong powers of reasoning, although they're not interested in theories or concepts unless they can see a practical application. They like to take things apart and see the way they work. While off in an apparent daydream, Sleepy's reveries have an adventuresome spirit. They are attracted to motorcycles, airplanes, sky diving, surfing, etc. They thrive on action, and are usually fearless. They are fiercely independent, needing to have the space to make their own decisions about their next step. They do not believe in or follow rules and regulations, as this would prohibit their ability to "do their own thing". Their sense of adventure and desire for constant action makes Sleepy prone to becoming bored rather quickly.

Bashful: Bashfuls are warm and kind-hearted, and want to believe the best in people. They value harmony and cooperation, and are likely to be very sensitive to other people's feelings. Bashfuls have a highly active fertile inner world that is not usually obvious to observers. They are constantly taking in information about people and situations that is personally important to them, and storing it for later use. This tremendous store of knowledge is usually amazingly accurate, because the Bashful personality has an exceptional memory about things that are important to their value systems. Some Bashfuls have been known to recall a particular facial expression or conversation in precise detail years after the event occurred, if the situation made an impression on Bashful.

Dopey: Dopeys live in the world of sensation possibilities. They are keenly in tune with the way things look, taste, sound, feel and smell. They have a strong aesthetic appreciation for art, and are likely to be artists in some form, because they are unusually gifted at creating and composing things which will strongly affect the senses. They have a strong set of values, which they strive to consistently meet in their lives. They need to feel as if they're living their lives in accordance with what they feel is right, and will rebel against anything which conflicts with that goal. They're likely to choose jobs and careers which allow them the freedom of working towards the realization of their value-oriented personal goals. Dopeys tend to be quiet and reserved, and difficult to get to know well. They hold back their ideas and opinions except from those who they are closest to. They are likely to be kind, gentle and sensitive in their dealings with others. They are interested in contributing to people's sense of well-being and happiness, and will put a great deal of effort and energy into tasks which they believe in.

Sneezy: Sneezies are quiet and reserved individuals who are interested in security and peaceful living. They have a strongly-felt internal sense of duty, which lends them a serious air and the motivation to follow through on tasks. They are organized and methodical in their approach. Sneezies take pride in their loyalty, faithfulness, and dependability. They place great importance on honesty and integrity. They are "good citizens" who can be depended on to do the right thing for their families and communities. While they generally take things very seriously, they also usually have an offbeat sense of humor and can be a lot of fun - especially at family or work-related gatherings.

Doc: As they are prone to let you know, Docs actually are natural born leaders. They live in a world of possibilities where they see all sorts challenges to be surmounted, and they want to be the ones responsible for surmounting them. They have a drive for leadership, which is well-served by their quickness to grasp complexities, their ability to absorb a large amount of impersonal information, and their quick and decisive judgments. They are "take charge" people. Docs are very career-focused, and fit into the corporate/medical/academic world quite naturally. They are constantly scanning their environment for potential problems which they can turn into solutions. They generally see things from a long-range perspective, and are usually successful at identifying plans to turn problems around - especially problems of a strategic nature. Docs are usually successful, because they are so driven to leadership. They're tireless in their efforts on the job, and driven to visualize where an organization is headed. For these reasons, they are natural leaders.

Grumpy: Grumpys live in a world of facts and concrete needs. They live in the present, with their eye constantly scanning their personal environment to make sure that everything is running smoothly and systematically. They honor traditions and laws, and have a clear set of standards and beliefs. They expect the same of others, and have no patience or understanding of individuals who do not value these systems. They value competence and efficiency, and like to see quick results for their efforts. Grumpys are take-charge people. They have such a clear vision of the way that things should be, that they naturally step into leadership roles. They are self-confident and aggressive. They are extremely talented at devising systems and plans for action, and at being able to see what steps need to be taken to complete a specific task. They can sometimes be very demanding and critical, because they have such strongly held beliefs, and are likely to express themselves without reserve if they feel someone isn't meeting their standards. But at least their expressions can be taken at face-value, because Grumpy is extremely straight-forward and honest.

Happy: Happys are people persons - they love people. They are warmly interested in others and tend to watch, listen and pick up specific, detailed information about others. They want to like people, and have a special skill at bringing out the best in others. They are extremely good at reading others, and understanding their point of view. Happy's strong desire to be liked and to maintain a pleasant environment makes him highly supportive of others. People like to be around Happy, because he has a special gift of invariably making people feel good about themselves. Happys take responsibilities very seriously, and are very dependable. They value security and stability, and have a strong focus on the details of life. They see before others do what needs to be done, and do whatever it takes to make sure that it gets done. They enjoy these types of tasks, and are extremely good at them.

Technacy and Snow White Theory

In that technacy involves high skill levels in not only technical functions but also in intertextual skills, interpersonal skills and in political thought processes, it would seem a reasonable hypothesis that perhaps a Doc character might actually compose a different weblog than say a Bashful, for example. We know that when answering an open ended question a Doc can be rather wordy and structure the answer in almost point form because of his/her thinking processes. On the other hand a Bashful is rather spartan in use of words when answering a deep question. Thus, goes the reasoning, there is perhaps also a difference in technate style when completing say a weblog.

For example, this site of mine is composed of articles that has a lot of my own thinking expressed through those articles, even though I borrow heavily from, say the Snow White Site, weblog sites and so on. Another site composed by a bunch of Docs is the End of Free site. This site has a comprehensive list of articles and references to sites that are now either providing news about sites that are charging fees for content, or are actually the sites themselves being analysed and/or are giving their rational for charging. There are some similarities between these two sites:

Both sites have strong themes;
Both sites heavily use evidence from other sites to support their main messaging;
Both sites endeavour to correctly link to other sites and are conscious of the integrity of the site.

In comparison, Paul Nakada's weblogs is rather spartan and has a very different look and feel. Being a Bashful, it is consistent that we do not find much in the way of highly overt and developed opinion like that of the Docs. Rather, words are sparingly used to point decoders (readers) to sites which have taken Paul's interest. This is a reading of what is on the web.

How accidental this is, one can only guess at this stage. However, what I am about to do is to invite several hundred webloggers from the worldwide community of 500,000+ to take the Snow White Test and then let me know both the result of the test and a link to the webloggers site. This should be a fascinating study.

I am also going to follow up on whether personality (character) has anything to do with writing style in the old literate sense. Maybe someone out there already has some answers for me?

Keep following the progress . . .