h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

[feigned indignation]

I protest! Portmanteau-words have a long and noble history! Lewis Carroll would have approved.

In all seriousness, though, I actually rather like this inelegance (in that its form follows its function -- the concept is supposed to define an ugly, somewhat mismatched union between internet technology and people's worst side). However, I can accept it's not to everyone's taste ... or, apparently, anyone's.

The fact that we so often misinterpret suggests that, no, we don't have enough old terms (or, in some cases, those that we have need wider currency -- I remember spending about two hours trying to explain a concept to a philosopher friend of mine at university which would have taken two minutes if I had known the word "qualia"). I suppose you could argue that we shouldn't go out making new stuff when we hardly use the old stuff out of a sort of sense of economy, but I think a playful attitude to language encourages us to learn more about it -- and ourselves.

Of course, this isn't much of a case for edited guide status, I will grant.

I had forgotten how things work here. I think I will just write it up and let it remain in the unedited guide.

OK, I was going to say thanks for the links, but actually they don't really help that much. I have no idea who Jeffrey Rowland is, and the first two links you posted seem to be piss takes. I don't have the time to read through those websites to figure out a term that you could probably explain to us here in a couple of paragrgaphs.

It's useful when starting a thread on h2, especially in The Forum, to explain the topic and if necessary post a relevant link. You seem to be over-estimating researcher knowledge of the etiology and usage of the term 'webcest'.

Also, when replying to posts, especially when there has been a time delay in replying, please post a quote of what you are replying to. On dial up, using the This is a reply to this Posting  button is time consuming and often prohibitive. Even on broadband today I probably won't bother to see what you are talking about because h2 is running weird and pages are loading slowly.



In terms of the wiki thing - was it that they wouldn't let an entry be created about the term, or was it that they wouldn't let the word be used in other entries?

I can't see any problems with writing an entry for the h2g2 edited guide *about the term webcest, it's origins and it's place in contemporary culture. In fact it might be a good idea because then we'd have an actually useful definition of the word

Webcest: Ces' Bullshit. A made-up word to enable debate over wild, inaccurate generalisations being made instead of saying; internet facilitated crime. The word itself looks too much like "Webcast" anyway.



Whats wrong with saying "internet facilitated crime" it should keep the T.L.A. fans happy; I.F.C.



What about "Web-crime" or "Cyber-crime" simple enough to use, even on the TV news, the "masses" would undersand?



Imaging two blokes being sent off to prison...

Bloke #1: "I got a five stretch for robbing a jewlers. What you in for?"
Bloke #2: "Webcest"
Bloke #1: "Selling soap on e-bay?"

I at first took it to mean the self-referential and self-reverential aspect of the blogosphere...

SC

If your definition "a catch-all word to describe taboo or wrong behaviour made possible by the internet" is what the word means then it is the only coherent definition I have seen...

Most of the "definitions" have merely been "It's like.... but ....". That isn't a definition.

In fact, the websites you posted do nothing to support the concept that this is anything other than a nonsense word.

Sure, words have to come from somewhere. However, the word doesn't just present itself without someone needing to find a word to describe something.

Not to get all technical on you, but, in fact, Webcest, if we are to look at its roots, means quite the opposite of the definition you gave.

web, of course, "the internet"... Fine... we know it has something to do with the internet
cest actully has no root... It is part of the word incest which is Middle English, from Latin incestum, from neuter of incestus, impure, unchaste: in-, not; + castus, pure, chaste

In fact, if you look at the actual meaning of the word using the Latic root for castus.... you would find that the word actually means web chastity....

All that aside, I don't happen to think that it particularly well defines bad behavior on the internet. Rather is simply sounds like incest on the internet which is more or less impossible. In fact, it sounds as though, in order to use the word, you'd have to use the phrase it defines in order to get across the meaning of the word.That sort of defeats the purpose of having the word.

I didn't manage to glean any info from the links, but if Webcest is "bad behaviour on the internet" then going over to someone's house (at their request, after an internet "ad") and eating them, is not actually behaving badly on the internet. It's bad behaviour in someone's house and was rightly brought before a court.

And I thought "netiquette" or lack of it already covered that.

>>"I at first took it to mean the self-referential and self-reverential aspect of the blogosphere.."

That got me thinking - maybe it'd be useful to have a term to describe net geeks becoming all hot and bothered about getting a dubiously useful word they invented online added to a reputable dictionary.

I'd suggest 'Websterbation'.

(No Google hits at present, so I'd guess it may truly be a new word).

Hi Andrew, just realised who you are, long time no see.

'webcest' to me feels as though it should have a narrower definition than has been suggested. Something to do with inappropriate sexual conduct via the internet e.g. grooming a minor, cyber adultery.

I would agree that the word lends itself better to a more specific sort of behavior. I was trying last night to find a suitable synonym for bad behaviour but my DSL live kept crapping out (there needs to be a word for that, too)....

I will try again today.

Taboo (or tabu) isn't right because taboo reverse to what is forbidden rather than the breaking of taboos.

Shenannigans is good but far too long to use with either web or internet. It also intimates that it refers to rather minor impish behviour, despite the othe meaning of deceitful, dishonets and generally nefarious conduct.

The word amorality is good
amoral "ethically indifferent," a hybrid formed from Gk. priv. prefix a- "not" + moral (q.v.), which is derived from L. First used by Robert Louis Stephenson (1850-94) as a differentiation from immoral.

morality
c.1386, "moral qualities," from O.Fr. moralité, from L.L. moralitatem (nom. moralitas) "manner, character," from L. moralis (see moral (adj.)). Meaning "goodness" is attested from 1592.

"Where there is no free agency, there can be no morality. Where there is no temptation, there can be little claim to virtue. Where the routine is rigorously proscribed by law, the law, and not the man, must have the credit of the conduct." [William H. Prescott, "History of the Conquest of Peru," 1847]

Websterbation sounds about right, Potholer.

Webcest is meant to mean what people get up to on the internet that isn't, um, 'acceptable' social behaviour?

Nope, the word doesn't work for me.

It brings to mind 'incest', which I think it would for most people.

Nothing particularly incestuous about finding someone to kill and eat on the internet.

Nothing even incestuous about the vile scum who groom young people for their own despicable desires.

The word just doesn't work.

Hey, why not Webscum?


az

'webscum'

Good one az

az

So when Andrew gets around to replying, will it be a quadruple or quintuple posting?

Well, I just hope he either quotes from the post he is replying to or else simply posts the post number.

Simple netiquette.


az

Eating people is bad netiquette?

I don't think so, strictly speaking, as it would be done off-site.


az

If anything, the only image that 'webcest' conjures up in my mind is one of a small group of net-obsessed bloggers and their hangers-on talking to each other and mutually boosting egos as if they were the only people in the world whose ideas mattered.

Ironically, using *that* definition, it would seem that the small group of people allegedly conjuring up multiple sock-puppets to try and get 'webcest' added to Wikipedia are posibly a good example of the word in action.

Webcessed?


az