My flight from Maryland to Washington today stopped in St. Louis, Missouri. Few passengers were continuing on and of those I was the only one that elected to remain on the plane during the layover, which was a bit over an hour. The reason I didn't get off the plane is that security regulations no longer allow you to leave any of your belongings on the plane, but rather, you have to take everything off with you. Since on this flight I decided to bring my second bag (the one without the laptop) on the plane as carry-on instead of checking it like I did the other way, I further decided it was too much trouble to load up and carry off my carry-on.
Anyway, I got to overhear some conversations between flight attendants. Very informative. The most interesting took place in the aisle not four feet from where I was sitting. "So, is this one the only one on during the layover?" I felt distinctly like cattle or some kind of inanimate object, not worthy of even the anthropomorphism accorded to say, a small cell phone. ("Oh, look it's so cute and adorable!") They continued talking in much this way until I looked up at them and caught the eye of the one female of the group. Without a word, they moved down the aisle about eight rows and continued their conversation in low tones from there.
Later, I asked one of the flight attendants a couple questions about flight times and number of passengers expected on the next flight, and got the distinct impression that such questions were entirely unwelcome while not in the air. Suitable cowed by this exchange (ha, ha, cowed, cattle!) I returned to my seat and took my revenge. They have been pwn3d! (By my blog.)
[For those not versed sufficiently in 733+, the language of hackers and other online denizens, pwn3d is pronounced "poned" and was a partially mistyped and partially alternate version of "owned" meaning "beat you in competition." That would be, "In that game, I owned you!" or "I won without you really getting to even compete to a level I consider significant!" But of course, "pwn3d!", especially when said loudly while pointing is just really way too much more funny. I will henceforth use pwn3d without explanation whenever the situation warrants, such as when people act in ways I find less than desireable.]
2 comments:
>I may have finally figured out my personal mission,
>the reason I'm on this planet. I seek to enable
>greater connections between people for their mutual
>benefit. Most of what I've done of value in my life
>has had that theme, but only recently have I realized
>that. Blogging therefore seems almost like a duty. And
>here we are.
Indeed, here we are. Blogging (as it were) through the mindset(s) of people that don't know each other. I happened to be surfing around the site and found your journal. As you said about the flight attendants, Very informative. So I thought I would impart a little outsider perspective.
It's great that you have found your reason for living. Feeling secure in your self is a marvelous acheivement in a consumer society, albeit a rather limiting acheivement. Establishing greater connections between people for their mutual benefit is a noble cause and I support your furthering of this agenda. However...
The almost dualistic contradiction between this idealism and your most recent post stupifies me. How can you possibly claim to wish greater connections between people, and then turn right around and blast someone you don't even know because you were snubbed? You couldn't tell them to their face, you had to go rejuvinate your ego by "owning" them in the language of an illegal practice. Forget about the mutual benefit of people, you would rather use these tragic forest fires to laugh at people who support the environment. A boreal environment, I might add, that provides a significant percentage of the oxygen YOU need to continue breathing. So don't even talk about "enabling better connections between people through technology and cultural change" unless you clarify this stance. For here, it appears that you meant 'connections' in objectively material electronic and economic ways, i.e. online gaming and business communication, rather than in subjectively experiential humanist and interpersonal ways, i.e. quality conversation and family solidarity. It appears you mean 'cultural change' as a continuation or advancement of the same impersonality you experienced while minding your own business on the plane.
Perhaps you should reconsider the full implications of adopting such virtuous idealism. Do this before you go trotting around spouting it to your allies and then being insulting or spiteful toward people you barely know.
In response to "Anonymous":
I think you are stupified by the dichotomy of my complaining about flight attendant behavior publicly and my personal mission because you're only getting a very small sliver of my world and extrapolating. In general, I'm very polite to others. My patience was certainly stretched thin by the amount of travel I'd done in the days leading up to the incident, made worse by the fact that I'd already attempted previously to politely ask a couple questions about the upcoming flight that were met with brusque, impatient, and borderline rude responses.
I'd also like to point out that having a personal mission means that's an area where I have not achieved complete success and may never do so. Sure, being more forgiving, perhaps giving polite feedback about what the flight attendants were doing, and being less aggressive in my blog entry would all be ways I might have handled things better. But I also come with all the human frailties and weaknesses we all have and a post to my blog is probably a better response than angry words and confrontation, which was another possible way to handle it. It may even be better than yet another alternative - just ignore it.
One could even argue that by posting, allowing comments on my blog, and leaving even comments that are critical of me has turned an otherwise forgettable incident into something of value exactly in keeping with my personal mission. Anyone reading this knows basically what happened, an example of a response, a criticism of that response, alternatives both in the moment and later, and a kind of rebuttal to the criticism. It's possible it may not even end there, depending on additional commentary. Readers will have then thought about the circumstances and could potential benefit. Certainly, since the original criticism you presented, while in my opinion overly harsh, was at least well thought out and intellectually presented without excessive attack. (OK, perhaps "stupified" is excessive?)
As for the whole discussion of "pwn3d", your criticism made it sound like this reference shows I only care about business and online gaming. Interestingly, I don't really have much use for online gaming, especially where words like "pwn3d" would be used. In fact, my entire exposure to the illegal hacking activities and the language written around those activities is vicarious at best. I just have a group of friends where we've been joking about "pwn3d" a lot over the last month or so. Perhaps the real problem with that part is that a joke amongst friends doesn't translate well to a larger and disconnected audience.
So, to sum up, I understand your criticism but believe it was overly harsh. I certainly thought about what was written, though, and have not discounted it entirely. In particular, consider how the post might have come across differently if I'd ended it after the words, "unwelcome while not in the air" with at most some other, less jovial closing. My posting would then be a simple relating of an incident that expresses how a passenger feels when a flight attendant acts in a particular way that when read by, say, a flight attendant, would provide a connection between flight attendant and passenger to their mutual benefit - better service for the passenger, less ill will for the flight attendant.
Post a Comment