My roommate Hoop and I had a lengthy discussion tonight, me asserting that he's a big dork and him asserting that he's not. The primary point of contention? The fact that he reads CLI specifications in his free time for fun. Not only that, but that he lusts after other books in the series that he's reading so he can learn about other .NET technologies in depth. Now, don't get me wrong - I certainly respect him for wanting to devote time to something that will make him more effective at his job (the primary argument he uses to say that this isn't dorky behavior), but that doesn't change the fact that it makes him a dork (which is not a derogatory term to me).
I'd go one step further - I think that reading CLI specs in one's spare time for fun (with the side benefit of getting something for one's job) is more dorky than playing Magic, and I'd bet that if you asked a random sampling of people that is not in the computer industry and doesn't play Magic (explaining either one or both as necessary), more than half of the people with a response one way or another would agree with me.
Now, I recognize that all of my audience works in the computer industry and that none of you play Magic, but still, am I just smoking crack here on either or both points?
--Nick
Edit: Well, unfortunately it seems I'm wrong. The concensus at work (which is unfair, but whatever) seems similar to the comments - apparently everyone differentiates between dorkiness and nerdiness, something I wasn't bothering with. Fair enough - Hoop, you're a big nerd. :)
Edit: I have to say, it's truly touching how everyone comes out of the woodwork to tell me that I'm dorkier than Hoop. Guess I finally figured out how to galvanize the base. :P
Posted by Nick at February 3, 2004 02:30 AM | TrackBackSome of your audience members are both magic players and in the computer industry....
Posted by: Tom at February 3, 2004 10:36 AMI do not work in the computer industry, and I do not play Magic. And it is my opinion that playing Magic is way dorkier than reading CLI specs for fun. But it is also my suspicion that I define "dorky" differently from you, so my datapoint is probably not worth much here. :-)
Posted by: Laura at February 3, 2004 11:50 AMLet's just agree that you're *both* dorks in your own dorky way, and be done with it.
But if you must know, I think that, given my own definition of "dorky", playing Magic is dorkier than reading CLI specifications. Reading CLI specifications is just nerdy. :)
Posted by: Sha Sha at February 3, 2004 01:31 PMThere is no doubt that Magic is dorkier. On one hand you have a thirst for knowledge. On the other hand you have a game that evokes images of acne-covered teens sequestered in a basement playing Dungeons and Dragons. ;)
Posted by: steve at February 6, 2004 10:55 AMAh, see, for me it evokes images of acne-covered teens who're too dorky for Dungeons and Dragons. D&D players are at least real geeks; Magic is for geek wannabes. :-)
Posted by: Laura at February 6, 2004 02:59 PMgeek (judging magic this weekend in cali) > geek(reading .net lit)
Posted by: Cybersuraa at February 6, 2004 05:53 PMHaving spent most of my life in the company and pursuit of geeks, nerds, and dorks, I would have to say that there is a definite pecking order: nerds > geeks > dorks. Nerds = attractive people who might be normal but who like to do geeky things. Geeks = unattractive people who do geeky things. Dorks = stupid people who do geeky things.
Finally, I add that Hoop plays video games like Dead or Alive verses your choice of a video games includes with knights running around saying "I will save you!". The title of less nerdy given to Hoop is indeed well-deserved. Bravo!
PS: Stop corrupting him!
Posted by: It's been one week at February 10, 2004 05:58 PMGoodness, and ghosts from the past come to haunt me. That would be you, S, would it not?
There is no corruption happening here - Hoop is finally beginning to become who he really is.
--Nick
Posted by: Nick at February 10, 2004 06:09 PMMr. One Week has it all wrong. Geekiness is about being intelligent/knowledgeable, intense about one's interests (as in, computer geeks, gaming geeks, and so on) and generally uninterested in mainstream "status" stuff. Nerdiness and dorkiness are both (distinct) flavors of social ineptitude, which may or may not go along with geekiness.
Posted by: Laura at February 10, 2004 10:37 PMSo if we follow Laura's line of thought:
Nick aspires to climb up to the rank of social ineptitude.
Yikes! And you give *me* grief for "b&^*( slapping" you here. =p
Posted by: steve at February 11, 2004 09:19 AMSo I've given it some thought and here's what I think.
The difference between nerds and geeks is in the application of the knowledge. It's sort of like the difference between "physics" and "applied physics."
Nerds are those that deal with theory. Geeks are those that use their knowledge in the real world.
Now dorks -- they're a whole different kettle of fish. Here's where is gets complicated. Both nerds and geeks can be dorks. Laura is right. To be a dork involves some level of social ineptitude. As it relates to this discussion 200 grown men and women who travel to play in a "grown up(?)" game of Pokeman would certainly qualify.
Posted by: steve at February 11, 2004 09:33 AMIt's actually Ms. It's been one week.
Reading this rather spirited discussion prompted me to do a bit of research on the etymology of these words instead of relying on my personal experiences with their social constructions.
According to Webster's, the word geek was introduced into English from the German work 'geck' which actually means fool. Geek is defined as " a person often of an intellectual bent who is disapproved of." Nerd stems from a creature in the children's book If I Ran the Zoo (1950) by Dr. Seuss (Theodor Geisel), and dork possible stems from "an alteration of dick."
Given these possible origins, I'd have to conclude that dork remains the lowest of the low in the social pecking order. Nerd is only marginally better, if only because Dr. Seuss had a hand in its origin (I'm sure Sha would support this). Finally, geek emerges as the true winner, the aspiration of all members of this discussion board I'm sure. Well, fine, perhaps only me.
And on the subject of corruption, I fully support Hoop's neverending quest for knowledge. However, I would prefer him to not be negatively influenced by your non-existent sleep patterns and dietary habits consisting so much pizza, that DNA spirals can be made out of them. I would love for Hoop to become who he really is, but I would like him to survive and not expire of artherosclerotic plaques in his coronary arteries from a dietary deficiency of green foods.
And Nickcc? Of course I'm going to haunt you! Consider this revenge.
Posted by: It's been one week at February 11, 2004 03:37 PMI know I wasn't invited here, and have no real knowledge of computers aside from how to reboot, but I must tell you that I about fell off the couch laughing while reading these. However, as a long term band geek and the victim of a 3.5 year relationship with a socially inept computer geek/nerd, I must agree with the pecking order of geek, nerd, dork. Dork is bad. Magic sounds a bit (read: extrememly) nerdy to me, but reading CLI specs sounds like a similarly harmful addiction. So long as no one is doing both we should all make it out alive.
Posted by: Kara at February 15, 2004 09:00 AMS - I have to say (and I imagine Hoop will back me up on this one), the fact that you went and looked all that up makes you a bigger dork than either of us. :) Impressive, though.
Kara - Of course you're invited, and I know you know more about computers than how to reboot. So long as you realize that not all of us computer geek/nerds are also socially inept, you'll do fine here. :)
Posted by: Nick at February 16, 2004 12:17 AMyou have a weblog... some would consider you a dork
Posted by: na at February 16, 2004 07:27 AMThough the social ladder might go geek > nerd > dork, in the end, we must all admit that we all get beat up equally.
I'd like to say that this discussion has been most useful for clearing up the geek/nerd/dork distinction. I often find that celebrities like to throw around the words "geek" and "nerd" without really knowing what they mean. For example, in this article http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45017-2004Feb16.html, Jennifer Garner describes herself as a "supernerd" because she majored in chemistry. But dude, ain't nobody going to be calling Sydney Bristow no supernerd.
Perhaps a certain level of physical attractiveness lifts you above the realm of geek/nerd/dork.
Like that girl in that Freddie Prinz Jr. movie. Or something. Not that I saw it...
Posted by: Sha Sha Chu at February 16, 2004 12:02 PMWait.... You play magic??
Posted by: Christian K at February 17, 2004 09:00 AMN-- If you recall, Hoop called me a geek, a title I wear with pride. Ha!
Posted by: Sarita at February 20, 2004 10:44 PMBeing fascinated by tech, and what makes you a living does not always make you a dork.
To me, dorkiness and nerdiness are states of mind. If you are fascinated by the neat, the complicated, or the cool (even if nobody else agrees with your assessment of cool), then you may become fascinated with something else not considered dorky/nerdy.
If, on the other hand, you are fascinated by the techie and unpopular _because_ they set you apart from the others, you do get dork or geek points.
A concrete example: my father started life as an engineer five decades ago. He learned accounting, fund analysis, and the like because he was fascinated by the people and the money. To other engineers, this make him a bit of a grind. I believe this is a cognate to a modern computer geek.
Once he moved to finance, he was fascinated by how markets worked, but he was also fascinated by military history. Again, the former is a cognate to a .NET developer being fascinated by books on a CLI. Geek points that stick.
The other interest is a completely different and respected discipline. The geek factor does not stick, IMO.
In summary: is your roommate fascinated by CLIs because they are the interest of the moment, or is he fascinated by them because they are something that the common herd does not know, and may never know.
Scott
Posted by: Scott Ellsworthe at February 21, 2004 08:08 PMThe judge who put coded messages in his Da Vinci Code plagiarism trial ruling has written another.
Posted by: Tyrone Fernandez at June 20, 2007 06:29 PMJonathan Ross is dubbed "risque" by Ofcom but not in breach of rules over an interview with David Cameron.
Posted by: Darryl Ralph at June 20, 2007 06:29 PMMadonna says she may adopt another child from abroad following her proposed adoption of a Malawian boy.
Posted by: Shaun Hudgens at June 21, 2007 09:25 AMJonathan Ross is dubbed "risque" by Ofcom but not in breach of rules over an interview with David Cameron.
Posted by: Jonathan Culpepper at June 21, 2007 09:25 AMMadonna says she may adopt another child from abroad following her proposed adoption of a Malawian boy.
Posted by: Shaun Hudgens at June 21, 2007 09:26 AMMadonna says she may adopt another child from abroad following her proposed adoption of a Malawian boy.
Posted by: Shaun Hudgens at June 21, 2007 09:32 AMMadonna says she may adopt another child from abroad following her proposed adoption of a Malawian boy.
Posted by: Shaun Hudgens at June 21, 2007 09:36 AMThe first stage of a £150m investment in regional museums is praised for boosting visitor numbers.
Posted by: Chase Frazier at June 22, 2007 12:50 AM