TL Taylor talking about 'Reconsidering Emergence' at humlabT.L. Taylor’s talking about “Reconsidering Emergence” here at the dirn workshop at HUMlab, and it’s being streamed, so if you want to follow my live blogging and watch the video stream, you can. This post’ll be updated as I go.

Oh, and bloggers: this talk is really interesting for its parallels to blogs and the “game” of blogging, with ranking and referrals and trackbacks and comments and “mods” to the software, which TL doesn’t specifically mention, because she’s looking at MMOGs, not blogs, but which I kept thinking about and which Lilia asked about too, so it wasn’t just me.

The kind of character you choose in an online environment affects the data you can collect. In a game like WoW or Everquest, the class you choose affects your experience of the game. These early methodological choices we make shape how we can understand any multiuser space. We need to watch for how these choices affect the stories we tell about the space later on.

When she studied Everquest, there was no specific “European” or player-versus-player (pvp) server [see TL’s correction to this in her comment to this post]. When she moved to Europe and starting playing WoW with her students, she was playing on a European English-speaking PvP server. This is what her WoW experience is based on. Also playing on a RP server (with The Truants), which gives a very difference experience of the game.

We’re using the word emergence more and more – but often only use about the “nice” stuff – how people are collaborating, creating, etc. However things like regulations, stratification, policing and limitations and hierarchies can also be part of emergence, not just positive social constructions. Intent is not to come off as being very negative, but to show a full picture of how people play.

The social labour of players makes these games playable and fun. Forming guilds, sharing knowledge, assisting each other in

European: E.g. all the discussions about trying to get everyone else to speak English – someone speaks in a language other than English, and instantly gets reprimanded, always told that that’s the rule, English only except in tell. Interestingly, Blizzard does NOT have such strong rules about this. Also, in the midst of the policing of the language, there’s national identity in Danish-only guilds, etc. Leads to more complicated questions like “What is an English language European server?” For instance, you have Middle Eastern players, because there’s no dedicated Middle Eastern server.

This conversation about English/non-English goes to a bigger question players always have: who’s allowed to be here? Who’s a legitimate player?

This can also be seen in the discussions of gold-farmers. Nick Yee wrote on TerraNova: “Players who pass the “English test” aren’t “gold farmers” even if they farm all day. But ironically, players who don’t speak fluent English (i.e., French) are at risk of being branded as “Chinese gold farmers”.

So the question of whether or not someone can speak English becomes a litmus test of whether or not you’re a legitimate player or a farmer or a bot. [This reminds me of when I discovered a silent player was actually Ukrainian]

Moves on to player revenge on farmers or perceived farmers – groups who move through an area attacking any other players they think are farmers. Shows short machinima of this, and quotes Steinkuhler on farmers, saying that people who like the idea of the productive player generally take pause at things like this.

Another interesting issue: collective knowledge, coordinated action to solve complex problems, voluntary formal organisations (guilds). Really impressive social support of each other. However, also a lot of hierarchy and stratification within the guilds etc.

High end raiding – a lot of investment, almost like a whole new game. Incredibly competitive – you can only see this content if you’re in a guild or raiding community that can take forty people and do it again and again. Therefore there are applications, trial periods, evaluations, very filtered process, ranking etc. Collaboration but also an immense system of stratification to make it happen.

Age – with Everquest she was amazed at the cross-generational play. However, on teh pvp server, guilds will have age requirements, etc, a lot more wrangling over age.

The ways players in WoW create software and technical artifacts that enhance their play. E.g. CTProfile – third party application that lets you take a snapshot of your character, puts it on a website and lets it be reviewed.

Players as producers – interesting how the boundary between developer/player is blurred. Interesting that WoW has an open user interface, so players can modify how game operates. Can radically change the UI – and this is not just icing on the cake, it fundamentally changes game play. Can make the same argument for the social. E.g. damage metres – they track and rank players according to how much damage they’ve done to other people. Often ambivalence about the use of this mod among raid leaders. Can give infomration, but some people will rush to be at the top of the ranking list, so they’ll rush to attack the dragon or whatever foolishly which can put the group at risk. This is modified in some raids, socially. Others are upset that their contribution isn’t as easily measured as damage, and becomes invisible.

Many mods work because they watch what people are doing – they’re surveillance. Also, Blizzard watches your RAM to watch you’re not using cheats. PlayOn project is datamining. Etc. Of course, surveillance needn’t be evil, panopticon, can be playful, people sometimes enjoy surveilling themselves –> coveillance = participatory surveillance.

It’s not the same game for everyone. E.g. if I challenge you to a duel, and I have the standard UI and you have it tripped out with every mod – is that a fair duel? Clear that there’s a line, a balance needs to be kept. TL’s particularly interesting in watching the community debate that line.

Questions:
Lilia: Parallel to blog world – ranking changes the experience, blogging.
TL: Tricky thing about games (and I don’t know how this fits with blogs) is that games are always in part about ranking and competition etc. What’s itneresting is when the different worlds collide.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “T.L. Taylor: Reconsidering Emergence

  1. TL

    Since I am sitting right here figured I would clarify one bit 😉 There were PvP servers in EQ but I never played on one. Would have been interesting to have and see how it compares with the WoW ones though. I’m always curious about what conventions get transported from game to game and which emerge from the specific context of one.

  2. Jill

    Oh, thanks for that correction, TL! Great getting instant (almost) editing from the presenter herself 🙂

  3. Mathemagenic

    DIRN workshop…

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.