According to dictionary.com, newbie is “an inexperienced user of the Internet or of computers in general.” However this term now applies to anyone who is new to anything in, and outside of computers. In fact, noob is so widely used nowadays that the meaning is completely lost in redundancy.

On forums where text, avatar, and alias are the only defining characteristics, what then defines a newbie? One of the most common ways of judging a newbie from the pack is by simple post-count (or lack thereof.) Many forums use this database which shows joining date and number of posts. It does not matter how much time is spent lurking, studying, or how much prior knowledge one has; the fact is, that until post-count (contribution worthiness) reaches an acceptable level and/or date of joining exceeds some milestone, newbie status reigns. The general consensus seems to be that time-in and “enough” posts of relevant material determine the shedding of the newbie title. Another popular determination is found within the quality of posts. Seasoned users scrutinize topic headings, relevance, and levels of complaint as gauges in making their newbie assessments. It is almost certain death when a new user complains or spews destructive criticism. However, it is interesting to note that it is extremely acceptable for seasoned users to complain, go off topic and hijack posts.

The question then is, ‘how much experience is enough to lose the status of newbie?’ Lately it seems that newbie status has become less about self-deprecation (“Help! I have a newbie question”) and more about being negatively viewed by those who have long lost their own newbie label. The assumption is that newbies are less educated about the topic and/or do not understand the rules of an on-line community, and/or are only causing trouble. This view is strikingly similar to debates surrounding new immigrants and their socialization.

The newbie label has become a derogatory term more than ever before; it’s as if newbies have become parasites of the internet asking stupid (ill-researched) questions, posting the wrong kind of topic heading (“help me I’m stuck!!!”) or generally being disruptive to the community. If post-count or joining date were not displayed for all to see and to judge by, would it be as easy to pick out the newbies simply by what they type and how they type it? Would seasoned users then also be criticized for going off topic and being disruptive?

Equally, by post count and joining date we could also easily ask – what doth make an expert? Perhaps another assumption is that those with high post-counts must be more knowledgeable and serious than those with lesser counts. Sure it may be true for some, but anyone can post to the “fluff” discussion and throw in their two cents on any number of topics from ‘how long is your hair’, to ‘what do you eat for breakfast’, without gleaning any more knowledge than the truly inexperienced members. The logical assumption is that if people have been active in a community for a long time, they must be serious about the forum topic, successful in assimilation and therefore a “non-noob” user.

One popular and over-debated topic on a forum in which I lurk is, “is Arch for newbies?”. It begs the question: How new is the newbie? Have they ever turned on a computer? Or have they tinkered and consider themselves savvy, but are just new to the concept of Arch? There is a huge difference here, but for some reason this fact is overlooked as new and seasoned users alike heatedly debate the question ad nauseum. Everyone has an opinion, but it is so obvious that there is no straight-up yes/no answer to that question. The answer (without knowing if the person in question has ever turned on a computer) should be hell yes! If people are willing to learn then that’s all that should matter. Is Arch for everyone? As with taking up anything new, people have to research it, experience it and then decide for themselves. No other variables matter. Experienced users cannot decide what works best for a non-user. It is like explaining to women that it hurts to get kicked in the gonads…we know it hurts, but we don’t understand how exactly.

As in any community forum, and much like many societies, there is a definite hierarchy in place. The difference being that one’s status within the community is not based on real life success or monetary wealth–it is based on knowledge, who holds it and…oh, post count. Joining a forum is to become part of a community where rules are established and enforced to maintain order, and where protocol must be followed for the collective good of the group. Despite those that test these limits, many join a community for common reasons, mainly to share ideas and to learn.

The term newbie is no longer a valid assessment of one’s worth or experience on-line. In labelling someone a newbie, is to identify them as being at the bottom of the hierarchy–plain and simple. The social construct of the rite of passage from joining (newbie) to becoming a respected member restrains everyone from the goal of sharing knowledge. New users may restrain themselves from posting for fear of repercussion, while seasoned users expend useless energy pointing out the flaws within the posts. With it’s overuse and blatantly ambiguous nature, “newbie” can no longer describe the varying degrees of experience people have. Despite the reasons for people joining, showing up, posting or not, the basis of any good community is diversity. Differing opinions, controversy, and open discourse is what makes a community great, and this should be acknowledged. In grouping all new forum registrants with the burdensome label of newbie with a big fat 1 post count, is to perpetuate the negative connotation and stagnate growth. So what doth make a newbie? Remove the post-count and joining date and find out.

The Arch Forums screenshot thread is the most popular, most viewed thread each and every month.  It is a place to show and tell and for others to see how to best maximize space, usability and creativity.  After being a faithful follower for months, I noticed (and not surprisingly) that a number of wallpapers displayed bikini-clad models. If there was a person displayed at all, they were more often females (fantasy characters, actors) than males. Rarely are males depicted in wallpapers, unless they are game characters or Anime.

I also know there are quite a few women users of Arch who also regularly post their screenshots and wondered what would happen if I threw in a partially nude male model in my screenshot with a strategically placed Openbox menu?   Would users ask where to find the photo as is very common with many partially nude female photos? or would anyone comment in general?

Well maybe it was just waiting in anticipation, but hours went by without a word. I posted at 1600 hrs on June 8 and the next post was a long 12 hours (and the next day) later. Certainly odd and to my knowledge there was never any remark about my screenshot.  I waited for something—anything, especially because my post also had the disclaimer, “This might be NSFW for some…” I thought that at least one person would express their opinion about it, good or bad.

I also wondered if the lack of response was because no one wanted to admit to actually looking at it (after all, more than 450 users did view it) or if people just didn’t know what say. I can understand why most males wouldn’t want to say anything remotely in favour, as it might be construed the wrong way but I thought at least some of the women would comment.

It is always interesting to challenge double-standards and the status quo; to gauge reaction and see what it all might mean.  On the surface, my wallpaper had no meaning at all — or maybe it provoked something deeper. No reaction at all could be just that—nothing, but I am hopeful that it challenged the norms somehow or made some impact on the other half. I also recognize that my own biased assumptions are at play here and maybe I expected too much but the bottom line is,  I will never know.

The Arch Minimalist logo, for anyone who is interested, has been released under a Creative Commons license (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike) and may be downloaded below:

• Arch Minimalist SVG logos
  (requires AXswar & AUdimat fonts for proper viewing)
• Arch Minimalist Slim login theme
• Arch Minimalist Splashy theme

Thanks again to everyone who participated in the logo contest!

Once VolWheel has been launched, the volume can be adjusted up or down by placing your cursor over the tray icon and using the scroll wheel of your mouse or touchpad. To mute, simply middle-click on the icon.

From the preferences window, accessible by a right-click menu, you can select the default audio channel, such as Master or PCM, as well as the default mixer command which is executed when you left-click on the tray icon.

By default, VolWheel uses the standard GNOME volume control icon (pictured above), however this can be customized to whatever you want by simply altering the icon’s file path in the source script.

VolWheel is written in Perl and currently depends on the following packages:

• gtk2-perl
• perl-gtk2-trayicon
• alsa-utils
• gnome-icon-theme

To report any bugs or to request new features, visit the VolWheel discussion thread.

I’ve been working on an alternative logo for Arch Linux. It’s not that the existing logo is terrible…but it reminds me far too much of Star Trek, and, in my opinion, it doesn’t render well when converted to one colour. Released under a Creative Commons license, you are free to use and modify the logo to your liking, so long as you credit me (Thayer Williams) as the original artist.

The SVG source files are available here: arch-boomerang-logo.tar.gz

So far, I’m extremely happy with the results. A more detailed review of Arch, as well as a step-by-step guide on installing the latest version along with KDE on a Dell Inspiron 6400 is forthcoming. In the meantime, I have written a tutorial on installing a Brother HL-2040 laserjet printer for Arch at the official Arch wiki. Stay tuned…