Comments on: Behaving badly on the internet

By: Ralph

Ralph — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:18:24 +0000

Jeremy,
I’m sorry I waited so long to read this post. It’s certainly of interest to me. So you have me wondering about the way I communicate on the internet. I expect you’d consider it acceptable. But I think I’m a lot more formal than I’d like to be. True, I don’t always have salutations and Best Wishes in many of my emails (I know it should be e-mails,) but that’s not from a lack of respect. Then what?
Lots of things, probably. But the main content of my writings I hope communicates the respect I have for the person I’m writing to.
What about C Blackford’s comment? What was your reaction to it? Obviously, he was going out of the way to make a point, the quotes around “real world” and capitalizing BBC give him away. I agree with him, though to my way of thinking we don’t really have oxbridge types in the US. I guess my feeling is to go with the flow. I like a certain amount of formalism but within reason. For me being dealt with and dealing with respect is pretty much all of it, and in spite of the tone I don’t find CB’s comment disrespectful.

By: chris blackford

chris blackford — Wed, 20 May 2009 00:45:28 +0000

there’s already too much hierarchical brown-nosing in the ‘real world’ so it’s refreshing to see an absence of it in the virtual world. nasty trolls tend to get ignored by most folks but robust comments that are backed-up by a modicum of intelligence are fine by me. what we surely don’t want is a BBC version of internetland where oxbridge types know best and the rest of us fall into our servile places in the scummy slime below. YEAH FUCK YOU OXBRIDGE TYPES..FUCK YOU VERY MUCH!!

By: amos

amos — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:24:05 +0000

Good monitoring is certainly a reason. In the TPM blog some people use their posts to network in the philosophy world, so obviously, they are on their best behavior. However, in any space or in any community, even a virtual one, there are leaders who set the tone and the leaders are not necessarily those who monitor. Once the leaders or dominant individuals have set the tone, be it polite or insulting, the others follow, and of course, people drift toward spaces which allow them to share their ideas politely or to express their inner lynch mob. Another factor is whether participants, even a small part of the participants, have social contact outside of the virtual space: the fact that just a few participants see each other face to face from time to time keeps the tone polite, in my experience.

By: Ophelia Benson

Ophelia Benson — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 23:22:07 +0000

“In other words, why do some online spaces degenerate into name-calling and others maintain a polite tone?”

Something I’ve just been thinking about. One reason has to do with monitoring. Sites that make a principle of not interfering with comments can degenerate into horrible slums with remarkable ease.

By: amos

amos — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:30:09 +0000

All of what you say is true, but what I’ve noticed is that there are virtual spaces where people are generally polite and others where they are not. There are bad and good virtual neighborhoods, ones in which you can walk in without fear of being attacked and ones in which you cannot. For example, in the TPM blog people are generally polite: there are few insults. I’m not sure why some virtual spaces begin to resemble New York in the era of Taxi Driver and others resemble a university seminar. In other words, why do some online spaces degenerate into name-calling and others maintain a polite tone?