Forum » In the News

Searching for civility online

 
  • Searching for civility online

    Searching for civility online

    This is the second piece of its type I have come across while reading my local paper on-line.

    It should encourage some sort of debate.

    One quote from the article states...


    Somehow we've rewarded, or at least learned to tolerate, a world where the drive-by insult is the norm. As we crank up the ease and pace of our "social" interaction while cranking down our standards for what actual discussion should look like, we seem to be increasingly comfortable with people simply behaving badly.


    It begs the question.

    Would you tolerate some of the things said on-line if they were said to your face?

    If you are something of a stone thrower on-line, deep down, would you say the same things face-to-face?

    “Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music”

    "You may not be interested in The Ancient (Dis)Order of the Last FM Platinum Round Table, but The Ancient (Dis)Order of the Last FM Platinum Round Table is interested in you." - Leon Trotsky.
  • There is a misconception about forums here.

    No, most people wouldn't say things to someone's face that they write in a forum.

    But a forum is not a conversation. So, the communication is different. In a conversation, you don't have hundreds of onlookers, in a forum you do. In a forum, which is a written medium, a writer may employ hyperbole, which is frequently used in writing. In a forum, there *is* a certain anonymity-- we don't know each others races or even genders sometimes (whereas in person, racial epithets and gender epithets are more common)

    Sometimes I feel people are just too timid and fragile when it comes to forums. If one's feelings are so easily hurt by what an anonymous person says, then perhaps that person isn't cut out for forum discussion.

    I have been a member of some great forums in my day. There were trolls at every one, but there were also some intensely good discussions.

    I know enough about forums and enough about how language works (which ties into my profession of 20 years) to know that expecting a forum to be like a face to face conversation is like wishing a carrot tasted like chocolate mousse. If you want face to face style conversation, there is a whole world for it outside the door. Forums are not that and never will be. If this disturbs forum users, then they ought to grow thicker skins and understand how forums work. Watering down and regulating a forum to turn it into a spoken medium is counterproductive and futile.

    • dankine sa...
    • Användare
    • 14 maj 2012, 11:28
    If you want face to face style conversation, there is a whole world for it outside the door. Forums are not that and never will be. If this disturbs forum users, then they ought to grow thicker skins and understand how forums work. Watering down and regulating a forum to turn it into a spoken medium is counterproductive and futile.

    spot on

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
    "I don't want to believe, I want to know"

    Auto Corrections Group
    • Bloopy sa...
    • Forum Moderator
    • 15 maj 2012, 00:55
    Online you are usually writing for many people, not one person. It's rare that it ever happens to me, but most of the cheeky jokes and things I've said that have led to me being insulted weren't aimed at one person. There's probably some things I would say to a crowd but not to one person's face.

    If I receive an insult that's undeserved, I'd have a similar reaction whether it's online or in person. I'd usually just ignore it. In real life you don't really have time to react to a drive-by insult from someone in a moving car.

  • spam

    Redigerad av Babs_05 den 18 maj 2012, 09:23
  • Seederman said:
    But a forum is not a conversation. So, the communication is different. In a conversation, you don't have hundreds of onlookers, in a forum you do.

    So if you were talking to a large group of people in real life, you think it would be ok to be rude?

    • sgath92 sa...
    • Användare
    • 16 maj 2012, 01:57
    Candyheart33 said:
    Seederman said:
    But a forum is not a conversation. So, the communication is different. In a conversation, you don't have hundreds of onlookers, in a forum you do.

    So if you were talking to a large group of people in real life, you think it would be ok to be rude?


    I think the point was that you can't really compare the two.

    Take a reddit thread, if you put as many people in one room as there are posters; would you really be able to have a coherent conversation? You could have a lecture, yes, but it would be nearly impossible for everyone who wants to get a word in uninterrupted to do so.

    Its also really easy to simply ignore a poster on a forum by simply scrolling threw their posts or not clicking on threads they start. If you put a thousand people in a room to have a coherent discussion you wouldn't be able to do this. You'd have to sit there and try not to want to gudge your ears out as the people you want to ignore go on their winded rant on their "turn." There's no TL;DR, there's no ignore list, there's mouse with a scroll wheel.

  • This is really annoying me.

    It is never right to insult somebody. Just because there are loads of people, doesn't make it right. I fail to see how you can logically excuse yourself from it.

    I think some people think the internet is a place where they can excuse themselves from being a good person, because inside they don't want to be a good person. I think that's horrible.

    I don't know why we're talking about forums though, forums aren't really a problem, their aren't really any rude people in forums, they'd get kicked out, wouldn't they? It's comment sections etc that are the problem. I don't think I've seen anyone be rude on the forum part of this website.

    • sgath92 sa...
    • Användare
    • 16 maj 2012, 22:24
    Candyheart33 said:
    It is never right to insult somebody. Just because there are loads of people, doesn't make it right.


    Never? If someone(s) being unethical enough civility can be thrown out the window, at your own discretion. The reason why swearing & personal attacks are protected by the first amendment per the SCOTUS is to allow victims of police brutality [for example] to swear at the State & its employees when they are violating civil liberties. In certain situations it is much more practical to yell at someone doing you wrong "You ass!" than to go into a winded logic based argument about how what they're doing is improper.

    In that sense, you can judge someone based on whether their rudeness was somehow warranted or to what degree. Restraint is a virtue, but allowing everyone to walk all over you is not.

    I fail to see how you can logically excuse yourself from it.

    I am not making any excuses for myself, on the contrary I make no effort to hide who I am on the internet. I don't have any anon or ambiguous accounts. I am willing to stand by what I say on the internet with my real name accompanying my posts as I would anything written on paper.

    I think some people think the internet is a place where they can excuse themselves from being a good person, because inside they don't want to be a good person. I think that's horrible.

    I don't know why we're talking about forums though, forums aren't really a problem, their aren't really any rude people in forums, they'd get kicked out, wouldn't they? It's comment sections etc that are the problem. I don't think I've seen anyone be rude on the forum part of this website.


    Yet there are forums with relatively little trolling, and no moderation to speak of because the regulars establish what the forum's typical atmosphere looks like and this has a self sustaining effect. At a time the same could be said for email lists [which have been mostly obsoleted in today's internet].

  • Candyheart33 said:
    Seederman said:
    But a forum is not a conversation. So, the communication is different. In a conversation, you don't have hundreds of onlookers, in a forum you do.

    So if you were talking to a large group of people in real life, you think it would be ok to be rude?


    You are missing my whole point. Forums are a written medium, not a spoken one. It is an entirely different set of rules.

    And what you might consider "rude" might be what I consider a well-constructed bit of hyperbole.

  • OK, I'm a contrary kind of person so I'm happy to go into bat with an opposing view. Anyway, the more thought I have given it, the more I realise I probably fall down on the side of the author of the linked article.

    Growing a thicker skin is fair enough to say and, let's be brutally honest, if some anonymous keyboard warrior insulting your [insert fave item here] gets you so wound up you take deep, personal offence to it then perhaps you need to lighten up and take a walk outside and smell the roses.

    However, I do think there are instances on forums where it does become personal and, going back to the article, lacks civility.

    And you don't have to look far to find proof so I'll use Last FM as a microcosm.

    Wander through artist shout pages and you'll regularly find a poster (or a Group of posters) hanging shit on an individual because they had the temerity to state their opinion, most likely that a particular artist wasn't much chop.

    Now, I'm of the view that if you go off and bag the crap out of an artist on their page you’re setting yourself up for a fall. I don't think I have done it myself (and if I have I'll have tried to do it in a way that wouldn't promote a "flame war"). Quite simply, I find taking time out to bad-mouth a band I don’t like pretty bloody pointless.

    However not everyone thinks like me and, I do believe, people are entitled to voice their opinion...in an appriopriate way.

    Because opinions can quickly turn vitriolic and personal, often from innocuous starting points.

    Now, me saying to Kennoth or leighdobson that Korn is a scourge on the musical landscape and they are fuckwits for listening to such rubbish will be taken with a pinch of salt because they know what I’m like having seen me around the place. They’d take it and give it back to me and I’m fairly confident that none of us would take any offence to the banter.

    Someone who doesn't know us, though, might take that banter a very different way when reading it (it is posted for all to see after all). They don't have any context, all they have are words on a screen.

    The situation might also take a turn for the worst if the two aforementioned gents didn't know me. There is a chance they may take exception to some random bloke calling them fuckwits based solely on the music they choose to listen to (knowing them they probably wouldn't but not everyone operates the same).

    I believe I'm entitled to state my views about a band if I want to but, as I said, there are ways to do it. Simply stating “U2 sucks” doesn’t really contribute much to a discussion and displays a certain lack of imagination. Saying “Coldplay are a bunch of over-rated pansy boys who only soft-cocks listen to” is, for some people I suspect, starting to get on the personal side.

    This leads into the next point. Some people seem to think it is alright to deride others because of what they listen to or like. Just because someone likes Linkin Park or Limp Bizkit doesn’t really open the door for someone like me, who doesn’t like such acts, to call them a loser or deadbeat who should actually be asking me if I want fries with that (see what I did there? (-;).

    And that is what the article linked above is touching on.

    For example:

    When I negatively reviewed the most recent Windows Phone device, Microsoft fanboys wasted no time (and spared no expletive) letting me know how wrong I was. Also, what a terrible human being I was.


    Just because someone reviewed something negatively doesn't automatically make them a bad person does it? Does a Windows Phone device truly evoke that much passion?

    If people who believe users of forums, and by extension, Twitter, Facebook and other social media, should grow thicker skins I'd invite them to do a Google search on the following;

    Cyber Bullying + Deaths

    I know, I know I have jumped to an extreme position but isn’t it possible the people who perform(ed) bullying started out thinking that people needed to harden up and grow thicker skin? That their comments and actions "were just made in fun” and “were taken the wrong way".

    Take those arguments up with the parents of Megan Taylor Meier or Daani Sanders or Tyler Clementi and listen to what their view on the issue is.

    You might be mature enough to handle what is thrown at you or to separate the wheat from the chaff but keep in mind everyone is an individual. Not everyone acts and thinks and feels the same way as you.

    Is it really that taxing to think about what you are writing and how it may be interpreted and what impact it may have on someone?

    Seederman made the following statement "...In a conversation, you don't have hundreds of onlookers, in a forum you do...."

    I'll assume you write this to back your argument. In part, you can't be all things to all people when presenting to a Group.

    True enough, you can’t make everyone happy, nor can you always predict how someone will respond to something you wrote.

    However, could it also be taken that one should then be more careful with what is said since so many more people can read it and interpret it in their own way? Also, it can be left there for all to see for days (weeks, months…).

    Consider this.

    What travels further and faster and has a wider reach?

    A scandalous untruth posted on a website forum or a scandalous comment made between a couple of mates down the pub?

    Sure, there are people who overreact to things said in forums. I understand that.

    However, posting on social media is, in my opinion, a lot like using email. A sentence that might be clear when talking face to face may come across quite differently without the tone of a voice or the look on a face.

    I think this holds true regardless of one’s definition of a forum (or any other social media) or how people use it.

    Hmmm, seems I do feel fairly strongly about it.

    “Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music”

    "You may not be interested in The Ancient (Dis)Order of the Last FM Platinum Round Table, but The Ancient (Dis)Order of the Last FM Platinum Round Table is interested in you." - Leon Trotsky.
    Redigerad av ProximityFuze den 18 maj 2012, 00:19
    • sgath92 sa...
    • Användare
    • 17 maj 2012, 14:11
    ProximityFuze said:
    However, I do think there are instances on forums where it does become personal and, going back to the article, lacks civility.


    Ever work in a retail setting?

    In the public, interacting with each other face to face there's always a segment that'll "make it personal" by taking all their life frustrations out on some min wage slave over something the clerk has no control over. People who have to deal with customers on a frequent enough basis run the risk of assaults, personal attacks, property damage, etc.


    If people who believe users of forums, and by extension, Twitter, Facebook and other social media, should grow thicker skins I'd invite them to do a Google search on the following;

    Cyber Bullying + Deaths

    I know, I know I have jumped to an extreme position but isn’t it possible the people who perform(ed) bullying started out thinking that people needed to harden up and grow thicker skin? That their comments and actions "were just made in fun” and “were taken the wrong way".


    So the lack of civility translates to stalking and harassment? I don't buy it.

    Perhaps the reason why there's bullying on the internet is because there is bullying IRL. People were dying from it long before computers existed. Any problem with a society is going to be evident in its online form. There are going to be pockets of bigotry, pockets of people who are just plain asses, etc.

    Stalking and harassment are already illegal, we just need to update the laws to take into consideration how much communication is online these days. But the only way we'd be able to stomp out the generalized bigots, dicks, etc would be to end free speech on the net and treat it the way we do broadcast RF. I don't recall if you're American but if you go back and look at when we first started regulating the content of radio the first thing we did was make it a federal crime to speak any religious or political views that weren't mainstream. Beyond that, we still don't allow swear words or vaguely defined obscenity/nudity on the air and have a system that's practically rigged to give large corporations a monopoly on radio stations ['cept for frequencies the average radio owner doesn't have access to, like SW]. Pirate radio stations are a "problem" to the FCC, but they exist because for the average citizen there is no legal way for them to broadcast on a frequency that people can actually hear.

    Don't suppose you've heard of the raids going on in the UK over uncivil facebook posts? Do we really want to bring that here?

    Consider the following:
    1- In these stories the public is never, as far as I am aware, told what the actual comments were that triggered the police action. This prevents a public discourse over when police action is necessary & when it is overkill. Even if we assume that these police actions were justified most of the time, in the cases where it wasn't [I am sure there were at least some that weren't] the victims of the police overreaching would be labeled as bigoted by a public who has no idea what they actually did! In a country with such intentionally vague rules on libel & defamation, why isn't the State going out of its way to convince the public that someone wasn't the "uncivil bigot they were made out to be" in instances when the charges are eventually dismissed? I would imagine that these accusations by the State have major consequences for the citizens who have the charges dropped, just as it is very hard for people here to find work after the police & media accuse them of pedophilia [only to later drop the case because, at least on occasion: the person wasn't actually guilty!]. We see on the 6 o'clock news "Joe Smith was charged today with ___" but when is the public confronted with a "Joe Smith's charges were dropped by the DA today, because it ends up that he had an insecure home WIFI and wasn't the individual responsible"?

    2- The raids are triggered when certain groups are on the receiving end of uncivil comments, the lack of any police actions where the opposite was true strongly suggests an asymmetrical enforcement problem. Imagine living in 1920s America where a Christian radio station could get away with talking about how evil Pagan people were, and that something should be done about that; and that's ok, but if the reverse were attempted the Pagan station would have been shut downed, its operators fined, with the potential for prison sentences? Because the wrong group would have been pissed off [what the "wrong group" means depends on social context].

    3- There is no longer any practical distinction between offending someone & calling for violence.


    I am actually in support of the concept of hate crimes, but I don't agree with how the US, Canadians, or British implement them. Instead of creating "Protected Classes" and only applying hate crime law to victims who fall within those groups, we should be using hate crimes in cases with certain types of motives. I.e. if you pick someone to assault because of their race, that's a hate crime. I don't care what race the victim is. It doesn't matter. But to the way hate crimes are written and/or enforced, it doesn't work this way and some people will get a free pass by picking victims who don' fall into a "protected class."

    We already use motive to establish how "severe" a crime is when [ie] someone kills someone. We agree that premeditated murder is worse than killing someone by accident. The result is the same [one person is dead, and another is the cause of it] but differences in motive will control whether the person responsible for the death is executed, or sent to prison [and if so, for how long] or whether they can basically get off with a slap on the wrist. If we can say premeditated murder is worse, then we can say that the reason for victimizing someone matters.

  • Good article Proxi. This is something I have struggled with --> the online behavior. A friend and I have discussed this quite a bit. He says interacting on-line is not much different than real life.

    I understand what Seederman is saying and he knows I respect him, yet I agree more with Candy and Proxi.

    I think the internet/forums has created a vehicle for people to do things they don't have to take responsibility for. It seems to bring out the worst in some. Allowing free rein to say and do things to others they would get their teeth knocked out/eye blackened for in real life. Or worse.

    Maybe it strips the filters between our heads and our mouths - or fingers in this case ; )

    As he said in the article:
    but the internet gives anyone a safe vantage point to sling punches without fear of retribution. And that's what makes comments so irresistible to some of the worst instigators. Could some of us toughen up a bit? Sure. But we can all make excuses and justify bad behavior all day long by saying 'people should get thicker skin' or by pointing out existing atrocious behavior elsewhere. In turn I could say, people should get some restraint. To me it comes down to the simple fact of...'common courtesy and manners'. And it's lacking fer sure. Why would you treat people on the internet any different than in real life?

    No, we are not face to face having normal conversations, yet we're still human beings with hearts, feelings & emotions sitting behind these screens. A group of people known as a 'community'. Why wouldn't a bit of decency/civility apply here as well?

    Also, I think internet forums create this strange unusual brew in the fact that; It throws kids and adults together in one big arena. Normally adults and children do not play the same games or have the same discussions. So it all seems a bit dysfunctional.

    ProximityFuze said:
    Would you tolerate some of the things said on-line if they were said to your face?
    To answer your question... No, I prolly wouldn't even socialize with that type.

    Edit: *thinking*...meh, idk, maybe it's all in how serious we take it all...

    Has our Autumn died...Help me find you again
    • lawynd sa...
    • Abonnent
    • 17 maj 2012, 18:44
    I find it somewhat amusing that Seederman is an advocate for thicker skins when he was unable to let go of what was constructive criticism simply because I suggested that his actions were 'dickish'.

    That said, I agree to a certain extent. A great deal of people get bent out of shape over the simplest things (such as someone disparaging their favourite band, to borrow an idea already sustained in this thread), and that only serves as a negative feedback loop in the first place. For me personally, I have enough going on in my life that I simply have no interest in responding to every slight, perceived or otherwise, against myself or others. As with real life, pick and choose your battles and make them matter.

    The other side of that coin of course is that a lot of people, like you or I (i.e. not trolls and their ilk) do quite often post without thinking things through very well. A lot of time it's unintentional, but that doesn't alter the outcome. What Madelines mentioned about the lack of filter between brain and fingers is bang on the money and we would all do well to remember that at times.

    Official recorder of Schrödinger's Tampon.

    Quote of the moment - "They tried to get me to eat haggis but I couldn't stomach it."
  • Since a lot of good insight has already been said on this whole subject, there is no need for me to repeat or quote, and I applaud everyone for their serious commitment to thought on this thread.

    The simple matter is, in open forums like ours (GD, Games, etc.) there will always be antagonists, bullies, button pushers and childish people hiding behind the mask of their avatar. Free speech should be a basic human right for all, but not when it is taken advantage of by thoughtless or malicious people. I believe the vast majority of LastFM members who frequent the posts are here for fun and stimulating (even mindless too) conversation and banter. If the fun disappears, so do the threads.

    We make up a community and most communities will stick together during the good, the bad and the ugly (that's right, Clint Eastwood) and will flush out the the ones in question. Yes, Mods have a job to do, and they welcome the help and feedback of the community, especially when inconsiderate *insert desired expletive* members are running amuck!

    So, I'm all for friendly jabs, light hearted smack-downs and the such, but it is usually in good humoured fun between members who are friends or at least have an established rapport in the threads. New members need not be afraid, most of us are fun and will welcome you and your comments. Sure, we will not ALL be friends and we don't all have to like each other, but let's have some civility and respect other members views.

    You might be sitting in a chair behind your avatar in a far of land, but remember, how you act in here says a lot about your character as a human being. How one acts online surely mirrors in part or whole how one acts in the real world.

    Just my thoughts!

    Anyways….lets get back to the fun YAWL!!!

  • sgath92, actually yeah I have worked in retail before. When I first joined the working masses I worked in what was basically a Call Centre so I know first hand how people can behave IRL.

    I don't condone it in real life anymore than I condone it on-line. I might be having a shit day but I will try my hardest to never unleash on someone working the phones or in retail or any other service type role (although, that said, in Australia retail staff actually get paid pretty well due to labour laws that Australia has) because I have been there and know what it is like.

    I think that is what the article is trying to communicate at its heart. That this behavour is becoming common place.

    I'd be interested to know if people are noticing it more because of the rise of the internet or whether it has increased because of the rise of the internet.

    Simply put, good manners cost nothing and, in my opinion, it is poor form to take out your life's frustrations on someone who just happens to have the misfortune to take a call or serve you at that moment in time.

    It rolls into another per hate of mine, blame shifting and not taking ownership of your actions. That Retail staff member is unlikely to have been the cause of your problem.

    Likewise, teeing off on someone because of a negative review, knowing there is no avenue for recourse, is pretty gutless.

    Johann Wolfgang von Goethe opinioned that “A man's manners are a mirror in which he shows his portrait.”

    I'd agree with that statement.

    I do think you raise some very valid points though and throughly appreciate the fact you (and others) have actually taken the time and put some thought into the discussion.

    That was my aim of the thread in the first place, to get some discussion going to see people's viewpoints.

    What I've read has been refreashing and has risen above the often mundane banter I see in here.

    This has been a champagne discussion.

    “Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music”

    "You may not be interested in The Ancient (Dis)Order of the Last FM Platinum Round Table, but The Ancient (Dis)Order of the Last FM Platinum Round Table is interested in you." - Leon Trotsky.
  • sgath92 said:
    Candyheart33 said:
    It is never right to insult somebody. Just because there are loads of people, doesn't make it right.


    Never? If someone(s) being unethical enough civility can be thrown out the window, at your own discretion. The reason why swearing & personal attacks are protected by the first amendment per the SCOTUS is to allow victims of police brutality [for example] to swear at the State & its employees when they are violating civil liberties. In certain situations it is much more practical to yell at someone doing you wrong "You ass!" than to go into a winded logic based argument about how what they're doing is improper.

    In that sense, you can judge someone based on whether their rudeness was somehow warranted or to what degree. Restraint is a virtue, but allowing everyone to walk all over you is not.

    Oh, I wasn't talking about people who were rude to you. I'm talking about people who were being perfectly civil, or most of the time weren't even talking to you in the first place.


    Seederman said:
    Candyheart33 said:
    Seederman said:
    But a forum is not a conversation. So, the communication is different. In a conversation, you don't have hundreds of onlookers, in a forum you do.

    So if you were talking to a large group of people in real life, you think it would be ok to be rude?


    You are missing my whole point. Forums are a written medium, not a spoken one. It is an entirely different set of rules.

    You mean you think there is a different moral code because it's written down and not spoken? If I verbally threatened to kill you if you didn't hand over a large sum of money to me, that would be wrong, but if I blackmailed you and wrote it down in words, that would be ok?

    I don't think there's a different moral code for written communication. It's not the fact that you physically hear insults that offends you, it's the insult itself.

    And what you might consider "rude" might be what I consider a well-constructed bit of hyperbole.
    And what would you consider a well-constructed bit of hyperbole?


    I agree with Proxi, I don't think the "people need to toughen up" attitude is right. People have emotions and feelings, simply telling them to "ignore it" isn't going to make a blind bit of difference. It's not that simple.

    • dankine sa...
    • Användare
    • 18 maj 2012, 23:41
    What's more important is, why is it anyone's else problem that you are offended?

    Far too much is not said/discussed that should be, simply because of the bleating masses shouting offense and expecting that to be some overriding concern of everyone involved.

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
    "I don't want to believe, I want to know"

    Auto Corrections Group
  • Comment removed for violating our community guidelines

    http://www.last.fm/help/guidelines]

    WOLF WITH A T-REX COCK
    Redigerad av Lastfmsupport den 22 maj 2012, 16:11
  • Seederman said:
    There is a misconception about forums here.

    No, most people wouldn't say things to someone's face that they write in a forum.

    But a forum is not a conversation. So, the communication is different. In a conversation, you don't have hundreds of onlookers, in a forum you do. In a forum, which is a written medium, a writer may employ hyperbole, which is frequently used in writing. In a forum, there *is* a certain anonymity-- we don't know each others races or even genders sometimes (whereas in person, racial epithets and gender epithets are more common)

    Sometimes I feel people are just too timid and fragile when it comes to forums. If one's feelings are so easily hurt by what an anonymous person says, then perhaps that person isn't cut out for forum discussion.

    I have been a member of some great forums in my day. There were trolls at every one, but there were also some intensely good discussions.

    I know enough about forums and enough about how language works (which ties into my profession of 20 years) to know that expecting a forum to be like a face to face conversation is like wishing a carrot tasted like chocolate mousse. If you want face to face style conversation, there is a whole world for it outside the door. Forums are not that and never will be. If this disturbs forum users, then they ought to grow thicker skins and understand how forums work. Watering down and regulating a forum to turn it into a spoken medium is counterproductive and futile.



    Bingo.

    • snyde1 sa...
    • Abonnent
    • 4 jun 2012, 03:31
    Topolsky must lead a relatively sheltered life to not have experienced similar incivility in person. Much is made of the boldness engendered by anonymity on-line, but the same happens in the real world.

    An article could be written for "Searching for civility on Main Street."

    @sgath92 - there is no concept of designated "protected groups" in Canadian hate laws. As long as the group attacked is identifiable in some way, it can be considered under the law.

    Improve your view of Last.fm - add some User Scripts.
    Did I hear that right? Mondegreens - for the misheard word. Like Odds? Can't get better than Even Odds!

    Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.
  • I think we need to talk about ideas, not personal things. My opponent may be a dummy, but the real question is whether he's right or not...

    • dankine sa...
    • Användare
    • 8 jun 2012, 15:48
    Conservationist said:
    I think we need to talk about ideas, not personal things. My opponent may be a dummy, but the real question is whether he's right or not...


    In many topics the two collide.

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
    "I don't want to believe, I want to know"

    Auto Corrections Group
  • Very glad to see this topic come up. I am an old guy, and have not participated in online forums to a great extent. I agree with Candyheart33 and others on this forum. I don't see the need to curse and insult someone for posting a different viewpoint. I've seen hate speech used over the smallest difference of opinion online. Although an online forum and a face to face conversation are totally different situations, kindness, compassion, and respect are always appropriate. And yes, I worked in retail for over 25 years.

    I remember when I was a child hearing that the world population was around 3 million people, now nearly 50 years later, we have around 7 billion. I would think that treating each other with respect would be more important now than ever before.

    What the Chinese philosopher Confucius said over 2000 years ago is still appropriate today "What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others." (Bk. 25, Chapter 23 of the Analects, Legge translation)

    Call me crazy, but I believe in beauty, love, and respect for others.

    "People suppose that words are different from the peeps of baby birds, but is there any difference or isn't there?"
    from The Chuang Tzu (Chinese philosopher Zhuangzi, 369-286 B.C.E.)
    • ruyiff sa...
    • Användare
    • 20 jun 2012, 13:05

    [spam]

    [spam]

    Redigerad av Ziomek2000 den 20 jun 2012, 13:45
Anonyma användare kan inte skriva inlägg. Vänligen logga in eller skapa ett konto för att göra inlägg i forumen.