Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!vecpyr!lll-crg!dual!qantel!hplabs!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Why so quick to attack and criticize??
Message-ID: <3168@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Sep-85 02:08:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.3168
Posted: Mon Sep 23 02:08:28 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 1-Oct-85 06:43:04 EDT
References: <16412@watmath.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Distribution: net
Organization: Uncle Chuqui's Lemming Farm
Lines: 66

>>	Third, I dont understand why there seems to be so much hostility
>>Why is everyone so quick to attack even when they are not threatened?

>I suspect that people may figure that it's easy to attack and criticize
>someone that they will never meet.  Perhaps people get a kick out of besting
>someone else, even if on a minor and insignificant point (witness rashes of
>spelling flames in public, rather than polite
>notes via mail).  Perhaps some people hide behind their userids.

The basic problem is the inherent dehumanizing influence of communication
over the network. In my involvement with computer communications (dating
back to 1977 or so) I've seen it happen consistently. You lose a lot of the
subtle communication keys (tonal inflection, body language, facial
expression) that generate the most important parts of the communication
process. This cripples the unconcious checks and balances we use in normal
communication to gauge and react to whomever we're talking to, and it
causes things to get out of control very quickly. When you're talking to
someone you can tell if you've said something wrong and can back off before
it gets to be a problem. With the net, you don't have that immediate
feedback, and you can't easily judge someone's reaction to it.

When you add in the anonymity factor -- you can 'hide' behind the network,
and the fact that most of us on the net are nothing more than accounts, not
people, it generates an atmosphere where overreaction and attack are the
norm instead of the exception. People are willing to say things on the net
that they'd never say in a room full of people (even strangers, much less
friends) because the network makes it easy to believe that there really
isn't anyone on the receiving end of that abuse. When you look at it, most
of the abuse on the net tends to be misunderstanding and overreaction and
not intentional, but the net acts as a positive feedback mechanism instead
of a negative feedback mechanism because of the lack of the non-grammatical
communication cues. Unfortunately, I don't know how to deal with this. Some
people (myself included) try to explicitly define cues such as *smile* or
*smirk* to help define better what we are trying to get across, but it only
helps so far.

>It is very difficult to understand people just by their postings.  I have been
>reading the news for 2 years now, and I am constantly amazed at just how
>difficult it is to get a clear "fix" on some of our more frequent contributors.

Well, it CAN be done. It isn't easy, and it definitely isn't foolproof, but
I've gotten to the point where I can feel comfortable making assumptions
about a person based on the net. I don't think you can do it without (1) a
good sense of judgement about people, (2) a strong background in humanistic
psychology and what makes people tick, (3) a very strong background in
writtne communications, and (4) a lot of motivation and work on building
objective viewpoints. In my discussions with various people on the various
nets I've been on, few people seem willing or able to put the time into
understanding the net and the people involved. It's much easier to just
react on a gut level, but the gut level most of us are conditioned to cause
problems when translated to the electronic media because of the lack of
proper checks.

>So, I think that people might be wise to remember that it is another person
>at the other end of the connection.  When I feel the urge to post or mail
>something, I often find it useful to mark the article in question and come
>back to it later.  Most of the time I end up not posting anything.

Hear, hear! If you wait 24 hours before any posting, you'll make a LOT
fewer mistakes. If you aren't sure whether to post, don't, or send it by
private mail. 
-- 
:From the shores of Avalon:     Chuq Von Rospach 
nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA          {decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,pyramid}!nsc!chuqui

Closing your mind is not a prerequisite to opening your mouth.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com