INTERNET RELATIONSHIPS AND PROTOCOL

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I was drawn to this opinion piece by the headline, and found the general thesis to be interesting.

Would all those members who post the more acrimonious comments about or to other members likely do that if they did not have the cover of anonymity (or protection of hundreds or thousands of miles?)

How much does the sometimes detached, even surreal, kinds of relationships produced by the internet affect how we communicate, what we say, the words we use, our level of civility toward other people?

A lot? Somewhat? Any at all?

Meghan Daum: Road Rage on Information SuperhighwaySOURCE

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,891 • Replies: 21

No top replies

I have been browsing these forums for three years and have discovered that often people approach the forum like it were combat. Also I noticed that many seem to think that to be negative is to be cool. I suspect this is a young person thing.

0 Replies

coberst wrote:

I have been browsing these forums for three years and have discovered that often people approach the forum like it were combat. Also I noticed that many seem to think that to be negative is to be cool. I suspect this is a young person thing.

Maybe, but if you check the "How old are you?" thread, a good majority of A2K members are in the 40 and up range, so I don't think we can pin it all on the kids.

I wonder if those who use these forums, as you say, as combat with other members rather than to actually discuss topics, etc. also do that in 'real life'? Or maybe they WANT to do it in real life but are afraid to so they take out their repressed frustrations here?

0 Replies

I'm posting here under my real name.

Those, who know me, say (if asked) that I don't behave here a lot different to how I behave in real life. (Besides that I usually speak German.)

I agree with Meghan Daum, generally, on this topic.

Personally, I want to add that it really is quite often a peculiar-funny feeling when being attack by some anonymous voice, and that not only when insults are involved: I feel a lot more vulnerable, and sometimes even get jelous that the other side can hide behind a screenname.

On the other hand: all A2K'ers I've met (and that is quite a big number by now) are in reality the same as here: adorable, intelligent persons of all ages.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

I'm posting here under my real name.

Those, who know me, say (if asked) that I don't behave here a lot different to how I behave in real life. (Besides that I usually speak German.)

I agree with Meghan Daum, generally, on this topic.

Personally, I want to add that it really is quite often a peculiar-funny feeling when being attack by some anonymous voice, and that not only when insults are involved: I feel a lot more vulnerable, and sometimes even get jelous that the other side can hide behind a screenname.

On the other hand: all A2K'ers I've met (and that is quite a big number by now) are in reality the same as here: adorable, intelligent persons of all ages.

I can appreciate that Walter.

I use a screenname that I've used now and then ever since I've been on the internet. (It's actually a character in children's stories that I used to write for my kids and their friends and then the next generation.)

My real name is no secret to any reasonable person who wants it, and I have also met A2Kers (and many others from the internet) who not only know my full name but also my e-mail, physical address, and phone number and where I work (or have worked as hubby and I now run our own business out of our home.)

But maybe it's safer in Germany. Here many of us don't want to make ourselves vulnerable to the real nuts and psychopaths who roam the internet. So we use screen names so that we can talk about where we live and what we do while restricting our identity and exact whereabouts to those we don't mind having them.

I can confidently say that the way I post here is pretty much as I would talk anywhere. I don't introduce the topic of politics, religion, or controversial social issues in most social or business settings, but enjoy discussing all with people who enjoy discussing them when appropriate to do so. I certainly do not attack people personally or live to play the 'gotcha game' in real life or on the internet, but I will defend myself if personally attacked or mischaracterized in real life as I do here.

And I hate ugliness, hatefulness, and unnecessary confrontation on the internet and in real life.

It's easier in real life though because you have body language, facial expression, tone of voice, and a more orderly flow of conversation than what you have on the internet.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

But maybe it's safer in Germany. Here many of us don't want to make ourselves vulnerable to the real nuts and psychopaths who roam the internet. So we use screen names so that we can talk about where we live and what we do while restricting our identity and exact whereabouts to those we don't mind having them.

I don't think, it's a lot different ... on the internet.

I'm more than sure, most here (and that's not only in Germany) wouldn't give their personal data to all the world and his wife as it's done in the USA.
(For instance, I certainly would sue my electoral office, if they would tell any party that I vote on absente ballot - in your county, they might even get the address labels ready printed with the proper address.)

It's certainly a very personal issue that I think, I have nothing to hide, if it makes me more vulnerable or not.
And I know that this attitude isn't shared by many.

0 Replies

I think a distinction is to be made between cyberlife and the real world, and I think that distinction is totally lost on many. Also, speaking from experience dating back to the days a telephone handset and a monochrome monitor were the gateway to the cyberworld, I think the problem is far from a new development. Going back even further, a similar phenomenon occurred with the explosion of 2-way voice radio communication, most particularly exemplified by the obnoxiousness which overtook the US Citizen Band in the '70s, though evidenced as well much earlier in the HAM Amature bands; sociopathic folks hid behind microphones then much the way today they and their descendants hide behind keyboards. In fact, hundreds of years ago, the printing press was seen in similar light, and aeons before that, writing itself was by some perceived to grant venue to those theretofore precluded from broad dissemination of viewpoint not in keeping with what "the powers that be" might prefer - at first, written communication essentially was the exclusive property of the ruling/priestly classes, something to be kept from the masses lest disaster ensue.

0 Replies

That, timber, sums up a seminar I had in history at university.

The only difference is that my seminar lasted two years Laughing

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

I think a distinction is to be made between cyberlife and the real world, and I think that distinction is totally lost on many. Also, speaking from experience dating back to the days a telephone handset and a monochrome monitor were the gateway to the cyberworld, I think the problem is far from a new development. Going back even further, a similar phenomenon occurred with the explosion of 2-way voice radio communication, most particularly exemplified by the obnoxiousness which overtook the US Citizen Band in the '70s, though evidenced as well much earlier in the HAM Amature bands; sociopathic folks hid behind microphones then much the way today they and their descendants hide behind keyboards. In fact, hundreds of years ago, the printing press was seen in similar light, and aeons before that, writing itself was by some perceived to grant venue to those theretofore precluded from broad dissemination of viewpoint not in keeping with what "the powers that be" might prefer - at first, written communication essentially was the exclusive property of the ruling/priestly classes, something to be kept from the masses lest disaster ensue.

Oh wow, I had forgotten about CB radios. They were a blast and a whole community of CBers sprang up almost everywhere just like Internet communities now. I remember once getting hopelessly lost in a snowstorm and fog trying to find the highway home out of Kansas City. All the street signs were iced over and I had no clue what direction I was going or even where I was. Using landmarks I could describe, a CBer got in his truck and came out in the storm to find us (I had a carful of kids with me) and led us to the highway. I never failed to hail his base station when passing through town after that.

But CB radio got too clogged and, as you said, too populated with trouble makers and jerks, and it went by the wayside.

I hope the Internet communities don't die for the same reason.

0 Replies

There's nothing I've said here that I wouldn't say or haven't said in real life. If anything, I think I'd be less polite in some of the more tense debates because putting things in writing gives me time to cool off.

0 Replies

I feel the same way that Free Duck feels.

There are a couple of obvious examples, but I don't find the level of animosity between the two opposing sides of our nations poltical culture any worse on A2K than in real life.

We are in a very divided society. People express their opinions.

This is often escalated by the fact that neither side agrees on which terms are offensive or not. The conservatives talk about "anchor babies" and "socialists" and "liberals". The liberals talk about "racists" and "war-mongers" and "bible-bangers". Each side apparently isn't willing to accept that their terms are offensive to the other side-- or perhaps they are just escalating. I have heard all of these terms being used in casual workplace discussions.

It is also possible that the two sides of our political culture are simply expressing a sincere hatred of each other.

I question whether things are more vitriolic than they were in the past (although it is clear the internet makes individual vitriol spread much farther).

I recently heard a radio piece (I was not paying that much attention but the general gist caught my ear) that was talking about political campaigns in the 19th century which were much more negative than today's campaigns with vulgar name-calling, slanderous unsupported accusations of drunken immorality and attacks on candidates mothers and children.

But if you want free speech in a pluralistic democracy-- I think vitriol comes with the territory. If I have a deep hatred of what you stand for, I have the right-- and arguably the responsibility to exress this.

0 Replies

I don't think the internet changes the way we think (aside from being a source of information), it just gives people a voice.

0 Replies

stuh505 wrote:

I don't think the internet changes the way we think (aside from being a source of information), it just gives people a voice.

The way we think? No. I agree.

But do you think all those people that are absolutely obnoxious, hateful, or stupid jerks on the internet behave that way in real life?

0 Replies

Quote:

But do you think all those people that are absolutely obnoxious, hateful, or stupid jerks on the internet behave that way in real life?

They think those things, but most wouldn't have the kahunas to say them out loud to your face without the mask on anonymity.

0 Replies

The words "obnoxious", "hateful", "stupid" and "jerk" are completely subjective terms. I have certainly met people in real life that I would apply those terms to.

Some people even think they apply to Ann Coulter. Go figure.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

But CB radio got too clogged and, as you said, too populated with trouble makers and jerks, and it went by the wayside.

I hope the Internet communities don't die for the same reason.

Naw, that's not what happened. In fact, the FCC opened new frequencies to the public because of the increase in traffic. Over-the-road transport drivers, who used the radio in their livelihood, switched to other channels. The wannabes who craved the attention of the "real truckers" were ignored, much as online trolls eventually get ignored at a discussion board. It was a fad, and as a fad, it died away.

Being "wired," or as so often the case these days, connected by wireless communications has become a way of life for tens of millions of people, and possibly hundreds of millions. What we do here is largely recreational, but that's no different from families on vacation driving down the same roads as over-the-road transport. Most of the internet is never seen by people such as those who post here, and is a real, crucial resource to researchers, businessmen, security professionals, academics and a host of others who may never have seen such a site as this, or taken one look and developed no interest.

Whole nother crittur from the silly "CB Radio" fad.

0 Replies

To me, the anonymity of internet discussion and the miles between the participants don't make much difference. If I make a fool of myself I get embarrased, on the web or elsewhere.

0 Replies

I'm painting with broad brushes here, but I think that for the most part, Americans tend to speak their minds. Others, such as the English (and similarly, the Australians like me) tend to be far less confrontational. So, we wander into an environment where suddenly everyone is saying exactly what they think, forcefully and passionately...we adjust accordingly. I know I am far more assertive and direct here than in real life. In real life, I've never needed to be.
Having said that, knowing that the situation can't escalate into violence probably removes a lot of the natural inhibitions also.

0 Replies

there are people here i say things to i would never say to them in real life, i would never say it because i would avoid them in real life

<cough>omsigdavid<cough>

0 Replies

INTERNET RELATIONSHIPS AND PROTOCOL

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know