Quote:

John - the Jack Webb "Just the facts ma'am" approach - should not be a problem. We're all big boys. Straight facts shouldn't have to be sugar-coated and we really have no time for wondering "Oh . . . did I say that nicely enough."
But too often the worst is assumed - or the person feels uncomfortable because they didn't check the manual and they fire back defensively and on and on. I have six kids and watching the dynamics of their interpersonal relationships as they grew was quite the experience for me - an only child. They're now all over 24 and get along but occasionally the wheels come off.

We can't worry about every comma, at best maybe we just keep a misunderstanding from escalating.

Ian




Good points Ian.

I think there are tried-and-true methods for keeping flames from escalating.

1) forums should have formal rules, and they should be posted where everybody can find them (that is true here, but it isn't true in every forum)

2) forum members (as well as forum moderators) should gently remind offenders what the rules are when they are breached. I say GENTLY, because one sure way to throw gas on a flame is to insult somebody openly in a group. People tend to answer in kind, so if your answer is patient and inoffensive, it will probably yield a gentle reply.

3) When necessary, reprimands should be issued in an "equal-to-equal" tone, not in a "superior to inferior" tone. Very few people will accept being talked down to without escalating the flame. This includes commenting on an expressed opinion in a way that demeans the opinion.

4) a good way to offer an opposing point of view without ridiculing the point of view that has already been offered is to say something like "there are several schools of thought on that... here's another way of looking at it..." or "lots of people see it this way..." Bottom line, be wary of any response that undermines the dignity of others. You can say anything in a way that is either insulting or reinforcing. If we err on the side of preserving dignity, there will be very few flames.

5) when we see somebody who clearly has bad interaction skills, the group needs to call them on it, but not in an insulting way. Don't say "hey buddy , you're an idiot", say "forum rules prohibit personal attacks" or "if you are here to get answers to your questions, be aware that people will shy away from answering questions posted by people who have a history of snapping at those who help them"

6) It is usually safe to comment on the BEHAVIOR (because behavior can be changed, and that's the whole point). If you direct negative comments to the PERSON, that will pretty much always start a flame. Plus, it amounts to a personal attack, which is forbidden by forum rules

7) Imagine trying to steer a ball rolling down a hill by tapping it with a stick. If you tap too hard, the ball goes out of control... and so it is with forum reprimands. Gentle nudging is best. When in doubt, go easier rather than harder.

8) forums where no enforcement of rules exists eventually turn into forums where there are no rules at all except for survival of the meanest. At that point all the value-adding people tend to leave. Therefore there is good reason to guard the environment we have here that is currently full of intellect, trust and goodwill.


I agree that walking on eggshells is no good. A forum is a place of ideas, and therefore we don't want to censor ideas. What we DO want is to manage the TONE in which the ideas are conveyed. It is possible to have a great deal of liberty in discussion if people make an effort to preserve the dignity of everybody involved. Or, you can play hardball... But that usually leads to "survival of the meanest", and that would be step down from where we are now.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ey71h8ep047758h/AAC12jNM0Hz9Q8zsh5iDeqNHa?dl=0