Get Brooklynian.com by Email! 
Grab the Feed (RSS)Brooklynian » Forum » Site Issues »
-
Why is there so much antagonism on this site? Why must everything be an issue that divides us into two sides and then we just lob insults at each other? Sure it’s good to be passionate about something, but when it gets to the point where it becomes personal and people are insulting others then it’s disturbing. Why is this disturbing? Because of the possibility it carries into other aspects of life. If someone is antagonistic about my choice in, let’s say apple juice, then it worries me how they might react if they discover I’m not the same race or religion as they are? How angry are they going to be about that if they call me names for liking Red Cheek over Martinelli's? Maybe not at all. Hopefully not at all. But since we’re all anonymous here, how can anyone know? I just think people might want to be careful about how they come across. And there's no reason this place can't be pleasant.
-
Good question. I'm personally tired of reading threads that devolve into bickering among the participants, rather than staying focused on the topic. Maybe the solution is to call the discussion "off topic" every time it stops being about the discussion, and starts being about the participants.Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
I disagree that we need more intervention by the moderators. I've seen this technique (interjection of "OFF TOPIC") used as spuriously by the moderators as the other techniques at their disposal (deleting posts, moving topics, etc.). Such random use of intervention techniques contributes to the antagonism that so often breaks out on threads rather than helping to resolve it. Thank-you for starting this post, piano, which is a much needed topic.Very un- "sivilized".
-
I also think that a lot of people here like to bunch everyone into their own form of "stereotypes" i.e., your new here so you must not care about this area, your white so you must hate black people, your african american so you must speak for all african americans. Also a lot of frequent posters lately want to get into these in depth, political and philosophical debate on line where it is very hard to determine the context of the post, i.e, as opposed to in person where the group can explain quicker and easier. There are also many posters here who need to just get some tougher skin.
-
krowonhill » I disagree that we need more intervention by the moderators. I've seen this technique (interjection of "OFF TOPIC") used as spuriously by the moderators as the other techniques at their disposal (deleting posts, moving topics, etc.). Thank-you for starting this post, piano, which is a much needed topic here.
You're welcome. I too agree that more intervention probably won't do a lot to prevent this antagonism, though any suggestions as to how to help are welcome. The problem is that by the time the refs come out to call technical fouls, it's too late. The bad vibes are already vibrating. I'm not sure there is any action that can be done to keep things civil other than to instill a welcoming and pleasant atmosphere here. If you'll notice on one of these threads that turn into fights (which ones don't, right?) it goes from a bunch of people making comments, usually civil, to a few or even just two sparing verbally and lobbing insults. Where does everyone else go? They don’t want to be a part of the unpleasantness so they leave it to those who are bickering. This then creates an environment that fosters antagonism while driving away those who don’t like to bicker all the time. As a result, only the bullies are left. By the way, why was this thread moved and where? -
It was moved to Ask Brooklynian, because it's a meta-comment about the site, and does not belong on a specific neighborhood board.Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
I noticed that the posts in this section do not appear when I click on "Posts Since Last Visit" (top bar). Posts from every other section do appear there (Crown Heights, The Classifieds, Brooklyn Back When, etc.). I'd suggest enabling this section to appear in people's "Posts Since Last Visit" list. I doubt people will generally surf to this section on their own. Otherwise, the tumbleweeds will just start rolling in. And, as dailyheights says, it's a good question.Very un- "sivilized".
-
Piano » Where does everyone else go? They don’t want to be a part of the unpleasantness so they leave it to those who are bickering. This then creates an environment that fosters antagonism while driving away those who don’t like to bicker all the time. As a result, only the bullies are left.
Maybe there could be a limit - installed technologically - that disallows people from 1) posting over and over again on a thread, and/or 2) from posting more than a certain number of times on a thread in a 24 hour period? That may encourage people to 1) read others' posts thoroughly before they respond, and 2) post more thoughtfully themselves.Very un- "sivilized". -
I agree that it should at least show these posts. It looks like no one has responded. I don't know if technology will help since it sounds like that might require people who don't get paid to do a lot of work. I don't know. I wish I had an answer for my own question but I don't. I don't think anything will stop people from being jerks, I just wish it wouldn't chase off so many decent people. But for some reason the way things are here tend to favor the instigators and the agitators.
-
Are you new to the internet? No offense, but there's two things you should google: "arguing on the internet retarded" and "John Gabriel's Greater Internet Douchebag Theory" it's a lot easier if you Google Image Search it. Peace Tyrone.
-
krowonhill » Maybe there could be a limit - installed technologically - that disallows people from 1) posting over and over again on a thread, and/or 2) from posting more than a certain number of times on a thread in a 24 hour period? That may encourage people to 1) read others' posts thoroughly before they respond, and 2) post more thoughtfully themselves.
I'm starting to think that perhaps the only real solution is to not even engage people who put up pointless posts looking to antagonize, or who are just seeking attention. You know, the kind of people who post not because they have something to say, but because they just have to say something. If we don't acknowledge them, maybe they'll get bored with the mature, intelligent discourse and leave. -
Piano » I'm starting to think that perhaps the only real solution is to not even engage people who put up pointless posts looking to antagonize, or who are just seeking attention. You know, the kind of people who post not because they have something to say, but because they just have to say something. If we don't acknowledge them, maybe they'll get bored with the mature, intelligent discourse and leave.
I've spent years on these sort of message boards (mostly automotive), and there's always someone like you on each one -- and a new one every week. Clearly you're intelligent and articulate, but you do not understand how these things work. I should also point out your incredible number of posts in a very short amount of time. I suggest you get out of the house, enjoy some sunshine. Talk to a human. Lighten up. Crack a joke. Don't say anything racist or homophobic. Necrophilia jokes are OK, but not if they involve ashes. Try not to get your panties in a wad. Peace Tyrone. "On the internet no one knows I'm a dog" -
I don't know why "posts since last visit" doesn't appear to work for you on this forum - there are no special settings that would prevent it from showing up normally. I'll look into it. Sorry it's causing you trouble. Tyrone's comment above is not exactly the nicest way to put it... but he is "spot on" that arguing on the Internet is a waste of time and doesn't change anything, let alone other people's minds. Piano's solution is the best one, which is that you shouldn't engage people who are making pointless, antagonizing, or attention seeking posts. The problem is, it's hard to ignore when it's right there in front of you.Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
dailyheights » Tyrone's comment above is not exactly the nicest way to put it... but he is "spot on" that arguing on the Internet is a waste of time and doesn't change anything, let alone other people's minds.
It's also entirely pointless. Come on. It's insincere to pretend I or anyone else on this planet does not already know this. It's also really quite a cynical reaction. By pointing this out, what you and others are really saying is that instead of not arguing on the Internet, people who don't like it just shouldn't use the Internet. And this is why this site fosters bullying. Those who want an end to the constant bickering are told to just go away or give up, rather than the antagonists being told to do so. Certainly it's easier to convince the rational ones to give up and take the high road, but it's not the right thing to do. Besides, I am talking about antagonism, not arguments. I've made this quite clear, and there is big difference between the two. But this is your site DH. You can have it anyway you like it and whoever you want on. So I guess at Ieast I owe you a thanks for making an honest effort here to assuage me when you really don't have any obligation to do so at all. But it's because of that I don't think you really want a site with so much bitterness and unpleasantness. If you need help, let me know. -
krowonhill » Maybe there could be a limit - installed technologically - that disallows people from 1) posting over and over again on a thread, and/or 2) from posting more than a certain number of times on a thread in a 24 hour period? That may encourage people to 1) read others' posts thoroughly before they respond, and 2) post more thoughtfully themselves.
The only other message board I've frequented had built-in technology that prevented people from posting twice in a row on a thread and from posting to the same thread within 15 minutes of an earlier post. I think that something like this could make a difference here since antagonistic posts often appear within a few minutes of each other and, as piano points out, are often the output of just a couple of posters. It wouldn't take any more work for the moderators if the technology is available. I disagree with Tyrone that something more civil is not possible here. To refute Tyrone's point, I've managed to be involved in thoughtful discussions on this board despite the hurdles involved. The other message board that I frequented was a peaceful and supportive virtual environment. People behaved quite differently on that one than they do here. I'm a big believer in collectively establishing a positive vision and working towards it. If the people who care about this board wanted something different, I have no doubt that it could be achieved. dailyheights, this thread is now appearing on my "Posts Since Last Visit" list.Very un- "sivilized". -
Why is the sky blue?your anger is delicious. - dieter
-
Um... OK. I'm just trying to be proactive here, not start an argument. If anyone honestly believes when I said "arguing on the internet is a waste of time" I actually meant "do not use the internet", then I guess I'm not a very good communicator. KrowOnHill, we do have a post throttle but I don't want to penalize users that are behaving for the sake of users that are misbehaving. I will take a look at it and see whether changing it would help. Bottom line, not only is it possible to have civil conversations here, it happens all the time. It would be helpful to me if people point out threads that are veering out of control or in danger of doing so.Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
witch-king » Why is the sky blue?
And just for giggles:
(\__/)
(=’.'=)
(”)_(”) -
I think the easiest way to make people mind their manners on the interwebs is to make them post under their own full name, have their avatars be a photo of them holding up two forms of government-issued ID, phone numbers and addresses easily accessed in their profile, etc. Otherwise we're all able to respond in any way without real-world consequences. Complain all you want, but this is the sandbox you've chosen to play in.
-
Yeah, and I'm free to ban you.
This is marginally related, but I just heard today that for a long time, voting in America was public. In other words, you'd vote and everybody knew how you voted. In some eras, they made the ballots gigantic and in different colors for different parties. This was a big help for "shoulder strikers" -- the thugs who got paid to hang around polling places and intimidate, beat up, stab, brick, or otherwise harass anyone attempting to vote for the wrong guy.Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
I'm just here for the coffee.
-
TyroneShoelaces » I'm just here for the coffee.
I'm here for the christian fellowship.your anger is delicious. - dieter -
I think the best way to check online behavior is to speak up for fellow posters. I think that if a poster displays antagonism, that he, she, or it should be subject to critique. So in the case that say, for instance someone calls another poster 'a racist' or says that their postings are 'racist', then instead of the ad hominem (whether valid or not) remaining floating in the air, others should step in and say something along the lines of 'whoa, that's strong language buddy!' We need to police each other, and not call each other names; yeah, I know, the irony. And on that note, I am going to proverbially release the doves of peace, extend the proverbial olive branch, and to some extent raise the proverbial white flag of negotiation and offer apologies to my two archenemies, Whynot and CTK: I've allowed passions to influence the manner in which I've responded to them -- given our history -- and I am going to endeavor to be more respectful. I think conflict is inevitable. I really do. I have conflicts with myself all the time (should I or shouldn't I go to the grocery story and get blue corn chip nachos and salsa at 3:30 in the am?), so conflicts with others is an assured thing. I've said here that 'conflict is inevitable, but how you handle it is not' many times, but of late, I haven't handled conflict properly. And for that, I am sorry. Seriously. I am likely still going to say, 'the whiteman', and 'whitefolks' in my online parlance however. Please do not misconstrue this usage as hate. It's not. It's part self parody, part pun-in-cheek (and chique) and just banter. It's how I talk; seriously. But, from now on, if my disagreement sounds antagonistic, I would appreciate it if I am critiqued on it, so we can discern what was the antagonism, and why it is considered as such. For those not in the know, my antagonism with whynot is based on some stuff that need not be repeated, and my stuff with CTK -- well, that's just complicated. I hope both of them can also offer apologies for their ad hominem and we can move on from here peaceably.
-
Amazing. No response. COoool. Like Harvey Dent I will rise again.
-
dailyheights:
I'd seriously suggest reconsidering the use of a "post throttle" on the site. Today's posts on the "pawn shop" thread devolved pretty quickly into personal attacks. Respondents were posting rapidly and on top of each other. As it was, a single responder posted six times in an hour (on page 10). A "post throttle" that limited the number of posts per responder in a given amount of time could have halted the process.
Very un- "sivilized". -
Not that I'm a mod or influencer, but, FWIW, I just looked through page 10 in the pawnshop thread - it all looks on-topic to me, with only once instance that could be interpreted as "not nice" (and even that was pretty tame). So, in this particular example, throttling would have done what? Nothing productive as far as kum ba yah goal is concerned and it would have stifled meaningful conversation.
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
I also have no idea what krowonhill is talking about. I skimmed it and was generally impressed with the level of decorum on such a potentially contentious topic.
Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
Ditto. And yes, i have been reading it today, it was a slow work day, what can I say haha!
(\__/)
(=’.'=)
(”)_(”) -
My evening dogwalk has jarred something potentially useful loose - one board that I frequent has infraction points that lead to eventual banning. I don't know the specifics, but it seems that the points are counted over a rolling period. X points over Y period leads to a temporary, cool-down ban (one week, two weeks, whatever). Permanent bans are doled out after a certain number of temporary bans (again, over a certain period of time) or for major infractions. It provides a clear message and more than adequate warning for the bad, bad boys.
edited to add - this particular board also has a 'Banned Users' thread that all can see, but only mods can post to. Bans, temporary or permanent, are noted for posterity and it also serves as a warning to others, much like putting the heads of your enemies on spikes outside the castle walls.
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
Interesting ... what I saw was:
mr. met told MHA he was intolerable and then a joke and, in response, MHA said something about him being white, then the discussion went off topic into stupid, ad hominem attacks. By the end, one poster was so riled up that he published six long-winded, nonsensical, and off-topic messages in the space of an hour. The whole thing was off-topic and really, really insufferable. What's the point then?
Very un- "sivilized". -
Oh, different page.
So, what would throttling done there? Encouraged fewer, even more long-winded posts? Sorry, I think that throttling could be useful for bot prevention, but of little value policing etiquette.
What would you propose? (not putting you on the spot, just curious)
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
By the end, one poster was so riled up that he published six long-winded, nonsensical, and off-topic messages in the space of an hour.
I see the joke/white comments (2 total), and I see the post where MHA voluntarily recuses himself from the discussion. But I don't see the 6 off topic "nonsensical" messages. These must have been deleted, because I don't see them. If they are there, I need to see the link to the section of the thread you are talking about. Can ANYONE post the relevant link please?
Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
whyfi » My evening dogwalk has jarred something potentially useful loose - one board that I frequent has infraction points that lead to eventual banning. I don't know the specifics, but it seems that the points are counted over a rolling period. X points over Y period leads to a temporary, cool-down ban (one week, two weeks, whatever). Permanent bans are doled out after a certain number of temporary bans (again, over a certain period of time) or for major infractions. It provides a clear message and more than adequate warning for the bad, bad boys.
edited to add - this particular board also has a 'Banned Users' thread that all can see, but only mods can post to. Bans, temporary or permanent, are noted for posterity and it also serves as a warning to others, much like putting the heads of your enemies on spikes outside the castle walls.
The sites I've seen that use such methods just seem to have users that then find away around the rules.
.....for example, because name calling is forbidden, users just use the definition of what they want to call the other person.
For example, if one poster is convince another is a fool, s/he instead calls them someone who lacks wisdom.
But I have to agree with daily heights, I thought today's thread was pretty good. It is on page 12, and everything that can be said has probably already been said, but I'm betting the posters (myself included) can repeat themselves a few more times. It sure beats working.
....and, thankfully, we haven't had a shooting in a while to talk about.
Dailyheights: I don't think any posts were deleted by the mods, the thread is intact. Krowonhill will have to answer your query....
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
dailyheights, Your site, your decision (obviously). You read the same thread that I did and clearly had a very different reaction than me. In my opinion, the thread became unproductive after the ad hominem slinging started (which you also saw).
In any case, the posts did become more rapid fire after a certain point. Anecdotally, I'll claim a correlation between the ad hominem slinging and the rapid posting, one that I've seen before. People post quickly and thoughtlessly after being insulted because they are pissed off. When upset, people often behave in ways they wouldn't if they had some time to calm down. Besides that, observers often seem to get excited when a "fight" breaks out (much as in real life).
WhyFi, in answer to your question, the toggle mechanism would give people some time to calm down before they post after seeing an insult to themselves or witnessing a "fight".
Very un- "sivilized". -
Yet still nobody posts a link. Oh well. We'll call it "case closed" for now.
Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
krowonhill » WhyFi, in answer to your question, the toggle mechanism would give people some time to calm down before they post after seeing an insult to themselves or witnessing a "fight".
So, it just shuts down all commenting in the thread, or just commenting for a particular poster? How does this mechanism differentiate from regular posting to excited, agitated posting? I just don't see a way of accurately assessing the situation through post count without running the risk of being incredibly intrusive during normal use....not that there's anything wrong with that. -
Piamo, perhaps you should follow your own advice once in awhile.
Is the below thread an example of where mature and intelligent discourse was maintained:
http://brooklynian.com/forum/park-slope/homeless-under-prospect-expwy/page/3
That part where you call my mother a "cum swallowing crack whore" seems to violate the spirit of this thread. Let's not even start with the PM's you sent me.
Good day sir. You bore me.
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.