Why Internet Discussions Turn Nasty
All of us have read posts where the initial poster writes something coherent, then other posters write coherent stuff that disagrees with the coherent first poster, then some of the posters respond to the first poster and then…slowly (or fastly) all hell breaks loose. This poster says something nasty about that poster; intelligences and understandings of things are challenged; those who disagree must be morons and then the attacks and counter attacks become really nasty. I am right; you are wrong; you are an idiot; no, you are an idiot.
This will then carry over to other posts by these posters – they go at each other in post after post on various topics. The hell continues. Posters will be hurt; anger and sarcasm will predominate and then the arguments essentially boil down to “My father can beat your father” or “Your mother is ugly” or “I am going to shove you in a locker you creep” or some such silliness.
In war we see this with the demonization of the enemy. As this is Memorial Day my wife the Beautiful A.P. and I went to our village’s honoring of our soldiers who died defending America and our soldiers who are vets and deserve our praise. The World War II guys still called the Japanese “Japs.” They had none of the love of Japan that many Americans, including me, exhibit. (This summer I will be in Japan for almost three weeks and I’ll be seeing a Tokyo Giants game!)
That’s what happens to our enemies in real war. We nail our enemies in an insulting way. I am now doing that with radical Islam. I have no good adjectives to apply to those who slaughter soldiers in England or our military men in Fort Hood by an Islamist. They call us devils; I return the favor. I would think that is normal. Maybe? Maybe not?
I guess in war it is better to demonize than play Hamlet and think too deeply about things. That does certainly cause various types of brain freeze. Casinos don’t like when you think. It is also possible that our thinking brain is uncomfortable with thought as well.
Certainly posting on a web site is not war but at times it seems so.
Poster “A” has an opinion; poster “B” has a different opinion. Why should they hurl “Jap” insults at each other? Are discussions and persons almost always fated to end in hatred of each other? Or at least dislike of each other? Or disdain for each other?
It is certainly my experience in my limited time checking out message boards that such hostility seems rampant. Those who agree with us are given a pass but those whose opinions are different – come on their fathers must be woosies.
On this particular site, which is one of the more intelligent ones of the ones I have been perusing, the Wizard bans people. For the people banned, it almost seems like a badge of honor.
Anyway I am back for a few weeks from my casino and other travels. If I have time I will post some more.
Quote: FrankScoblete
This will then carry over to other posts by these posters – they go at each other in post after post on various topics. The hell continues. Posters will be hurt; anger and sarcasm will predominate
Geez, Frank, its the nature of discussion. It happens
in bars, in dorm rooms, in classrooms. In workplaces,
in bowling ally's, on public bus's. Its how we discuss
as humans, are you new to the planet? The only place
you see lively exchange of ideas in constraint are places
like congress, where there are strict rules. And in some
countries, those same discussions become violent even
with the rules in place.
You seem to have a real problem with this, you bring it
up again and again. You think you'll change human nature?
Fat chance..
As Chief Shop Steward I had the pass codes for every floor. I would show up and tell him he could hang up now as I was here now.
Never took more than a visit or two to set things right.
People could simply ignore each other and the bull would stop. The Wizard doesn't ban people for bad discussions: he bans people for violations of the rules. He took the unusual step of limiting forums on craps because it was dominating the forums for many days in a row.
I'm trying to think of anyone that I 'hate' on this forum and I can't come up with anyone. And no one has really come after me except intellectually, which is absolutely acceptable.
The feuds with multiple posts on multiple threads has really only been between 6 or 7 users, but it dominated the forums for a while. With the lead gone, the forum has been thankfully quiet.
Quote: boymimbo
I'm trying to think of anyone that I 'hate' on this forum and I can't come up with anyone. And no one has really come after me except intellectually, which is absolutely acceptable.
Well what happens with forums is they attract people who like a spirited discussion, which means discussions will get heated at times. IOW, it is not a random sample. Where a problem comes in is when a minority of folks have to attack people personally when they cannot defend their position. One reason I like this forum is that we have few people who fall to that level, combined with an administration that has a keen sense for knowing when to let things go and rein things in.
I can't speak for others, but I find the discussions here can be a bit like having a sparring match. It helps one develop their intellect.
Quote: AZDuffmanOne reason I like this forum is that we have few people who fall to that level, combined with an administration that has a keen sense for knowing when to let things go and rein things in.
I can't speak for others, but I find the discussions here can be a bit like having a sparring match. It helps one develop their intellect.
Completely agree. Using boymimbo as an example, he and I have been going back and forth with opposing viewpoints over a very hot topic issue - guns - for months now. If anything, my respect for him has grown as a result.
Same with rxwine; in every thread about guns, we’re at odds. Yet, he also participates in my fishing and cars threads often, and we’re completely cool with each other.
Even you, AZ. You and I have argued over everything from gay rights to speed limits, but neither of us has ever crossed the line to where it affected our internet friendship.
Most people here, when they argue it’s always within the rules of proper debate. Sure, sometimes the attack moves towards the poster and away from the post, but compared to the rest of the interwebs, a vast majority of our transgressions are mild at best.
I think it speaks towards the integrity and character of most of the posters here as to why it remains as civil it does, and same goes for the rest of the interweb. Gentlemen are a dying breed.
Quote: AZDuffmanI can't speak for others, but I find the discussions here can be a bit like having a sparring match. It helps one develop their intellect.
Are you saying that you are developing *my* intellect, or am I developing yours? ;)
I don't think many of the things said online would be said if we were all in the same room, face to face.
Quote: AlanMendelsonBack to the original point:
I don't think many of the things said online would be said if we were all in the same room, face to face.
True, but at the same time, people are less honest in person. Just giving other side of the coin.
Quote: FinsRuleTrue, but at the same time, people are less honest in person. Just giving other side of the coin.
Honestly wasn't what I had in mind. What I had in mind was the idea of having a decent discussion without insults and personal attacks. You just wouldnt insult someone if you were face to face, would you?
Quote: FinsRuleTrue, but at the same time, people are less honest in person. Just giving other side of the coin.
Less honest, and the law is more of a factor in face to face.
If you are way bigger than I am, I risk getting into a losing physical altercation. But then again, if you start something physical, I always have the option of bringing in the law to have you charged. Both factors help to keep human interaction more tolerant, for the most part. There are always exceptions, and most of them have done their time.......
Someday forums will be live video chats, and then watch how things change... especially when your naked wife walks behind you at your computer's webcam.
Quote: AlanMendelsonshould require posteres to use their real names.
If you don't mind being searchable by everyone from your ex-wife to your boss, that's fine.
Don't see any advantage to it.
Quote: AlanMendelsonespecially when your naked wife walks behind you at your computer's webcam.
LOL
But as others have said, anonymity and lack of possible physical confrontation allows people to grow brass balls at times. I try to have somewhat long fuse. However, the people I tend to get into significant internet arguments with are so stubborn, they will never admit when they are wrong about something anyway. So I generally try to avoid major arguments because they really just further waste my time.
Quote: rxwineIf you don't mind being searchable by everyone from your ex-wife to your boss, that's fine.
If you don't want your name attached to your post, why should you be allowed to post it?
In my case, some of the political conversations have become spirited and very heated, yet I still have a great deal of personal respect for everyone on the other side. For example, take a guy like s2dbaker. He and I are polar opposites, and we've debated endlessly. Yet I still think he's a good person and harbor no personal animosity toward him whatsoever. Same with boymimbo & rxwine.
Makes me wonder why a certain DI/DC person was having so many problems.
Quote: AlanMendelsonHonestly wasn't what I had in mind. What I had in mind was the idea of having a decent discussion without insults and personal attacks. You just wouldnt insult someone if you were face to face, would you?
You bet I would, if they were saying idiotic
things. I've done it many times, I'm far
more verbose in person than I am here.
Quote: AlanMendelsonIf you don't want your name attached to your post, why should you be allowed to post it?
I don't know, why are your priorities on this more important than mine? It's just preference.
Kids and others on Facebook and other social media tend to find out everything follows you forever. And if they don't, they may eventually.
If you happen to mention anything it's possible fodder for someone else to use someday.
Unless you're making your business out of it, like some do, I see no point?
But seriously, why are your priorities on this more important than mine? Or anyone that disagrees with you?
Quote: rxwineKids and others on Facebook and other social media tend to find out everything follows you forever. And if they don't, they may eventually.
If you happen to mention anything it's possible fodder for someone else to use someday.
Very true, and not only that, there's the whole concern about identity theft, which is another can of worms.
Basically, requiring the use of real names would be the fastest way to kill a message forum.
True perhaps but is this an advantage? Prior to Hurricane Katrina there were endless face to face politically correct babble fests concerning evacuation procedures but when poor black alcoholics actually attempted to cross a bridge into an area of high ground, food, drinking water and unlooted liquor stores, the police fired on them.Quote: AlanMendelsonI don't think many of the things said online would be said if we were all in the same room, face to face.
I think it boils down to social politeness. In person, you tend to be polite, because there is a social aspect to face-to-face interaction.
To give an example, if I met Mr. Scoblete in person, I would just say nice to meet you, or other such chit chat.
However, on this message board, one of the first things I said to Scoblete was that I hated all his books and think he is one of the worst gambling writers out there. That's the sort of thing that, while honest, is more appropriate on a message board than face to face, because message boards are more unfiltered exchanges of ideas, and less encumbered by the need to be socially polite.
You trade a little politeness for honesty based on the format of the interaction.
Quote: FleaStiffTrue perhaps but is this an advantage? Prior to Hurricane Katrina there were endless face to face politically correct babble fests concerning evacuation procedures but when poor black alcoholics actually attempted to cross a bridge into an area of high ground, food, drinking water and unlooted liquor stores, the police fired on them.
I dont understand the point you are trying to make here, Fleastiff?
Quote: Beethoven9thBasically, requiring the use of real names would be the fastest way to kill a message forum.
Maybe, but it would also stop the falsehoods from being posted.
Quote: AlanMendelson
Maybe, but it would also stop the falsehoods from being posted.
Would it? It's still an internet forum. If your career has nothing to do with gambling, or you're not scrutinized in the public eye closely, it would make little difference.
Quote: tringlomaneWould it? It's still an internet forum. If your career has nothing to do with gambling, or you're not scrutinized in the public eye closely, it would make little difference.
You're probably right. Never mind.
Quote: AlanMendelsonYou're probably right. Never mind.
Haha, this response is the kind of response I wish I saw from more often from others, and not because I'm necessarily right. You aren't super hard-headed like some internet forum posters, and neither am I. If someone gives me a reasonable argument to point out my faults, I am fairly quick to admit I am wrong.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI've always said that hostile discussion forums should require posteres to use their real names.
I don't really see that as a good idea. What is to be gained? Just boot troublemakers.
Part of what you gain by using handles is you get what people really feel, not people trying to be PC. Is like when Troy Aikman said in the 1990s he was thankful for internet chat rooms because it was the one place he could have a normal conversation with people. Same here. I I want to hear a bunch of weepy PC conversations I will start talking to my co-workers.
There seems little doubt that demonizing one's opponents is a part of human nature. Heck, when Lincoln was running for President he was often called a monkey. Our founding fathers at times could be compared to the MMA so "viciously vigorous" were their disagreements. I remember reading about two famous archeologists who would go to each other's digs and throw stones at the other. I guess you can strip away most civilization and get right down to the "I hate your face" level fairly quickly.
I am an avid reader of The Skeptical Inquirer and Skeptic magazines and I must say I prefer each of their brands of analysis to most of what I read on message boards (barring this one) and certainly most political boards. (On political boards, even some famous ones, the other side is sooner or later referred to as Nazis. Bush was a Nazi on liberal boards; Obama is a Nazi on conservative boards; you get the picture.) Now the above magazines take on much of what they consider to be the flotsam and jetsam of wrong-headed thinking but it is done in a controlled and clever manner. They make winning points time and again by not hurling insults but showing what they believe to be the mistakes in other's ideas, beliefs and research.
Do I expect to see that control here? Yes, I do for the most part and, in fact, I do for the most part. Disagreements are great; the dialectic works quite often.
On a singular note. I tend to agree with Alan Mendelson that I would prefer to see the real names of the people who post. I realize why some people are against this but I do think putting your name to what you write makes what you write have far more power --- at least it has more power with me.
On dice control/influence/bias, it's been less civil because people are more passionate about the answer. This forum is dominated by folks who know their math skills, and so they as a whole are more steadfast in their beliefs and feel much more confident to state them and back them up.
The name calling and unfriendliness is due to the statement of one's belief affects another's belief system. It's an attack on their ego. When you have strong beliefs, you personally take it as an insult. Being insulted has an emotional effect on you, but you have a choice on how to react. Some people just disappear and never return. Other people escalate and hurl back a bigger insult (because they are upset and angry).
Quote: FrankScobleteOn a singular note. I tend to agree with Alan Mendelson that I would prefer to see the real names of the people who post. I realize why some people are against this but I do think putting your name to what you write makes what you write have far more power --- at least it has more power with me.
In a perfect world, I would agree with this requirement, however, it is not practical in today's world. The risk to your employment career is way too great, depending on course, of your vocation.
Twenty years ago, you applied for a job, and if you got a call for an interview, you had your time to shine. The interviewer asked the questions, but you got to choose what information you wanted to let out, and how it was presented. The internet has changed all that. What is my personal life is now being used by a business to qualify me for employment. To quite a few folks, my just being associated to a gambling site would be a warning sign to not hire me. My current employer could decide that since I seem to have a few K to wager on craps each year, perhaps I am overpaid (they already think that and don't even know about the craps). If you were on a political site, supporting a certain candidate, a perspective employer may decide to look for another person, because of your political beliefs.
The amount of information that can be easily found on someone is just plain scary these days. If anonymity on forums and such were to be removed, it would potentially cause great harm to our business lives.
In my opinion it is partially because of people using their real names.
Those of you that are well known publicly have a certain following, pro or con and when viewers see posts on forums I think that they consider
the source of the message at least as much as the message itself.
By using a pseudonym you make viewers consider the message itself. Is it possible that those who publish books and then go to internet forums on
those topics [using their names and repeatedly mentioning their product] are just trying for free advertising? Should they be paying wov for page hits? I think going to forums and advertising a book or a show of your own is just tacky, and detracts from relevant, intelligent discourse.
If this forum is about improving critical thinking skills about the games, leave the surnames out of it. Like Raleigh said, there is so much tracking of
social sites going on, that any personal info on the net is feeding the predator's and could and does come back to really bite people.
How would you know if people are using their "real" names? Should photo I.D. be required? Biometric? How many authors use penn names?
Just type your name into a search engine and see how much info comes back about you that you were'nt aware of.
Quote: FrankScobleteWhy Internet Discussions Turn Nasty
All of us have read posts where the initial poster writes something coherent, then other posters write coherent stuff that disagrees with the coherent first poster, then some of the posters respond to the first poster and then…slowly (or fastly) all hell breaks loose. This poster says something nasty about that poster; intelligences and understandings of things are challenged; those who disagree must be morons and then the attacks and counter attacks become really nasty. I am right; you are wrong; you are an idiot; no, you are an idiot.
This will then carry over to other posts by these posters – they go at each other in post after post on various topics. The hell continues. Posters will be hurt; anger and sarcasm will predominate and then the arguments essentially boil down to “My father can beat your father” or “Your mother is ugly” or “I am going to shove you in a locker you creep” or some such silliness.
In war we see this with the demonization of the enemy. As this is Memorial Day my wife the Beautiful A.P. and I went to our village’s honoring of our soldiers who died defending America and our soldiers who are vets and deserve our praise. The World War II guys still called the Japanese “Japs.” They had none of the love of Japan that many Americans, including me, exhibit. (This summer I will be in Japan for almost three weeks and I’ll be seeing a Tokyo Giants game!)
That’s what happens to our enemies in real war. We nail our enemies in an insulting way. I am now doing that with radical Islam. I have no good adjectives to apply to those who slaughter soldiers in England or our military men in Fort Hood by an Islamist. They call us devils; I return the favor. I would think that is normal. Maybe? Maybe not?
I guess in war it is better to demonize than play Hamlet and think too deeply about things. That does certainly cause various types of brain freeze. Casinos don’t like when you think. It is also possible that our thinking brain is uncomfortable with thought as well.
Certainly posting on a web site is not war but at times it seems so.
Poster “A” has an opinion; poster “B” has a different opinion. Why should they hurl “Jap” insults at each other? Are discussions and persons almost always fated to end in hatred of each other? Or at least dislike of each other? Or disdain for each other?
It is certainly my experience in my limited time checking out message boards that such hostility seems rampant. Those who agree with us are given a pass but those whose opinions are different – come on their fathers must be woosies.
On this particular site, which is one of the more intelligent ones of the ones I have been perusing, the Wizard bans people. For the people banned, it almost seems like a badge of honor.
Yes I would have to agree. I am quite new to a few various internet forums and it seems like there is a lot of keyboard warriors who like to either start shit or talk very condasendingly to other uses who may have a different view point. I know that in the real world most of these people who like to start shit on forums probably arent very good at communicating with people so they like to use the net as a bit of an outlet and feel big.
I would like to meet some of these keyboard tough guys in the real world and see how tough they are then! Everyone can be a tough guy or smart ass behind there computer screen but no so much in the real world.Time will tell
Quote: RaleighCrapsIn a perfect world, I would agree with this requirement, however, it is not practical in today's world. The risk to your employment career is way too great, depending on course, of your vocation.
Twenty years ago, you applied for a job, and if you got a call for an interview, you had your time to shine. The interviewer asked the questions, but you got to choose what information you wanted to let out, and how it was presented. The internet has changed all that. What is my personal life is now being used by a business to qualify me for employment. To quite a few folks, my just being associated to a gambling site would be a warning sign to not hire me. My current employer could decide that since I seem to have a few K to wager on craps each year, perhaps I am overpaid (they already think that and don't even know about the craps). If you were on a political site, supporting a certain candidate, a perspective employer may decide to look for another person, because of your political beliefs.
The amount of information that can be easily found on someone is just plain scary these days. If anonymity on forums and such were to be removed, it would potentially cause great harm to our business lives.
I sort of agree and disagree with this at the same time. No question that the internet is forever, and you can't post drunk, rashly, or without consequences for attribution. I have not yet said anything on this forum I would be unwilling to have attributed to me, so if I were using my real name here, I would not suffer thereby. I was co-administrator of a national professional bbs for 10 years, where all were required to use their real names, but it was a closed forum (though in one notable case, something posted there privately became national news from the House floor, and a private post of mine was used without permission in a public blog that led to the end of my career. I still stand by what I said, but sometimes politics trump truth.)
However, I would also have to ask why ANYONE should need the ability to say insulting or ridiculous things and hide behind anonymity. I chose my nickname because, at the time I decided to start posting here, I had not read anything by someone who was not using a nickname, so I thought it was forum protocol. If you can't stand behind something in person, it's likely you shouldn't be posting it. I would give exception to someone like casinoboss, who would have some professional exposure (he says and I believe him) from being identified. But if a person posting stoops to personal insults to anyone to make their point, they lose credibility with me, regardless of the validity of their argument.
I will say that I sign my PM's with my first name and last initial, but both my first and last name are relatively uncommon (especially my last name) so that would make me pretty easy to find for someone with ill-intent. I can defend myself sufficiently against a physical threat, but there are other ways to injure someone, if one were so inclined.
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: RaleighCrapsIn a perfect world, I would agree with this requirement, however, it is not practical in today's world. The risk to your employment career is way too great, depending on course, of your vocation.
Twenty years ago, you applied for a job, and if you got a call for an interview, you had your time to shine. The interviewer asked the questions, but you got to choose what information you wanted to let out, and how it was presented. The internet has changed all that. What is my personal life is now being used by a business to qualify me for employment. To quite a few folks, my just being associated to a gambling site would be a warning sign to not hire me. My current employer could decide that since I seem to have a few K to wager on craps each year, perhaps I am overpaid (they already think that and don't even know about the craps). If you were on a political site, supporting a certain candidate, a perspective employer may decide to look for another person, because of your political beliefs.
The amount of information that can be easily found on someone is just plain scary these days. If anonymity on forums and such were to be removed, it would potentially cause great harm to our business lives.
I sort of agree and disagree with this at the same time. No question that the internet is forever, and you can't post drunk, rashly, or without consequences for attribution. I have not yet said anything on this forum I would be unwilling to have attributed to me, so if I were using my real name here, I would not suffer thereby. I was co-administrator of a national professional bbs for 10 years, where all were required to use their real names, but it was a closed forum (though in one notable case, something posted there privately became national news from the House floor, and a private post of mine was used without permission in a public blog that led to the end of my career. I still stand by what I said, but sometimes politics trump truth.)
However, I would also have to ask why ANYONE should need the ability to say insulting or ridiculous things and hide behind anonymity. I chose my nickname because, at the time I decided to start posting here, I had not read anything by someone who was not using a nickname, so I thought it was forum protocol. If you can't stand behind something in person, it's likely you shouldn't be posting it. I would give exception to someone like casinoboss, who would have some professional exposure (he says and I believe him) from being identified. But if a person posting stoops to personal insults to anyone to make their point, they lose credibility with me, regardless of the validity of their argument.
i dont want to say any thing mean to ne1 but i dont need a bunch of creepy people coming where i work to look for me. may be thats why sum hide with out there real name showing.
I am not 100 percent for everyone using his real name to post. I prefer it but I understand someone being afraid. Still using real names might lower the level of nastiness --- which is essentially what I prefer; calm, rationale discussions. I have no problem with someone who disagrees with me; he states his opinion, I state mine.
But those who have followed some of the posters on my threads and posts and some of the posters on other threads and posts can see how easily discussions can degenerate into "You mother is ugly," "No, your mother is ugly." But no one on this forum has yet topped the best insult I ever received from an anonymous poster, "Scoblete is a blood clot." Now that puts all other nasties to shame if you ask me. (No one is allowed to use that insult on me. It is pure and original and should stand alone. Also my grandkids would be upset.)
