[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
Civility
The following is taken from a posting from another list that
encountered problems with clashing personalities. I think it makes
good food for thought for anyone who considers making personal
attacks on public forums such as these. The list this posting was
taken from i eventually unsubscribed from due to the lack of dignity
of its participants. They were more willing to participate in
childish squabbles than maintain aloofness when in the face of
antagonisation. I hope I don't have to do the same with this one.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
..... but, at the risk
of continuing this thing and abusing the bandwidth further, I would like
to think a minute about the ethics -- or about the very possibility -- of
virtual communities like this one.
We all know that if you antagonize somebody enough, that person will
eventually oblige you by becoming antagonized. This is fair. I think
the scramble for moral high ground that comes in the wake of these
exchanges, in which lurkers post in calling for order as though they're
having to come down to the playroom and separate the squabbling children,
only perpetuates and worsens that antagonism. It is dishonest, and
disingenuous, to call for business as usual after this public space has
been used to antagonize and provoke one of its members.
Something else has to happen. What? -- I don't know. But it seems that
the list has to begin by acknowledging what happened to it, and that all
of us are implicated in its abuse. There is no moral high ground when
something like this happens. Pardon, all, if this sounds too preachy or
righteous. Really, I just find at times like this that we're dealing
with more important and provocative issues than perhaps we realize.