Conducting some research on the sometimes childish attacks here--any thoughts?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jeffree
  • Start date Start date
J

jeffree

New member
Hi, all. I've decided to have some of my university students study recent threads here, especially in the Mic forum, to analyze the reasons and implications for the childish language that erupts here from time to time, particularly when a perception of spam arises. Some of the blatantly rude responses to otherwise interesting posts (sometimes obviously more knowledgeable and specific than many others) have often struck me as surprisingly foreign to the communication standards used by most successful professionals, not to mention a violation of the lessons of basic politeness taught by most parents to their children. (Some of the responses that greet Alan Hyatt's posts--someone who does nothing to hide his professional affiliation and perspective--are a good case in point.)

We will *not* be investigating whether or not someone might indeed be spamming; instead, we'll look at issues related to the *style of communication* in such online forums, such as the following:

* Above all, why do some people respond with such a lack of politeness that would be inappropriate in most face-to-face professional communication?

* Would these people respond actually respond in the same way if seated across a table from each other?

* Is there an obvious, persistent, personal agenda that seems to motivate the attackers--something more than getting at the truth and helping others?

* How often are otherwise interesting threads being derailed by such attacks?

* How often are apologies offered for obviously rash language? Such apologies for heated words would, of course, be common in many face-to-face business exchanges, but are they actually as rare as they seem here?

* And how many readers might not express their displeasure at such lengthy, somewhat off-topic exchanges, but who might be discouraged from using this generally helpful forum because of these childish exchanges? (I admit that I'm in this group.)

These and such issues will guide our research, and we seem to have plenty of material to work with here. If anyone has thoughts on such issues, please do feel free to pass them along to us.

Best,

J.

P.S. Cries of "spam!" or "Hey, if you don't like it, leave it!" to this message might make me laugh (and help to verify my concern), but they would not aid our research in any useful way and would simply waste everyone's time.
 
How do you like your job? Do you have a doctorate degree? What advice do you have for someone trying to get into masters program with a not so hot G.P.A. Help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Are any of your students hot lusty women who might want a little 'hands on' training on communication procedures as they relate to the mic forum?
 
I don't see how you can reach an informed conclusion about your last bullet-point.

How do you measure what people DON'T do on a BBS?

How do you create an index of what will make Joe HomeReccor not post???

The first point is easy: Most folks here don't have professional relationships with other registed members. Some do, but most don't.

Of course folks are gonna be more civil in a professional atmosphere, at least until the ink dries on the contracts.

After that when things go south they generally correspond under some law firms' letterhead.
 
jeffree said:
...Some of the blatantly rude responses to otherwise interesting posts (sometimes obviously more knowledgeable and specific than many others) have often struck me as surprisingly foreign to the communication standards used by most successful professionals, not to mention a violation of the lessons of basic politeness taught by most parents to their children...
Click to expand...

I think you'll find much of the answer there - the folks posting (or at least initiating) these asinine remarks are by no stretch of the imagination "professionals." They are likely wanabe home recordists (or probably wanabe anythings), sitting safely at home in front of their computers, their posts reflecting a lack of self respect and lack of perceived success in life.

I think it's the anonymity, lack of any sanctions for their actions, and the outrage they can easily provoke in folks who are used to conducting their affairs in a more civil manner that encourage them continue this behavior. They may not get any attention in real life, but they can get it here in spades.

You'll notice that this behavior stems from very few individuals - I think it is more a psychological abberation in these individuals rather than a sociological phenomenon. In any case, if you do the study, please post the results or a link to same in this forum.
 
I think it's pretty safe to say most of the folks here operate under some kind of psychological aberration.

Why else would they choose home-recording as a hobby???:)
 
1. Anonimity can lead to idulgences of alter egos and power trips (How many folks use thier real name and why is that?)
2. for the most part NO. but keep in mind that this is a very unnatural form of communication. We have time to either slowly craft our responses or mindlessly vent without any signifigant retribution. It's an entirely different dynamic than a face to face conversation. Some responses are days or weeks in between but read as if they were posted in rapid fire succession. The public in general has yet to establish an ettiquette for the BBS or e-mail format. These things take time.
3. see #1 YES
4. IMO regularly/more often than not
5. Rarely unless parties involved accept a mutual "mis-communication". Apologies are not seen as necessary until a penalty, such as severely affecting your reputation on the board, is imminent. Face to face interactions have a sort of "instant karma" which does not exist here.
6. That would be a quetion better resolved by a survey.
 
A Concern

jeffree said:
These and such issues will guide our research, and we seem to have plenty of material to work with here. If anyone has thoughts on such issues, please do feel free to pass them along to us..
Click to expand...


Well, OK, as you asked and all.

My main concern is for the welfare of your student body. It would appear that if the goal is to seek out, identify and analyze childish attacks appearing in this forum, particularly those dripping in moral superiority, you have at least two, maybe three semesters of work ahead of you. I would worry about the tendency of young, impressionable college sophmores to identify with the subjects they study. It could come to be an "issue," as they say.

On the other hand, you might want to expand the study to include psychological tracking of those students who have volunteered to attempt an analysis of the data to be found in this forum. They can be analytical guinea pigs. This was a trick widely used in the 1950s, usually involving some form of radiation exposure. A goodly number of posthumous doctoral theses were published in the ensuing years. Who knows - we might see theses titles like "What I Learned About the Mic Newbies and the Oneswhoforgotthattheywereoncenewbiestoo Wars Before That Saran Wrap Incident," or "The Short Path To Bellevue."
 
Any of your female students want to to attend the "4TH ANN HR.COM JAM/RECORDING/BBQ/BEER FEST " and have hot, lustfilled, sex with a buncha' aging geezers?
 
I think it's a noble effort.

But don't you think, in order for it to be relevent, that you make it in to a much broader study?

I mean if you want to investigate why people are rude to one another on a mic board, you'd be better served to study the much broader phenomenon of interpersonal interaction over the internet in general . . . and all of the ways the social codes, morays and what not change as people interact online versus how they behave in person.

It's really nothing earthshatteringly new or unusual. People act differently and communicate differently online. People also act and communicate differently over the phone . . . over email . . . over postal letters . . . over CB radios and walkie-talkies.

My only other thought on this is how scientific you're really going to be able to get. Unless you've got some actual scientifically and statistically valid studies in mind, complete with various focus and control groups . . . I just don't see it as being anything more than a bunch of students' opinions on something. Which is interesting, but no more valuable, ultimately, than all of our opinions on a particular microphone for example :D

And if you really wanted to get creative with your tests and studies, I think you should first ask Dragon for permission to use his board as your Lab Rat / Guinea Pig.
 
OK ...... I'll play.

Crazydoc has it right. The bulk of people who frequent these boards a lot aren't really professionals. The actual professionals don't have time to spend all day at a BBS. I pop in daily 'cause I've made some good friends and there are things to be learned here and even some funny entertaining stuff.
But I'm way too busy with my business and playing 3-5 nights a week to spend a couple of hours a day here which is what it takes to really keep up.

I doubt that people would act as they do here if they were face to face for a number of reasons.
First would be the threat of bodily harm ........ but more importantly ..... when conversations are in text rather than words ..... it's extremely easy to misunderstand someone's words and thus; to get offended. Then your sarcastic reply gets exaggerated for the same reason and it escalates.
In person though, an immediate little joke or addition can defuse the situation whereas on a BBS, there's no way to do that.

As for apologies ......... I've had only a few flame-outs with anyone but in the few I've had, I always ended up getting an apology with only one exception. However, I didn't flame back and instead, followed the guy around trying to have a calm discussion. Eventually I guess they could see by my manner that I hadn't meant to do whatever it was that pissed them off and cooled down.

Lastly .......... I absolutely avoid the mic forum and the cave because of the insanity that seems to pop up in so many threads. I can't count the number of threads that were shaping up to be informative or interesting that have been derailed by flamers.
In fact, I don't come to HR nearly as much in general as I used to because of the often high levels of incivility that show up so often.
 
This is defintiely strange and interesting. It has always baffled me as to the whole anonymity == butthole aspect of the internet.

I've never been a secretive person and don't hide who I am or use a pseudonym. If I say (type) something I thought about it and meant it jsut as I would in real life. I don't, and haven't, looked at the internet as a different world just and extension that allows convenmient communication.

I don't need to get on line to get a power trip to feel better baotu my self by belittling other people.
 
Thanks, guys--such quick and mostly thoughtful repsonses. Let me add a couple of other thoughts related to yours:

* In the coming month, I may indeed post a survey or two to clarify certain issues (e.g., are you ever discouraged from visiting this site because of basic communication issues?). Feel free to participate, whatever your opinion.

* We'll also track the content and tone of certain members' posts as far back as possible in time. I think this focus will be especially interesting and useful.

* We'll compare the communication style of this forum with several others, including some smaller ones with fewer members. I've noticed over time, for instance, that the Yamaha aw16g forum seems to have much less back-biting, which may be the result of (1) fewer members who get to know each other better, and (2) a common denominator--the 16G DAW--that joins everyone together as part of a dedicated in-group. We'll look at a few other such forums to see if we can draw any broad comparisons/contrasts related to forum size and members' stength of affiliation.

* This whole analysis won't be anything too deep; we have too much other work to do in the course (business communication). Still, even a light research effort may reveal some useful discussion ideas to aid my students' learning, above all. That's the real point here for me, along with prompting some folks here (a relative few, it seems) to think about these issues a bit before impulsively posting.

Thanks, again, very much for your input. I'll be back at some future date with more--or at least with some broad findings, I hope. Meanwhile, I expect the process to be pretty interesting and even fun, especially since I've come to know some of the players here through their posts over time. Now, let's see what my more objective students can uncover.

J.
 
Well, there do seem to be a few things I've noticed over the years, and when I first started posting I fell right into every single trap.

1. The perception of anonymity yields the perception of power. If you think you'll not be traced, you worry less about being courteous. Odd thing is we leave a path a mile wide and are pretty easy to trace.

2. There's a difference between having a strong opinion and having a learned opinion. That can take a while to emerge.

3. Instant written communication is dangerous. You get hot, you fire something unfortunate off, it's gone. Before e-mail, you did the same thing with a letter, which took enough effort to outlast a mood change before it went out, or you picked up the phone, yelled a bit and then got uncomfortable with the silence at the other end of the line. You get far better communication on a phone than in an internet post. There's more data - it's an analog / digital kind of thing.

4. Posts are permanent written records. Wish you could retract something stupid you fired off this morning? Too late.

5. We overreact. Someone hits my hot button and I rip off a response that would curdle muriatic acid. I've learned not to hit the "submit reply" button - most of the time.

6. Our lives have us squeezed like so many grapes underfoot. We're all under levels of daily stress that would have killed us even a generation ago. We've become accustomed to life according to the limits of our PDAs; email keeps us accessible 24/7. We weren't intended to be accessible 24/7 and we are paying the price.

7. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I'm probably a poster child for that one.
 
How will you determine your control group? By group-posting association, response content, or ???? Do you have some kind of established coding-scheme that you'll be using to determine what merits "lack of politeness," as you put it?

...Very interesting idea, overall. Designing a study to find meaningful correlational results would be tricky. ;)

Good luck!!

-mr moon
 
Posts aren't exactly permanent. You have 10 hours to edit or delete any post on this BBS.
 
That's all I gotta Say About That

We all know human nature has both a good and evil side. But when you add in the male ego and give them a mask to hide behind, you’re bound to see tempers flare and egos inflated by people that would otherwise avoid confrontation at all cost.

We wouldn’t even have the net if the Internet’s success pended on female users. So the real question should be, why don’t men get along when they are able to hide behind the Internet bushes?

I like to compare the net to a vehicle. Somehow you’re invisible and invincible behind the wheel. It’s ok to be rude to anybody you feel deserves it. If another diver makes you made, it only seems fare to flip the bird. And although completely surrounded by glass it’s somehow make it ok to pick your nose at the wheel. If you have a CB radio you’re free to say what ever you want over open airwaves without being held accountable.

When an item such as a piece of recording gear is under the microscope it’s only natural for a variety of opinions to fly. If a post is asking for an opinion, then that’s what you get.
If your circle of pears all agree and you spent hard earned money purchasing it, then it must be worthy of a great defense. Now that recording gear has become affordable to almost everyone, opinions have become ever more plentiful.
Q: Who makes the best kick drum mic?
A: Although I’ve only used two different Kick mics Mine is clearly the best and everybody else is wrong.
Q: Who make the best mixer that cost over $100 G
A: ahhhhhhhhhhhhh

Can we force people to be honest, nice, caring, giving etc?
Sure we can!
We make them work a little harder and think a little longer.
How you ask?

First we put caller ID and *69 on our phones. Then we have surveillance camera in every corner of every room. Global positioning on our vehicles and cell phones and don’t forget the firewalls, virus scans and spy ware.

So I propose we all take a deep breath before typing and imagine the recipient setting across the table from you as well as the variety of people and age that will be reading you post or reply.

Although I don’t think this garble will change the way things evolve. I felt compelled to reply anyway.

To quote Forrest Gump….”That’s all I gotta say about that”

C
 
Is this study being funded by my taxes? If so, I adamantly appose it.

If not, then my observations are that negative forum outbreaks occur for the following reasons:

1. A person knows nothing but has a difficult time moving their ego out of the way to learn or accept the fact they know nothing

2. A person knows everything and they want to make sure the rest of us know it.

3. A person gets cornered in their wrong assumptions and feels the need to fight their way out.

4. A person feels the need to defend a friend, co-professional or somebody that has been cornered and come to their defense.

5. A person has no experience with a particular piece of gear and just repeats things they have read or heard. Theses are the worse kind really, because they relay myth and possibly the opinions of others who have no experience either.

6. A person reads a chapter and thinks they understand the whole book with regard to understanding electronics, tracking, mixing or mastering.

7. A person tries to use their professional status to support a poor supposition and gets caught.

8. A new person who starts raving about a new product, usually from a Chinese manufacturer, the tone of which assumes there is no intelligent life here and the rest of the forum users will mindlessly go out and buy said product. (This is a disguised sales pitch from a low marketing budget company usually)

9. People that just want to be controversial either because they don't care about the other forum members or they are just bored. This type makes an obvious controversial or attacking comment.

10. People that have two extremely opposite experiences with a piece of gear and find no common ground for their experience.

11. New people that come on the board and ask the same question that has been asked a thousand times without using the search feature. This tends to set the usual crowd off a bit.

12. Any discussion on AD/DA conversion and the ramifications of dithering down for the CD format.

13. People that feel they must control the mentality and ambiance of the forum and use intimidation tactics on the neophytes.

14. People who are not clear in their comments or make grand opinions, generally being "Sauce for the Goose"

15. Experts who make snide but unclear comments to a novice question either to exert their online air of authority or to break in a new gal/guy.

16. On the rare occurrence a female shows up here to ask a question, you can see a real outbreak of negativity. The experience is an example of male pack hierarchy displayed in the grandest form.

Been here around 5 years, you see it all over time....
 
jeffree said:
...Some of the blatantly rude responses to otherwise interesting posts ... have often struck me as surprisingly foreign to the communication standards used by most successful professionals, not to mention a violation of the lessons of basic politeness taught by most parents to their children.
Click to expand...

There are 2 erroneous assumptions and/or implications here:

1. That the people are are succesful professionals.

2. That all or most have been taught basic politeness by their parents.
 
This seems more like a veiled editorial rather than a genuine attempt to "study" the forum. Primarily because you've tainted the sample by announcing your intent. What's the thesis?

"...to analyze the reasons and implications for the childish language that erupts here from time to time, particularly when a perception of spam arises." This is hardly an objective perspective. Study my ass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top