Internet “Anonymity”: I Can’t See Your Face, But I CAN Read Your Comments

[Third Hour]

My mom once said something that I think about all the time: "Why would you ever say anything to intentionally hurt someone else?" That's all I think about when I read through slews of comments on different articles on various sites, ranging the gamut from thoughtful and heartwarming to — for lack of a better term — just plain mean. As someone who has been victim to hateful comments on social media, it hurts my heart. Probably the same people that dub others "special snowflakes" will dislike this article; they'll say people are simply too sensitive. I have no doubt that there will be comments on this post from people (especially people who don't even read the article!) saying that others just need to toughen up. While we should always try not to be offended, that doesn't mean that others can say whatever they want — no matter how cruel or mean-spirited it may be — without consequences. People like to blame their hatefulness on others being "too sensitive," completely surrendering their...

View the full article

[Guest MormonGator]

A+ article, but the advice will go way over the heads of those that truly need to hear it. 

Edited January 23, 2019 by MormonGator

[Guest]

Well, people should just toughen up and not take things so personally. . . oh, wait...

[Guest MormonGator]

24 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Well, people should just toughen up and not take things so personally. . . oh, wait...

Like we talked about on the Gillette thread-the people that need the advice the most will not listen to it. No one is going to say "Well, I was going to beat my children and assault some guy, but Gillette changed my mind."

 

Sadly, no one is going to say "You know, I need to stop being abrasive and unpleasant and change the way I communicate online" after reading this article. Shame too, because like I said the article was A+ and agreed with it word for word. And yes, I know that I have to work on how I communicate online too, so I include myself in my critique. 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Like we talked about on the Gillette thread-the people that need the advice the most will not listen to it. No one is going to say "Well, I was going to beat my children and assault some guy, but Gillette changed my mind."

 

Sadly, no one is going to say "You know, I need to stop being abrasive and unpleasant and change the way I communicate online" after reading this article. Shame too, because like I said the article was A+ and agreed with it word for word. And yes, I know that I have to work on how I communicate online too, so I include myself in my critique. 

While I would normally agree with this sentiment, the truth is that I've been finding myself going toward the more abrasive side recently.  And reading this article kinda pulled me back a bit.

So, it does some good.  You know, the starfish on the beach story...

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

more abrasive side recently

Recently? 

😉

Edited January 23, 2019 by MormonGator

[Vort]

45 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Well, people should just toughen up and not take things so personally. . . oh, wait...

These snowflakes are simply too sensitive.

[Vort]

2 hours ago, MormonHub said:

My mom once said something that I think about all the time: "Why would you ever say anything to intentionally hurt someone else?"

Typically as a means of defense, either self-defense or defense of someone else. The main problem with this is that it's rarely an effective defense. A second but possibly even more dangerous problem is that the hurt may go to someone's heart, as in a child or young person who gets caught up in a topic and finds himself (herself) in over his (her) head. Such children need love and patience, not harsh attacks and deconstruction. The same applies to many adults. I say this as one who has found himself in the role of defender/criticizer far too often.

I have been pondering the virtues of fasting recently, not just food fasting but fasting of many different kinds, as a way to master appetites. Perhaps President Nelson's "internet fast" is another of this family. I believe that, as Latter-day Saints, we do not take (food) fasting nearly seriously enough. Maybe we should look to incorporate all kinds of fasts, food-wise and otherwise, into our lives.

[The Folk Prophet]

I want to know how it's okay to call others you find abrasive "hateful", as if calling them hateful is any less abrasive than that which you find abrasive?

Oh...wait...could it be I'm taking a generic principle as a personal attack? Is it, perhaps, unfair if I called that generic principle "hatefulness"?

 

[zil]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

"Well, I was going to beat my children and assault some guy, but Gillette changed my mind."

[carpy]

18 hours ago, Vort said:

These snowflakes are simply too sensitive.

nice. did you even read the article?

"Probably the same people that dub others “special snowflakes” will dislike this article; they’ll say people are simply too sensitive. I have no doubt that there will be comments on this post from people (especially people who don’t even read the article!) saying that others just need to toughen up.

While we should always try not to be offended, that doesn’t mean that others can say whatever they want — no matter how cruel or mean-spirited it may be — without consequences. People like to blame their hatefulness on others being “too sensitive,” completely surrendering their agency and role in the event".

[clbent04]

22 hours ago, MormonHub said:

My mom once said something that I think about all the time: "Why would you ever say anything to intentionally hurt someone else?" That's all I think about when I read through slews of comments on different articles on various sites, ranging the gamut from thoughtful and heartwarming to — for lack of a better term — just plain mean. As someone who has been victim to hateful comments on social media, it hurts my heart. Probably the same people that dub others "special snowflakes" will dislike this article; they'll say people are simply too sensitive. I have no doubt that there will be comments on this post from people (especially people who don't even read the article!) saying that others just need to toughen up. While we should always try not to be offended, that doesn't mean that others can say whatever they want — no matter how cruel or mean-spirited it may be — without consequences. People like to blame their hatefulness on others being "too sensitive," completely surrendering their...

View the full article

I don't like posting aggressively. But if I find others posting aggressively for no reason other than to be mean, overly opinionated, or close-minded, I hit back. Not all the time. Just selectively. They're toxic and deserve to have that brought to their attention. And I never give anyone a hard time who posts respectfully. A few posters are quick to write off someone else's opinions as dumb.  I have no respect for people who attack others merely because they have differing opinions.  Addressing these kind of differences respectfully to begin with makes a world of difference in creating a more positive atmosphere I would prefer. Otherwise, contention spawns contention.

Edited January 23, 2019 by clbent04

[pam]

4 hours ago, carpy said:

nice. did you even read the article?

 

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

[Guest]

14 hours ago, carpy said:

nice. did you even read the article?

Perhaps "judging others too quickly" should be the topic of the next article for this author.

[JohnsonJones]

I think the article is well called for.  There are many (and that probably includes me as well, I try not to be but at times it may be inadvertent despite my best attempts) that are a little abrasive towards people when they come to the forums.  I feel that it chases some off that could otherwise have been good contributors to the forums here.

Many of us (including me) probably could use more time and thought when posting to think about what we have just written.  We can hesitate one second and realize it is another person who is a Child of God on the other side of the screen who we are responding too.  This is a divine person with a holy ancestry that we are talking with and ensure that is how we would want to talk to those who are directly related to the creator of heaven and earth.

We may not always succeed (as I said, I actually do try, but at times I probably am too harsh and abrasive and should try to be even more thoughtful) but perhaps we would be more welcoming to fellow members who may not share the exact type of customs, culture, or opinions on various points of Latter-day Saint theology that we do but are honest Latter-day saints trying to be in a welcoming environment that is otherwise absent in most of the internet.

(and here's my extreme weak point)...I admit though, that when there comes those who would destroy the church and tear down others who are members of it who come to the forum with ill intent, I have a grave fault in which I take some pleasure at seeing them chased off.  As they are also children of our Father, this is probably a selfish and heartless thing and I should also remember their divine background, even if I may be feeling a little upset at some of their attacks at times.

It can be the hardest to be loving towards those who I feel are the most antagonistic towards my religion and beliefs at times and the first reaction I have (and this probably applies to many of us in our responses, and sometimes it isn't about religion but about something else that we may personally think is not so well conforming to how we'd like them to be, even unimportant items we may do in life) is to strike back in similar fashion.  Very petty of me.

Edited January 24, 2019 by JohnsonJones

[Guest MormonGator]

17 hours ago, carpy said:

nice. did you even read the article?

"Probably the same people that dub others “special snowflakes” will dislike this article; they’ll say people are simply too sensitive. I have no doubt that there will be comments on this post from people (especially people who don’t even read the article!) saying that others just need to toughen up.

While we should always try not to be offended, that doesn’t mean that others can say whatever they want — no matter how cruel or mean-spirited it may be — without consequences. People like to blame their hatefulness on others being “too sensitive,” completely surrendering their agency and role in the event".

@pam was right, @Vort was being sarcastic. 

That said, @carpy is certainly correct. I've seen so many people who say the rudest possible things than point and laugh, saying "ha ha ha look at the snowflake getting offended." 

The other funny part? People who complain abut others being "snowflakes" than turn into sniveling babies when someone says the most harmless thing about their religion, favorite band, their college, their sports team, their favorite author, favorite movie, type of car they drive etc. Happens all the time. All the time. 

Edited January 24, 2019 by MormonGator

[Fether]

6 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

@pam was right, @Vort was being sarcastic. 

That said, @carpy is certainly correct. I've seen so many people who say the rudest possible things than point and laugh, saying "ha ha ha look at the snowflake getting offended." I'm sorry, what is the proper response for insulting and demeaning comments directed towards you?

The other funny part? People who complain abut others being "snowflakes" than turn into sniveling babies when someone says the most harmless thing about their religion, favorite band, college, sports team, etc. Happens all the time. All the time. 

Also, pegging others as “snowflakes” only seems to justify insulting them further. Similar to pegging someone as a fascist/nazi to justify attacking them.

[Fether]

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Perhaps "judging others too quickly" should be the topic of the next article for this author.

It’s more of a “judging other’s typed comments when they have never met before too quickly” article.

in his defense, he doesn’t know Vort he wouldn’t know what kind of character Vort had. All he had to go off of was the article and Vort’s comment

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Fether said:

All he had to go off of was the article and Vort’s comment

And Vort's second comment on this thread.

[Guest MormonGator]

59 minutes ago, Fether said:

Also, pegging others as “snowflakes” only seems to justify insulting them further. Similar to pegging someone as a fascist/nazi to justify attacking them.

100% agree. It's a form of bullying that I'm incredibly uncomfortable with, especially when it comes from people who happen to be in the same church as I am. 

Edited January 24, 2019 by MormonGator

[NeuroTypical]

I'm reasonably certain Vort was displaying faux insensitivity for comedic effect.  Approaching sarcasm.  The art of saying something you don't mean, or acting like someone you're not, in order to illustrate some point or have a laugh, is indeed an art.  It only works when your audience 'gets it'.  It requires a good read of your audience, and your audience needs to know (or guess) where you're coming from .

The deal with this thread, is it acts as the comment section for Thirdhour's blog.  And Thirdhour's blog attracts viewers that have no clue about these forums, or us.  It's like going to a youtube video and looking at the comments where some random person is yellin' about snowflakes, so you call the guy out on his behavior because you think he's being serious.

It's a common problem with humans, magnified when we communicate online, because we lack the other cues like tone of voice or facial expression to figure out what someone is actually saying.

There's only one solution - we must lynch Vort.  That will fix the internet.

Edited January 24, 2019 by NeuroTypical

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

\There's only one solution - we must lynch Vort.  That will fix the internet.

I don't think anyone is calling to lynch @Vort. My comments were general and not directed towards @Vort-they were directed towards @Carborendum. 😉

Edited January 24, 2019 by MormonGator

[NeuroTypical]

Heh - an example of me saying something I don't mean for comedic effect, but it is misunderstood. 

I guess another learning: If we're talking about how we talk to each other, and part of the talking is identifying ways people talk that we don't like, then such lighthearted nonsense like "lynch Vort" or "snowflakes are too sensitive" are more likely to be misunderstood as seriousness.

 

 

[Maureen]

17 hours ago, pam said:

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

That could be true, but sometimes it's hard to tell. I've read some of Vort's posts where his words are kind and thoughful. And then I have to ask myself, "Is he being sincere or sarcastic?"

M.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Maureen

[Vort]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

There's only one solution - we must lynch Vort.  That will fix the internet.

Sadly, this would resolve a whole host of problems.