[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Discussion: netiquette (was re: young people)

A couple of points in particular I agree with and would like to emphasize
from Lady Melys' post:

>(furthermore, the opinions for which she was demanding an apology were HER
>INTERPRETATION of his opinions, and my interpretation of the same post was
>distinctly different.  i'm not trying to claim that my interpretation is
>any more valid than her interpretation; i suspect that if we investigated,
>we'd find that his actual opinions were a third thing altogether.)

It seems to me one of the strengths of the Merry Rose over the Rialto is
that in discussing informational topics, such as documentation and such,
subscribers here seem more willing to approach a questionable view from an
open minded, constructive viewpoint.  Since the short time I have been on
the list and in the longer time my lady has subscribed to this list, we are
agreed that we just haven't encountered a lot of the senseless flame wars
over scholarly issues.

What doesn't make sense to me is why there is this division, at least here,
between informational debates and banter particular in the arena of _how_
discussion is undertaken.  If, as a group, we can give the benefit of the
doubt and acknowledge the point Melys made so soundly above, that on an
informational thread people's intents and interpretations vary greatly and
should be approach with a questioning rather than a bullying demeanor, why
can't we apply that across the board?

>courtesy is as necessary on the 'net as in any other medium.  a
>fundamental part of netiquette is acknowledging that differing viewpoints
>and differing interpretations of viewpoints will lead to offense being
>taken where none is intended.  as such, it necessitates making the extra
>effort both to give people the benefit of the doubt and to not take
>advantage of a public forum to make a personal point which would be more
>appropriately kept private. 

Again, if we can agree that communication through this medium is not exact,
that it leaves a great deal of room for personal interpretation, regardless
of true knowledge of a poster's intent, is it not sane to reason that in the
best interest of honest communication, let alone courtesy, we should give
our partners in discourse room to clarify if their ideas are met with
confusion or seem to roll out toward a negative end on an otherwise
constructive thread??  (sorry for the run-on sentence)

>most of the people here are courteous, chivalrous individuals, and if told
>in a calm and rational manner that they're given offense they will try to
>either clear up the misunderstanding if one exists or refrain from doing
>so again out of sheer consideration of the other person's sensibilities. 
>everyone on this list is human; if slapped on the wrist in public by
>someone with no clear authority to do so, we're a lot less likely to
>actually listen to the point of view behind the slap, regardless of how
>valid it may be.

Please, please, please, when offense is taken, take a moment to give the
perceived offender a moment to clarify.  Communication is give and take.  I
can't stress Melys' point above strongly enough (or in better language than
she already has).  The whole point of the list is a sharing of
information--to take information from someone and run with it, without
leaving room for further clarification or discussion, is worse than not
contributing at all (IMHO).

*stupid grin*  Sorry, I seemed to have tripped over Sappy, also, on his way
back to Rialto.  Forgive my ramblings for what they are, but I pray
consideration is given to the points being made by _everyone_ in this

As always,
Yours in Service,

Thomas Lyon of Braemar
"The goal is no more produced by the method than the mountain is produced by
the journey."


To unsubscribe to the Kingdom of Atlantia mailing list, send a message
to majordomo@atlantia.sca.org with no subject and the body consisting of:
unsubscribe atlantia