johnpalmer (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
johnpalmer) wrote2007-06-28 06:55 pm
johnpalmer) wrote2007-06-28 06:55 pm
Thinking about online community
In a newsgroup I read from time to time, there was some talk about what people want to think about community. I've distilled what I want in a relatively-safe-space into two basic ideas. I don't know if they'll match anyone else's, but I figure I'll throw them out because I love to hear myself talk. Since this is long, and some readers of my journal are sick of the thread on the newsgroup, I'll put them behind a cut tag...
The two things I want are a sense of importance to my ideas, and a sense of importance to my feelings.
That is, if a person were to misunderstand my ideas, and most especially, to make incorrect assumptions about it, it would require evaluation. "Okay, did I really make a good faith effort to understand? Whether I did or didn't, is there something I could do in the future that might help that understanding?"
Part of this is personal; I take what I say too seriously sometimes, and that's a flaw, but in the moment, it still feels important. Misunderstandings can seem painful, and as important as what's been said (which, again, gets over-inflated by me sometimes).
The other part is feelings. I want my feelings to be important, I want people to consider it a meaningful cost if those feelings are hurt. "If I rip this argument to shreds, it might be painful; is the gain (demonstrating my disagreement) important enough to justify the cost (possibly hurting feelings)? If so, I'll continue, if not, maybe I won't."
If my feelings were hurt, I want to know the other person has considered it meaningful, and if it was due to a misunderstanding, considers it necessary to try to make some minor amends, e.g., "When I said that you were an evil Nazi kitten-murderer, I didn't understand that you were merely suggesting that privately funded homeless shelters are a good thing. I wish I had understood better because you didn't deserve to be talked to in that manner."
That's what would make me feel safe. What's wrong with it?
Well, as an outside observer, how the hell can I tell who's making a good faith effort to understand? People will misunderstand things. And how can I tell if feelings are considered important? Other things are valued differently by other people. A person could find another's feelings to be *very* important, but consider saying or doing something that much more important, and carry on.
Only the last one is one that I can be certain about. Sadly, in many online communities, berating someone over a misunderstanding often ends with a final insult, like "you should have been more clear in the first place, asshole!"
So, for me, it's always a matter of "how do I feel? Do I feel that's going on?" If the answer is "no",then it's time to take a break... possibly even a permanent one.
The two things I want are a sense of importance to my ideas, and a sense of importance to my feelings.
That is, if a person were to misunderstand my ideas, and most especially, to make incorrect assumptions about it, it would require evaluation. "Okay, did I really make a good faith effort to understand? Whether I did or didn't, is there something I could do in the future that might help that understanding?"
Part of this is personal; I take what I say too seriously sometimes, and that's a flaw, but in the moment, it still feels important. Misunderstandings can seem painful, and as important as what's been said (which, again, gets over-inflated by me sometimes).
The other part is feelings. I want my feelings to be important, I want people to consider it a meaningful cost if those feelings are hurt. "If I rip this argument to shreds, it might be painful; is the gain (demonstrating my disagreement) important enough to justify the cost (possibly hurting feelings)? If so, I'll continue, if not, maybe I won't."
If my feelings were hurt, I want to know the other person has considered it meaningful, and if it was due to a misunderstanding, considers it necessary to try to make some minor amends, e.g., "When I said that you were an evil Nazi kitten-murderer, I didn't understand that you were merely suggesting that privately funded homeless shelters are a good thing. I wish I had understood better because you didn't deserve to be talked to in that manner."
That's what would make me feel safe. What's wrong with it?
Well, as an outside observer, how the hell can I tell who's making a good faith effort to understand? People will misunderstand things. And how can I tell if feelings are considered important? Other things are valued differently by other people. A person could find another's feelings to be *very* important, but consider saying or doing something that much more important, and carry on.
Only the last one is one that I can be certain about. Sadly, in many online communities, berating someone over a misunderstanding often ends with a final insult, like "you should have been more clear in the first place, asshole!"
So, for me, it's always a matter of "how do I feel? Do I feel that's going on?" If the answer is "no",then it's time to take a break... possibly even a permanent one.
no subject
Me, I think that on Usenet there are fewer minuderstandings between long-term posters than is made out, but I'm cynical (and in the past have been sick on the grass over stuff that has been written, not necessarily discted at me).
I don't know that you taking yourself ordinarily-seriously is any kind of a flaw at all(but I know too many utterly false indivuals IRL). *Too* seriously is your call, I guess.
no subject
:::sigh:::