The Editor's Desktop: Critiques, Controversies, and Conversations

Very good thoughts on the way we should "gather"...

Very timely, informative, and addresses key issues....!

David, thanks for your input. I just hope that the concerns raised will lead to some constructive changes. There have to be outcomes!

It would be reassuring to know that you and site management are not only taking note of the debate but have some kind of time-line to address the various points of concern that have been raised. Please give an indication (a guesstimate will do) of when changes could reasonably be expected to occur.

Magi

Zenith, Maureen, your concerns and questions are valid. However, these issues have already been raised with Gather management, and are being addressed though other venues.

From my perspective what has happened here over the past couple of weeks is not atypical in a public community forum. In addition, emotional impact is exacerbated by the fact that it surrounds one's work. We are all naturally defensive when it comes to our creations. Hence we take criticism, jesting, and other disruptive situations more seriously than we perhaps should. The beauty of Gather is the ability to interact so immediately, and intimately, with an audience. This also allows us to lay our emotions bare, which leaves us more vulnerable to the impact of the situations you describe.

Flaming, as it applies to multiple low ratings, is being addressed through the implementation of a new rating system. Member discussions pertaining to a recommendation for Gather Management are underway within the Member Discussion and Chat Forum group. I would recommend that you read the discussion articles posted there, and provide your input. Your involvement is the best way to ensure an adequate solution is implemented.

Multiple IDs are extremely difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to control. Almost all applications on the net, like Gather, have the same issues. There is very little that Gather can do, unless there is specific, and clear, criminal behavior displayed, or it becomes significantly disruptive. Thus far, what I have seen cannot be classified as such. If there is a level of illegal activity occurring, then this is not the venue to address it. Anonymous members that post innocuous little blurbs in our posts are annoying at best, but simply IGNORE them and they WILL go away, and tire of their game. Others members with multiple 'personalities' are also fair game, and common practice, on systems throughout the net. Sometimes, members of a community like this have opinions that they would like to share, yet cannot do so directly for fear of being ostracized by that community. Creating a pseudo personality allows them to say what they feel they need to. In some cases, it actually adds value to the discussion or debate. Sometimes not, but again, we must learn to IGNORE, and not engage, in a public forum such as this.

As for the heated discussions that led to harsh, and sometimes vulgar, words...I have witnessed most of them on Gather, and you cannot single out just one or two individuals for blame. Everyone was almost equally at fault. Choose any discussion thread and this is true. As I stated previously, emotions run very high when discussions surround our work. Anger, and other emotions, escalate very quickly in this type of environment. Hence, we need to be able to take a step back occasionally, and clear our head, or try to ignore the comments that appear 'hurtful'. Like in any community, there will be individuals with strong personalities, that will come off as abrasive. Just like in communities outside of Gather, we need to be able to deal with them without losing control of ourselves or the situation.

I address some of these issues within the Member Discussion and Chat Forum group. Please refer to Article #1 - Truths, about Gather, and Ourselves.

"So am I to understand that flaming, multiple ID's, profanity, racist remarks, obscenities are to be allowed and deemed acceptable forms of public critiques/conversations?"

Zenith, I guess I am missing something. I have written in the past about ettiquette on the site, and I don't see where in this article I have mentioned that verbal abuse and profanity are accepted form of debate. Being direct and being abusive are two different issues, and I think I made it pretty clear that provoking thought is more productive than provoking for the sake of it.

If the disruption you refer to has to do with specifc conversations, let me know which you are referring to and I can respond better.

Thanks,
David

I am glad that everyone has taken note of what I noticed, thought of but not said. It is a community feeling. With such alertness and occasional editorial comments, I hope, Gather will fare better.

The pie don't get baked without the heat! All censorship is political.

LOL Chris! Please say what you mean!

David, you're right on. Sometimes the "edgier" conversations provoke deeper thought and discussion than the "nicer" ones with platitudes and all agreement.

As experience has taught me this week, Gather members need to be aware of their hot buttons and areas of deep, intractable belief. While debate is healthy and accepted, if you know you are dogmatic on certain subjects, it is likely best to avoid them unless you have excellent self-control and impeccable etiquette. Otherwise, you will find yourself pushed into corners, feeling badly, and holding grudges against people who are just as dogmatic.

Gather hosts a wide range of folks who write literature and poetry to those who are junkies for current events and issues. The former, by their natures, might have thinner skin than the latter, who are used to doing battle on a daily basis with their ideas.

Understanding yourself and your limitations will help you enjoy Gather more.

Eric, very well said... you should consider writing. ;-)

Eric L., Pretty clear to me. I've noticed one extremely good Canadian poet that pulled the plug because of Gather comments. That is sad. However, the Gather comments both negative and positive are reflective of our culture, I'm talking primarily American at this point. Emotions are easily heightened when you are typing and not seeing another person eye to eye, that's apparent from Gather Threads. Civility will bear out in the long run, rouges will come and go, the individual shunning of such will continue to drive them away, I just don't want to see a Gated Community Develop. That's what I mean when I say all censorship is political. As we breakup in our cliquish little houses of comfort zones, lets keep the door open. We often become what we dislike by our own actions of bantering with those of other opinions. That's where attack begets attack. Survival instincts kick in and reason goes out the window, frustration makes people either fight or flight. My Canadian poet took the flight, hopefully, I believe to return, after healing. You can not bake a pie without the heat, I agree with you, controlled heat is best.

Comments? People give comments?

I've had mostly good and neutral ones, the occasional snarky ones, and just try to ignore people who make pointless personal disparaging comments. I'm sure some of my insights are insignificant, heck, most of them maybe, but a single grain of sand can tip a balance and one seed can start a forest. Wheat from chaff. What else ya gonna do?

Ok, there is pure meanness, but I don't think, someone angry, or in strong disagreement with a writer should be expected to squelch their voice when commenting on opinion pieces. I think too much is made of the few vagrants with the especially unpleasant words. You went to kindergarten with them, and they will be in the long term care facility with you.

I agree that seeing pure venom directed at a creative piece is hurtful to the writer, but expecting endorsement and agreement from everyone on a site that intends to be as inclusive as possible is not realistic.

I agree with Chris.

FYI, just to put a light heart on things...Coconut Cream Pie is one of my favorites...love the Marx Brothers! Now there was common sense when one needed it. OK back to the serious thread. Still, one out of the three would have made a great President of the United States.

wow, I am going to the wrong articles.

Chris -- I was joking with you, but I'm glad you used it as an opportunity to add more to your initial statements.

I totally agree. The only censorship should be self-control. Self-control is particularly important when, as you say, emotions become heightened due to the rather Wild West nature of this medium.

I like Coconut Cream pie too, and the Marx Brothers. Groucho WAS President of the United States. They just called him Richard Nixon...

I still don't think there has been a complete answer to what some peoples issues are. There are ethics and suggestions on how to comment, but when ignored in a purposeful fashion, I still feel it's wrong.
How many times will you get burned in the oven before you stop baking?
I agree with the groups that are created to get in depth criticism for serious work, or to improve and get better. There are those however, that go out of their way to insult, or be sarcastic, and some use false IDs to do this. Then there are others that also have another ID to write articles.
Nobody is moderating this abuse of this site, or it doesn't appear that way. I have to disagree with other public forums not controlling this issue. I am in many other forums where the moderators of subjects take action, or the administrator does. We have people in here that are of many ages, skill levels, education levels, nationalities, and upbringings. To just say they have thin skins and ignore it, doesn't help any of us in the long run. Yes, ignoring them in the long run and they will probably go away. Then another pops up and repeats the cycle previously observed by others with impunity. In the mean time a lot of decent people may go elsewhere to contribute because it gets old after a while.
What vehicle are Gather members suppose to use when they feel this kind of behavior gets out of hand?
Again, I'm not advocating "kiss kiss" comments all the time, and I'm not personally into rating, but I bet if a poll was taken that members would prefer it didn't continue to be uncontrolled.

David - You have a great article here about this topic. I feel it is important to point out that though there are groups for critique - it doesn't mean that all members are going to be aware that there are groups for critique or that perhaps a person writing here may not want it. Like you said about asking not to debate - the same goes with critique. If members are sharing a piece of their heart and don't want critique - be safe and add a blurb that says "I write as a hobby and for my enjoyment. General comments appreciated. No critiques please."

As one who gives critiques (only when asked for) I can agree that it does take a lot of time to thoughtfully go through and consider how to improve a piece. It is not intended as an insult at all, in fact it is a compliment - if something is so bad that the criticism would be too involved - why bother?

People hear the word criticism and think criticized - negative term - think more like feedback – think about assistance and learning. Writers who look for constructive criticism look for it because they have learned how valuable that second pair of eyes are. I have learned so much from the other writers in my life who have been nice enough to give me critiques of my work. Sometimes it ticked me off. But often, I would realize they were right. Sometimes I realize they are wrong -but that is when you just have to say they were offering an opinion - not a law. In the end I am the author and I decide what gets changed and what does not.

So, I agree with you in what you have said here, and add a little it. Thanks for mentioning me and my groups!

John - If you feel that an article or comments to an article ar inappropriate - you can always either 1) flag it as potentially inappropriate (see below the comment box) 2) send an e-mail using the feedback link, explaining what is gong on that you feel is inappropriate. A Gather staff member will check into the situation and follow up with you.

Thank you Monica - I was just about to suggest the exact same thing. As a policy here, we will respond to articles that are brought to our attention, as it is impossible for anyone to read the entire site. We take action immediately when an issue is brought up, to determine if it is a problem and what steps we need to take to remedy the issue.

One enhancement I think will help will be not just to flag an article, but to say why in a short text box. That will improve our abiltiy to respond to problems on the stie.

A second enhancement will involve improvements to the moderation tools, and how comments appear on an article. Go to Building a Better Gather to stay up to date on these developments.

David

Candida, John, my comments were not meant to be all inclusive of every user community on the net. There are some forums that have the ability, by virtue of their small active member populations, activity levels, and close loops, to more easily identify errant behavior, and take action. I would not consider Gather, at all, to be in the league of these types of applications. I am also not endorsing bad behavior, but acknowledging that it exists everywhere, and sometimes there are limits to what a system owner/administrator can do. I am confident though that Gather will take all of the action it can.

I hope Gather will be cautious about over-reacting. I believe strict policing of adults will destroy the atmosphere of Gather much faster than a few adults who behave like children.

Candida, you are comparing an apple to an orange. If you wish to discuss this issue with me further, please send me a message, or, you also have my email address.

Sorry David! ....but, it is spirited debate!

Candida, I do not understand your last comment. I am a member, just like you. Again, if you wish to have further discussion on this, I would love to hear from you!

I have said it elsewhere on the site, so bear with me if I repeat myself, but I have come to believe that many of us share a cultural phobia about criticism, either giving or taking it. It of course varies from person to person, but I know that people from some other countries welcome criticism/feedback much more than Americans seem to. I suspect that Gather has the power to help many more of us open to seeing criticism as the best thing that could happen to us. I think the specific groups here that deal with criticism are a sign of the longing we feel for honesty even when it bites us, and I think that all the discussion on the site is another sign that we are all learning to be interested in criticism on a new level.

Sandy, we at Gather are not trying to react unless the community asks us to. In fact, we allow a lot of content on the site to remain (about 99.99%) because we believe strongly in the First Amendment, and none of us are fans of censorship. So when we respond to community complaints, we err on the side of letting content stay. That does not mean that we don't contact the author or commenter, but we do just remind them of their responsibiltiy to the Gather site and community, rather than delete content.

I hope this helps clarify.

David

David- Thanks for responding. You may be working on exactly what I was getting at. This site is too large for you, or whomever, to adequately monitor. Most people won't bother to write the editor to complain, and will silently put up with it for a while, then fade away. There are already articles out there talking about how to get people back to participating. This could be part of the reason they left to start with. I'm trying to help more than complain.
I don't know what tools for moderation you're thinking about, but I do feel that moderators of a group should have more responsibility perhaps. They set up the rules of a group and should make sure that they are followed if it is possible. I don't know what a moderator can do today.
I usually find my way to articles by email notifications from connections, as opposed to just clicking on a group. When you do that, you may stray into an area that you don't know the rules of, thus the moderator control may be the answer. When published just to Gather, I don't have/know a suggestion.
Kevin- I didn't mean to sound like I thought your comments were all inclusive or targeted at you. No harm no foul. I did get the oven reference idea from the pie comment though. ;-)
Sandy- I don't think Gather will over-react either. There are more than just adults in here, nobody is talking about strict policing, and it was not my intention to imply so. Remember, there are a lot of people in here that may think differently than you do. It's not like I think the porno groups in here should go for example, I just avoid them of my own choice. A fake and disruptive commenter seeks you/us out.

Thank you, David. I trusted that was your position and am grateful to you for confirming that position. I get a little paranoid about 'moral majorities' that usually end up being neither.

Thank you David, I often think of the censorship issue. I feel here on Gather you can be who you really are. Sometimes you may bump up against another user, but at the end of the day if you walk away learning something than everyone wins.

Have a great day,
L

I love debate that is based on fact and observation. I'm as stubborn as a mule, but I do hear a valid point when it is made. Having grown up in the 50's and 60's I'm put off by name-calling when used to argue a point. Back in those days many arguements were based on who had the loudest voice, facts didn't seem to matter.
I can and will give any system a chance, if it looks like progress is being made. Those who choose to use personal attack when disagreeing are free to do so, but I won't particpate in the discussion.
Those who disagee and have facts or observations to backup their disagreement not only get my interest, but my respect as well.
We are all capable of losing our tempers and flying off the handle, that's just the way people are But,flying off the handle doesn't work as a normal operating procedure.

The last thing that GATHER needs to be is a sight for personal blogging. Blogs are blogs and there are many places for them. Isn't GATHER supposed to be an amateur writing page? Simple as that? No need for long, lengthy, personal cliques, vendetta's, one on one issues going back and forth. Bottom line - isn't it a place to read and write?

Feel bad about not reading the articles which provoked such responses. If you, like the Pope could identify them -- would be able to make a comment. But I agree with Chris, all censorship is political. Or possibly religious. I have only been on this site awhile and have not even figured out the way you do certain things -- but the only thing I find annoying is members talking about members and attacking Gather On. Am not really interested in people's personal lives or the lack thereof.

Comments& critiques are a necessary part of the evolutionary process of writing. I may not always agree with a critic but I welcome all constructive crticism.

Timely article, David..... I appeciate you and all the comments. I'm not for censorship, and any and all abuse should be reported, but the bully is not even wothy of recogintion.

David, I think you hit the nail on the head. Anything (or tool or community) that's popular is going to polarize people. Just look at the Scion line of cars or Apple computer or even "Desperate Housewives". I think the Gather community (both users and developers) is strong enough to withstand the 1% of users who abuse the system.

David,
When debating a topic, oftne I am the author. Recently I have been made aware the author's comments also are counted in the ratings, so this is a problem for some.
I appreciate it when someone takes the time to comment on one of my articles, and if it is a debate, I should be able to debate without fear some may think I'm trying to rack up more Gather Points.
If it is merely a problem with ratings, simply make it so the author's comments don't count.
Thanks.

Well put article and great advice...I commend you! Excellent!