Can online comments be civil? Do comments reflect on the community or on the individual?

I think we CAN be civil. I also think that many choose NOT to be civil!

I believe that the tone and attitudes people show in their comments are reflections of who they are. If they are crass and uncivil, their comments will be crass and uncivil.

Ishbel makes an excellent point. Because people gain points (and the subsequent gift cards or cash), some posters choose to be argumentive, controversial, disrepectful, etc. specifically to stimulate counter-tirades (and subsquently more points for them).

My personal policy is not to respond to those whom spout disrespect, profanity or prejudice. This doesn't stop some people from continuing, but it does put them in a position of proving by their own words and actions the adage "better to be thought a fool then to speak and remove all doubt." If people can't communicate their opinion in civil and respectful language, than perhaps they need to go back and hone their arguments.

I think because there is a sense of anonymity, people tend NOT to be civil as if they are getting away with something, but on the same note there are people who are very sincere and choose to be civil with others.

I think it is possible to get noticed on gather in two ways. One, you can be intolerant, closed minded, and insulting, which will attract a following from your peers and also attract a high number of postings from your intended victims and opposition, giving you big points. That approach may eventually result in your being ignored as people learn your game. Or approach Two, you can be civil, tolerant, and open minded, and make a name for yourself in those areas. Such fame is less fleeting.

People feel that the internet offers them a way to be thier true self so why should they be civil that my theory that being said you should alwasy be civil to everyone!

[Longing sigh accompanies pensive expression, contemplating the halcyon days of the old Evil News Forum]

On-line comments reflect on the individual. As David K. points out, it'sabout points. BUT....it is most likely a true representation of the commenter's personality. If you were to speak to them face to face, you would get the same attitude. They won't be civil on-line and they won't be civil in person.

The on-line community is affected only because they have to put up with these rantings and ravings. And if you try to ask the commenter to tone it down, you get slapped with the "Freedom of Speech" excuse.

It's not ALWAYS about points - those of us living outwith the USA get points, but can't redeem them... so no gain to the foreigners - who can be just as rude as those who DO have the ability to claim vouchers for giftcards or whatever the points buy!

Robert Putman, author of Bowling Alone, produced some shocking research on the diversity of communities. He found the more diverse a community is, the less trust there is.

Those of us who have experience with very diverse online communities should be shocked the least by this phenomenon. The scary truth is, people tend to gravitate to their own. They work with, socialize and fall in love with people who are mostly just like themselves.

In short, people have little experience with diversity, and when confronted with people who do not think alike, or value the things they value -- they act up.

I wish people were more civil in online forums like Gather, but still, as uncivil as they, this is healthy. It is the only time that many people have to interact with a truly diverse environment.

I concur with Greg that online forums like Gather are healthy ways to increase discourse, share ideas, and be an outlet for creativity. Like real life, we must tolerate the intolerant and close-minded, but these folks can be ignored in favor of meaningful interactions with the thousands of others that share this space.

Also like real life, no matter the number of connections (acquaintances) you have, there are always a few opportunities for real friendships and collaborations to develop.

Comments reflect upon the commenter first and foremost. no community FORCES it's members to comment in one certain way. Although some would say the TOS is a way to force members to speak in a certain tone, to me the TOS does nothing but set perimeters on which we should temper our tone. It is sad that TOS guidelines have to be set about discourse within a site but if people won't watch their attitudes and refrain from hurting others than that is where a strong TOS can make all the difference between a website that is adult and decent or one that rivals the wild wild west at high noon!

While it may be true that a persons' true personality may display itself in online ugliness, I also feel there is a certain proportion of the vileness-spewers who may only have the empowerment to attack others in an anonymous forum. It is these I am concerned about, not the folks who engage in raucous but healthy arguments. Some folks are mild and meek to the world, yet venomous in an online discussion. It is a alter ego kind of thing.

Greg said..."I wish people were more civil in online forums like Gather...."

So do I, Greg. But I'd modify your comment to this "I wish people were more civil in real life communities." Gee, what a concept.

Donna - good point. There are a few people who hide behind cartoon character personifications just so they can attack anonymously. Ironic how they believe it gives them power when in fact all it does is diminish the value of anything they say. Sad, actually.

What people do and say reflects on themselves - only. It doesn't matter whether anyone can identify you or not - it matters that you let yourself be part of the problem.

At least, that's how I see it.

I have no doubt that anonymity encourages and enables some of the most uncivil discourse found in online forums. Some of the worst may exhibit similar behavior in face to face exchanges but I suspect most tone it down a notch or two when their real name and face are attached to their comments.

While a few gatherites may use incivility as a point generating mechanism I must pass on that I have seen much comparable invictive on sites that offer no points. One newspaper site allows comment at the end of just about every article. Articles dealing with race and immigration provoke the nastiest exchanges.

Comments reflect on the individual but can bring down an online community by keeping otherwise civil comments away.

Look what happened to Reza Aslan when he visited to Gather.com. He was treated with the kind of knee-jerk vitriol that makes it easy to stay away.

Were the three examples more politically incorrect than uncivil? There was no profanity used, no slang insults or name calling. Yes, the examples were rants or tyrades and the writers could have done a better job arguing their point, but freedom of speech isn't always neat and polished. Newspaper editors and the "gatekeepers" of the "old media" used to edit out much free speech with a bias they might not realize. The media gatekeepers cannot squelch certain dialoge in today's marketplace of ideas via the internet.

But that also opens a new venue for people to express their opinions and be heard.No longer can the media gatekeepers control what's being said. Freedoms aren't always easy, but I like them. You have the freedom to be considered an idiot also.

But also, what is "civil"? I debate often on Gather and many people dislike me using the terms "leftist", "political left", "Marxist", "socialist", etc, terms that I learned at the "right wing" college called the University of MN, and people get offended and think it is "uncivil".

I use my own name because you should be responsible for your actions.

What a great discussion on a topic near and dear to my heart! I just got back in town, so I'll have to comment later. But, I did want to stop by and say that this article will be featured in the group that it was meant to be in: "GATHER Discusses Tolerance", at nohate.gather.com. (Please come and check out - and maybe join - the group.)

Well, The Chive eloquently stole my thoughts and comments prior to my posting. It is comforting to see that others feel the same way about things. Very well said, Chive.

My son is currently taking an advanced philosophy class in college - while discussing Aristotle with him, he remarked on the same thing. Even the young'uns who should be less set in their attitudes than older generations notice a definite lack of ability to discuss different points of view rationally and civily.

Civility is key. Inevitably we are sometimes reduced to thinking, yes your view is very interesting but it happens to be totally wrong.
Which is okay as long as you do not type "you are wrong and you are a hopelessly moronic cretinous baboon".
I am forced to admit there are no absolutes. Have I ever been wrong on Gather? Yup. I recently expressed by frustration at the current first lady for donning a hijab while visiting Saudi. I later learned that she wore it for a minute or two to express her appreciation for having received it as a gift.
I still hate the hijab and the male dominated state-enforced chastity that it represents, but that is personal, and need not extend to Laura Bush.

It is easy to generalize about all of this, rationalizing things the way we would like to believe then, but what is so darn infuriating is the mix of comment value, and personal style.

As one who knows and admits I occasionally flare up at people, the only time I regret it is when I have unfairly responded to someone. I'd like to think that is pretty rare, but sometimes we are not the best judge of how we are online, or in person.

I try to separate the truth value of what someone is saying from how they say it. I don't think it does me any good to overlook someting valuable that someone might have to say because of how I view them, and I think that is often the biggest provoker of anger and hostility, at least for me.

I have toyed around with thinking of creating a social networking site with issue groupings, I am mostly interested in politics, but taking away all names, icons, personalizing additions and posting anonymously. The theory behind that being that people would lose the need to defend their egos and not attack people or show off as much. The downside I think would be that no one would go there.

Some people have a smoother manner, it does not make them right, and some people are really irrititating, it does not make them wrong ... but we sure would like that to be so, and much human behavior irrationally orbits the fact that it is not true. We all want to teach people a lesson too, according to our own realities.

I think Gather is pretty good. I used to like to discuss news on the Yahoo News Web Site before they dumped it all and have never replaced it because it turned into a horrible place for the criminally demented I guess. I hope that doesn't happen to Gather. It is also why I don't post my real identity or picture as of yet, there are real screwballs out there.

i think that some people just can't be civil. it is just too horrible, the way they live their lives with such hatred and vitriol. yikes!

There are people who can't help themselves. When the issue is race (and some other issues as well), there are those who feel the need to respond with hatred. Good article - thanks for bringing Tim Post's writings to our attention.

Sometimes you have to slap some people upside the head because quite frankly, they don't understand anything else. There are some people whom you can debate with in a civil manner, and some whom you have to hit straight between the eyes with rude, crass comments as well as profanity. Anyone who denies this obviously doesn't have very much experience dealing with people in real life, never mind the internet.

I notice this when I read a news article on AOL. Sometimes the resulting comments are atrocious! It makes me wonder if these people even have any intelligence! I guess it's easy to hide behind anonymity, but it doesn't speak well for our society as a whole.

Julia asked: Can online comments be civil? Do comments reflect on the community or on the individual?

Sure, comments can be civil. They often are. And while the comments reflect on the individual, they also reflect on the community into which they are spoken.

I've found the resulting comments on this article very interesting, but even more so, the article and comments that Diana Raabe lead us to with the views of Resa Aslan. Wow. I'm barely a quarter of the way into that article/comments, but I'm finding some well written opinions, not that I agree with all of them, not at all, but so far, only a couple of remarks have been personal attacks.

Heated discussion is a joy in which to engage. I wish that Reza Aslan would have stayed with us to continue sharing and enlightening and providing us with another voice.

A couple notes: anonymous comments, imo, lack credibility. People hide behind their fear of cyber-attacks if they reveal their true selves. I think there is greater danger and damage in the comical names used to espouse one's beliefs. If you have a position on something, own up to it.

What a great question! For the most part, yes, comments can be civil but it seems the abilty of the community to accept those comments with equal civility depends on the viewpoints expressed. If the comments lean towards agreement with the communities' status quo, then they are received and interpreted as civil. Should the comments present a dissenting or controversial view, then the chances of it being it received by the community as civil is much less.

I always own up to what I say and try to keep and open mind about listening to others. These days being a "moderate" poltically to me means sometimes supporting some very unpopular positions which I do not run away from.

My major irritant is when it looks like someone who attacks me is not doing so for a reason other than emotion, or is unable to keep their minds open.

A good example is the kind of thing that happens on IMDB in the discussions about movies. People get absolutely inflamed when you say you do not like a movie, and try to argue about it or prove you wrong. It is so sad to post a comment about something and then get attacked when all you meant to do was to discuss some opinion you have.

One other reason to maintain anonmity is the chance that people one might work with might be on Gather. It is often not smart to say a whole lot about one's self in public that goes to people you work with or do business with. It can lead to misunderstanding or personal problems, and it does happen.

It is the unfortunate trade-off we have to make in allowing everyone the easy accessibility of posting their comments for thousands to see with the click of a mouse. Those types of people have always existed in society, and they'll abuse their privilege of free speech in every way they can. They crave attention, so it's best to ignore them until they get tired and go away.

Stacey:
> Should the comments present a dissenting or controversial
> view, then the chances of it being it received by the
> community as civil is much less.

Oh wow is that ever true. There is a sensibility that people
develop and it is like the support they get from this imaginary
group is more important than the subject being discussed,
that bugs me. I see these forums as a way to hear other
people's points of view, not make friends. Friends are people
you know and interact with in reality. If people are really
going here for friendship or "support" whatever that means
it is a very sad commentary on our society I think.

bruce k, point read and taken, re: co-workers. I'll have to acquiesce to your point as I am not in quite the same position. While I do have "co-workers" it's not quite the same. I am self-employed and contract my services to others.

That last sentence of mine makes me grin. I just last week wrote a front page article about prostitution and well, you can probably see the humor, oui?

I agree with you Deb, but I wonder how deep that goes. Lots of the writing or personal comments people make, and then others come in and say, how wonderful, or how sad, or be supporting ... how deep does that go? LOL and -hugs- and stuff like that kind of bugs me ... but it seems to help some people maintain the illusion that there is something social going on ... I just wonder?

Susan ... how is it you know so much about prostitution then??? ;-) Just kidding ... yeah, I'm a contractor/consultant too. I always remember about a handyman I was about to hire to do some plumbing stuff. Then he started talking all these conspiracy theories, and strange things ... he took to emailing me lots of pictures of the supposed victims in Iraq of depleted uranium ... all in the space of a day. Strange views of even not strange views can alienate people pretty quickly, or make them uncomfortable so best to save your strange ideas for Gather was my conclusion! ;-)

I believe comments reflect the individual , absolutely. I've also noticed on Gather that if people disapprove , they just don't comment or answer. Now that we have the delete button, I've had to use it once for a weird comment left by someone unknown to me, but if someone's trying to intentionally start an argument, I just don't comment.

I certainly hope people reading my comments think I'm civil. One of the things that I've found here at Gather is that most people are civil. I have seen very few really nasty comments to things I've written. And I like very much to keep the comments posted so all can see. This is a great source for real discussion; I hope we can continue in that vein.

I would like to address the comment of Timothy V. I do not agree that sometimes those we address force us to become rude or crass. One's actions are one's own. If someone responds to another, even one who is clearly rude or vicious, with similar profanity or incivility, they have accomplished nothing. People are not swayed with such tactics and no one has the right to be cruel or rude in order to change another's mind (nor is it likely to do so).

When one descends into the same kindergarten behavior (or is the first), it is a reflection on the commenter not the one attacked. People of intelligence are not swayed by cruelty or belligerence. And those that might be - why would you care if you sway them?

I am not innocent; I have said things in comments that were ill-advised or sarcastic, not as nice as I like to be. But that was my failing, my lapse and no one else is responsible for my actions.

Stephanie, do you think than when someone says something rude or crass to you that it is a "psychic injury". I think if all things are help constant in a day, a single lousy remark and affect someone's life negatively. I know I was actually slammed by someone who misunderstood something I said on a message board who just kept on attacking me and givin the benefit of his psychoanalytic expertise, noexistent as it may have been. Not that big of a thing, but it bugged me, and it made me feel attacked for merely trying to share my point of view. Since he disagreed with my point of view, I believe he was trying to punish me for having that point of view. So ... why should one had to put up with that? There are an infinite number of ways these little fights can go, as most of know by 2nd grade, and yet this kind of thing is very central to human life. If we cannot see it or solve it on the internet how do we deal with it in real life? Some people say they can just ignore things, but those are the people I think that can ignore for so long until they go crazy ... we all feel it the same, we just strategically react differently ... perhaps.

Everyone is entitled to protest their treatment. To be honest, when I first came here, it was in the hopes that I could get objective readings on my fiction. I have worked on it all my life; it means something to me and I always thought I was pretty thickskinned - I work in safety and I take a pounding nearly daily as I tell people what they don't want to hear.

One story I put based on my husband's own views, my reading of who he was as well as a reflection of my recently deceased father's nature, which is much like my husband's. The first one to look at it saw something horrific, a slam on men everywhere and, for the first time in my memory, I questioned whether I should write, whether I had the skills I thought I had. I wept, cut to the quick. Some was my father's recent death, but it struck me with unrelenting harshness. I nearly left gather entirely. Even now, my husband remembers how I was hurt and thinks I shouldn't waste my time.

The commenter heard, somehow, about my reaction and we mailed back and forth. I had reacted extremely to something he had not intended to be so harsh. Nor had he understand his view. Even though we did not end up seeing eye to eye, we were able to discuss it and I learned something useful that allowed me to correct something rather egregious in a novel, something that made my work better than it could have been.

For the most time, no one reads my work; that's OK. I don't solicit support; I don't have a huge crowd of contacts. I react only to articles and/or comments that interest me. I've never been here for points.

Sometimes I am attacked as I am quite opinionated and not reticent about expressing myself, but I've never been in a situation where I was unable to be civil. By all means, express how you feel when attacked; don't be a doormat. But I believe anyone should be able to express themselves without descending into petty name-calling and profanity. I could be wrong, but it is what I think.

I think that online comments are a magification of how people are or behave in real life. They can hide here, knowing that they cannot be physically accosted for their words, so perhaps, their words are stronger than they would be in real life.

And yet...as we are teaching our young people in school that they are the most important thing, that the feelings and thoughts of others do not matter as much as their own, I think we'll also find more arguments in real life.

Arguing doesn't solve problems, though. Thoughtful discussion can. And that is lacking online and in person.

I think people like to be jerks when they can hide behind a computer screen.

I don't know, I can't bring myself to do it.