"Flamewars" and Psychology

["Steph Teeter" <steph@endurance.net>]

A friend posted this to another group - it's pretty good... I don't know the
original author. Probably somebody doing a PhD thesis on email psycology.
Pretty cool to be part of a new social phenomenon :)

Steph
---------------------------------------

"Flamewars" and Psychology

also see: Newsgroup flaming as mental illness

"Insult wars" frequently break out on internet discussion groups.  Some
people enjoy these and will start them intentionally.  But many more
Flamewars exist than can easily be explained by intentional troublemakers.

It seems that the psychology of email itself can start flamewars.  Email
messages are "low bandwidth", meaning that the writing usually lacks
critical information about how to interpret the messages, and it lacks
most of the emotional communication of face-to-face talks.  As a result,
we can usually interpret email messages in several different ways.  A
person can send an innocent message which is "heard" as sarcasm or vile
insults by the person who receives it.  The reverse can also happen;
intentional insults can mistakenly be "heard" as benign, but missed
insults usually cause no problems!  We hear what we want to hear, and
unfortunately this is particularly true of email.

Flamewars usually are triggered *NOT* when one person intentionally
insults another, but when one person *takes* insult when reading messages
having fairly innocent intent.  The offended reader then hurls a real
insult in return.  The first party feels unjustly attacked, since after
all they did not send any horrible insults in the first place.  Therefore
they respond with insults of their own.  And so a "war" has been triggered
through misunderstandings.  Same as with nations.  Same as with little
kids.  And like with kids, the flamewar participants will often end up
saying "well she started it, I was just defending myself!  "No he started
it, no she did, no he did,"  and the moderator steps in and says "I don't
care who started it, you both participated, both of you go stand in the
corner."

The solution?  Simple: Be nice.  Don't hurl insults via the list, EVEN IF
SOMEONE ELSE INSULTED YOU FIRST.  Avoid acting like a self-important
boob; don't take insult at every little thing, and don't insist on public
retaliation for every minor slight.  Either ask if the insult was
intentional, or if you must, SEND YOUR RESPONDING ATTACK DIRECTLY TO YOUR
TARGET VIA PRIVATE MAIL AND *NOT* TO THE EMAIL LIST (SENDING A MESSAGE TO
THE PUBLIC LIST THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE AS A PRIVATE MESSAGE IS
THE GREATEST SOURCE OF PROBLEMS ON A PUBLIC LIST SERVE). If you feel that
someone has unjustly attacked you, and if you feel justified in
"defending" yourself in public by launching an attack of your own, then
you have fallen for the Flamewar psychology.  People with a "tit for tat"
philosophy who have a need to take retribution for perceived attacks are
no better than nations who start wars for stupid reasons.  On the other
hand, if all real (or imagined) insults go right past you with no effect,
then you would make a good-email list moderator!  :)