News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: A Refresher Course on Netiquette  (Read 5525 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brother Asreus

  • Brother Captain, Resident Spokesman for Idiots.
  • Ancient
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2175
  • Closed captioned for the thinking impaired
A Refresher Course on Netiquette
« on: September 22, 2006, 10:11:16 PM »
It seems that lately, many people have forgotten or have been ignoring the rules of netiquette. This makes the Discussion Board a less pleasant environment not just for us Mods, but for members as well. To that end, I'm going to post a few reminders and sticky it so people have something readily available when posting here. If you have questions, please feel free to ask. As a side note, any one-liners or spam posts will now be deleted and the offender notified via PM. These posts are useless and contribute nothing to the topic, therefore why should you be rewarded?  So in no particular order, here's a reminder about the rules of Netiquette.


The most important rule of netiquette is, "Think before you post". If what you intend to post will not make a positive contribution to the discussion and be of interest to several readers, DO NOT POST IT!

PLEASE DON’T SHOUT!!!!!!!!!!! That caps lock key wasn’t invented to help you get your message across. Messages written in all caps are annoying, hard to read, and loud. And we all have enough loudness in our lives...

Relevancy: Messages should contribute a topic being discussed, or introduce a relevant idea. If you’re responding to the posted message, you do not need to re-display that full message in your response. Chances are we’ve read it already. Edit at will!

Flaming: Do not attack people personally. On the net, this is called “flaming.” Posts should advance the discussion and, while it’s OK for the discussion to get heated, the heat should be directed towards the issues, not towards other members.

Contribute, don’t reiterate: A post that says “I agree” is useless. It’s OK to agree with a poster, but rather than simply agreeing, extend what they have to say by locating other examples or elaborating on the point.

Be aware: Consider the impact of your words before posting. In cyberland, your statements lose the nuances of facial expressions, gestures, or tone; it’s very easy for others to misinterpret your statements! Fell free to use emoticons (but not too many), symbols (I’m *so* pleased...), and carefully chosen caps (you guys ROCK...) to enhance the meaning of your words.

Free speech: 40K Online actively supports the principles of free speech. However, we will not shy away from deleting that which is tasteless, rude, or hurtful. Frustrated freedom fighters will always find a suitable arena for their revolutionary thoughts.

Back it on up Jack: If you make a statement, be prepared to back it up with facts and proof. Your uncle Jim-Bob who once saw a white gator is not a respectable, informed, unbiased source of information. Post links to where you got your info and use multiple sources as well. Also, reading your sources articles and not just quoting them is recommended.

Trolls/Trolling: An Internet "troll" is a person who delights in sowing discord on the Internet. They try to start arguments and upset people.

Trolls see Internet communications services as convenient venues for their bizarre game. For some reason, they don't "get" that they are hurting real people. To them, other Internet users are not quite human but are a kind of digital abstraction. As a result, they feel no sorrow whatsoever for the pain they inflict. Indeed, the greater the suffering they cause, the greater their 'achievement' (as they see it). At the moment, the relative anonymity of the net allows trolls to flourish.

Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). You cannot negotiate with them; you cannot cause them to feel shame or compassion; you cannot reason with them. They cannot be made to feel remorse. For some reason, trolls do not feel they are bound by the rules of courtesy or social responsibility.

Perhaps this sounds inconceivable. You may think, "Surely there is something I can write that will change them." But a true troll can not be changed by mere words.


If you have any concerns about a post, feel it is spam, flaming or a violation of forum rules, we encourage you to use the "Report to Moderator" button. Do not try to handle the matter yourself by posting a warning or another rebuttle post. In most cases, this will only serve to make one bad post multiply and add gas to fire so to speak. Also, it increases your chances of being dragged into something and getting in trouble too.

« Last Edit: September 23, 2006, 05:03:28 PM by Brother Asreus »


Cthulhu for Pres in 2012!!! Why vote for the lesser of all evils?

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18989
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: A Refresher Course on Netiquette
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2006, 08:13:10 PM »
Quoting.

If you are directly replying to another post then plese quote the part of the post you are replying to. The whole post is not necessary if you are merely offering a counter point to a single section. Quote as little as you can else the posts get cluttered very quickly.

Quote the person you are replying to directly. Do not fall into the lazy trap of putting
Quote
around sections rather than
Notice one can be tracked back to a post and the other can not. Use the "Insert Quote" link if you are unable to do it manually.

Especially if you are quoting multiple people. Make sure the statement you are quoting may be followed back to where it came from.
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Lomendil

  • Mad Prophet of Commorragh
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10734
  • Country: 00
  • If it's comprehensible, it's obselete
Re: A Refresher Course on Netiquette
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2006, 09:01:00 PM »
I'd like to point out that trolls are often perfectly aware that they are annoying real people. They just find it funny and don't care that it puts other people out. It's like spitting onto people's heads from the top of a multistorey car-park or going out throwing eggs at random people's houses and cars.



Beating Trolls - The safest way is to ignore them and use the report to moderator function. It's a good idea to also point out on the thread that there is trolling afoot so that other members are made aware, and to tell them that they shouldn't fall for the bait. There's no point arguing with a Troll, they revel in causing conflict and will argue back in as annoying a way as possible. There's no point aiming lofty "Trolls are so pathetic and immature" type comments in their direction, because they don't care and it will just make them laugh that you were goaded into it - to them it's as good as being flamed. It is possible to have fun with a Troll though. They can be toyed with provided you are suitably nonchalant and indirect, and if you make sure that they know you know they are a troll. Cheery messages telling the troll how much the poster loves them, combined with irrelevant happy images and off-topic chat with other members, have been known to confound their schemes in the past... Trolls are powerless to cause trouble when they're not taken seriously, see. Best to save this for a thread that can't be salvaged though, because you'll basically be spamming. No point in ruining a perfectly good thread for that if it can be rescued by deleting just one or two trolling posts. It also depends on the grade of Troll since some trolls are so mindless that you can't get any amusement out of them, and they just need banning.

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18989
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: A Refresher Course on Netiquette
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2007, 08:05:15 PM »
From Operation Clambake:

The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:

Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities").
Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.
Quantify, wherever possible.
If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.
"Occam's razor" - if there are two hypothesis that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.
Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, is it testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?

Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric:
Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument.
Argument from "authority".
Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavourable" decision).
Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).
Special pleading (typically referring to god's will).
Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).
Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).
Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).
Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)
Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved").
Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect.
Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).
Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is).
Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?").
Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).
Confusion of correlation and causation.
Straw man - caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack..
Suppressed evidence or half-truths.
Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public"
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Mr.Peanut (Turtleproof)

  • Ride Like Lightning, Crash Like Thunder | Infinity Circuit | Pork Sword of Mod-Justice | Took the basket, nuts and lol | Good grief, ye hennie pennies
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13225
  • Country: 00
  • Turtleposting At The Speed Of SHift
  • Armies: Eldar, Dark Eldar, Sigmarines, Chaos, Demons
Re: A Refresher Course on Netiquette
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2010, 08:42:29 PM »
The follow are selections from the text "Fighting Fair."  Although written for face-to-face confrontations, whether with a lover or an antagonist, it is advice that everyone should observe during a debate:

Quote
Remain calm. Try not to overreact to difficult situations. By remaining calm it will be more likely that others will consider your viewpoint.
...
Be specific about what is bothering you. Vague complaints are hard to work on.

No "hitting below the belt." Attacking areas of personal sensitivity creates an atmosphere of distrust, anger, and vulnerability.

Avoid accusations. Accusations will cause others to defend themselves. Instead, talk about how someone's actions made you feel.

Don't generalize. Avoid words like "never" or "always." Such generalizations are usually inaccurate and will heighten tensions.

Avoid "make believe." Exaggerating or inventing a complaint - or your feelings about it - will prevent the real issues from surfacing. Stick with the facts and your honest feelings.

Don't stockpile. Storing up lots of grievances and hurt feelings over time is counterproductive. It's almost impossible to deal with numerous old problems for which interpretations may differ. Try to deal with problems as they arise.
...
Establish common ground rules. You may even want to ask your partner-in-conflict to read and discuss this brochure with you. When parties accept positive common ground rules for managing a conflict, resolution becomes much more likely.
You are
What you do
When it counts
     -The Masao
"Getting what you want can be dangerous.

 


Powered by EzPortal