Forum Moderators: open
I never know how to respond to the posts. Do we say something, or do we say nothing? I have opted for saying nothing most times. But as a community of legitimate professionals, should we think of a standardized way to communicate that certain behaviours are unacceptable? Or am I crazy?
Maybe we should have a "standardised way" of dealing with them because I am sure that there are several of them in our community.
Those of us who try to find out if someone *is* a crook or not, and/or try to get people to look at their issues in a logical, fair and non-name-calling, non-blame-diverting, non-antisocial way, are often roundly insulted for our pains on WW.
But that's the way that sociopaths often respond to attempts to correct them, so no surprises there...
Rgds
Damon
I never know how to respond to the posts.
The moderators and administrators are here to ensure that everything stays at least in line with WebmasterWorld's own TOS.
If you have an issue with a thread or post which you think is problematic and you feel the moderators or admins have missed it, the best thing to do is to send the forum mod and/or an admin a PM and report the thread or post.
If it's something that you personally find offensive, the best thing to do is just ignore it and don't respond.
We're not here to pick fights. Doing so only ends up sending a thread further downhill than it might already be.
TJ
Efforts at public shaming doesn't end bad behavior. It just sends the behavior into the shadows.
Talking down to people, from the moral high ground, yields what harvest? A sense of moral superiority for the speaker (What a good person am I!) and instant behavior modification by the "listener"?
Ya. Simple. Works like a charm. Every time I've employed that approach.
Not. I'm not quite certain why I/we do it - talk down or otherwise to "bad people" - other than our own weaknesses, sense of fecklessness, frustration, or simply because "talking good about ourselves" (implicitly, by talking down others) is easy and available and may make up for other shortcomings we feel about ourselves.
But the methodology just does not work. Pointing fingers just doesn't work. It may look like it works, for a brief time, as behavior is suppressed or hidden, but without fundamental change it - the problematic behavior - will pop up in other ways. Sure as I'm sitting here. Always.
There are ways to approach the issues that concern us that have some positive effects or outcomes - such as public education - and there are ways that are less likely to work. Whilst I sympathize with your view about "a better world" your methods aren't effective. Therefore, you become part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Really, the problem isn't you any way, at least not if you are not enabling the bad behavior. (Are you?) Everyone choses their own path, subject to the limitations of choice.
So what's to be done about matters that concern you such as "bad behaviour"? It's an old saw but it conveys a certain time tested wisdom: Lead by example, educate about alternatives, and let people chose for themselves.
One thing I choose to do, to hopefully make it a better world, is to share generously what I know, without fear or concern about giving away a competitive advantage. Why risk that? Because I choose to believe that there is enough to go around and that in a better world we really do care that everyone should make it through life with the basics covered.
And who knows? Maybe there is enough to go around.
For instance, a common question is "How do I create a popup script that won't be blocked by #*$!?"
I have replied more than once along the lines of "Popups are unpopular. It's unlikely anyone here will answer your question".
Kaled.
Exactly my point.
(I hope that I'm old enough and burnt enough by others' doing it to me not to deliberately talk down to people to make myself feel better. I have more constructive ways of making myself happy.)
The trouble is that the "bad hats" often interpret a disagreement of fact or interpretation with them as being a personal attack, and respond with a personal attack.
(Some people just, genuinely, have difficulty with logic that seems transparently obvious to the rest of us. That does not make them stupid, but it doesn't make them right either.)
It's hard to be reasonable (ie use reason) or be civil at that point, but it's the right thing to do. Shouting at the sociopaths won't "reform" them, but attempting to work through a problem gently from the point of view of logic and reasonable behaviour may (a) help them with whatever problem provoked their post and (b) help avoid similar problematic tactics in future.
Sometimes, with my consultant hat on, a client will come to me and demand that I make the ink on their paper red and flashing. Often the right thing to do is to get them to back out of the corner they've painted themselves into, find out what they were actually trying to achieve at a higher level, and help them get there by a more reasonable route.
Hopefully, if people carefully point out often enough that (say) trying to defraud G and/or name-calling and/or defeating pop-up blockers and/or crime-do-jour is actually the HARD route to what they want to achieve, then a few more people may just go the easier route (ie work and diligence)!
Rgds
Damon
I actually was hoping for our collective selves to find the best approach to voicing our concern with the best possible effects in the world. Something on the lines of the following:
"I don't know for sure, and could very well be wrong, but it seems like your trying to accomplish 'X', which, as stated in TOC [here], we don't support as a community."
Is that crazy, presumptuous and insulting. I guess the real danger is saying that to someone who is operating legitimately. But figure if that is the case, then they would respect others trying to curb dubiousness.
What do you guys think? I don't want to insult anyone, but welcome people into a community of responsible webmasters.
Is that crazy, presumptuous and insulting?
No, I don't think so.
Rgds
Damon
Nothing in the WebmasterWorld Terms of Service makes any reference to us speaking as a group or holding collective opinions. If anything, parts of the ToS make it clear that personal opinions are just that.
