Internet behavior

[fasstrack]

OK, the description was dramatic---but it made you look, didn't it?

After three years of participating in these forums, this being my favorite of the three I've gotten involved with, a look back and a question posed to others may be in order:

What is it that liberates people in their heads to say things they never would in person for fear of being clocked?

I've made friends on these boards, got work, and let a couple of people who have gotten viscious get under my skin too. The latter is no fun, lemme tell y'all, especially when you react and get in the dirt as well. And it's not like I've been an angel either, though when it gets out and I answer back and feelings ultimately get hurt I feel like total shit. There was a real mess recently with a person I've met exactly once and we both lived to regret the proceedings. It could have been avoided too, by ignoring on my part. I did for a long while then finally blasted the fucker.

I just tried find online articles why psychologists and other wags on the subject and came up empty. (Didn't look very long, but found mostly self-advertising sites about people counseling folks with web addictions. Hey, come to think of it maybe I should have read those as they were the shit. Obviously i'm spending too damn much time on the web to be even posing these questions. ).

So, any thoughts? What makes people so bold and so nasty sometimes? Anonymity? Endorphins? Lack of getting laid? Sport? I'm really serious about this and want to know.

[Chuck Nessa]

So, any thoughts? What makes people so bold and so nasty sometimes? Anonymity? Endorphins? Lack of getting laid? Sport? I'm really serious about this and want to know.

I think is is all caused by jerks like you.

[connoisseur series500]

OK, the description was dramatic---but it made you look, didn't it?

After three years of participating in these forums, this being my favorite of the three I've gotten involved with, a look back and a question posed to others may be in order:

What is it that liberates people in their heads to say things they never would in person for fear of being clocked?

I've made friends on these boards, got work, and let a couple of people who have gotten viscious get under my skin too. The latter is no fun, lemme tell y'all, especially when you react and get in the dirt as well. And it's not like I've been an angel either, though when it gets out and I answer back and feelings ultimately get hurt I feel like total shit. There was a real mess recently with a person I've met exactly once and we both lived to regret the proceedings. It could have been avoided too, by ignoring on my part. I did for a long while then finally blasted the fucker.

I just tried find online articles why psychologists and other wags on the subject and came up empty. (Didn't look very long, but found mostly self-advertising sites about people counseling folks with web addictions. Hey, come to think of it maybe I should have read those as they were the shit. Obviously i'm spending too damn much time on the web to be even posing these questions. ).

So, any thoughts? What makes people so bold and so nasty sometimes? Anonymity? Endorphins? Lack of getting laid? Sport? I'm really serious about this and want to know.

Ask Chuck. He gets nasty.

[Hot Ptah]

My theory is that people who act like jerks online are really jerks essentially, as part of their true nature, but they cover it up with a thin veneer of respectability when dealing with people face to face, for their own self-interest if nothing else. When they feel anonymous online, they let their true selves out.

Of course, this could be completely wrong, just my musings.

[fasstrack]

So, any thoughts? What makes people so bold and so nasty sometimes? Anonymity? Endorphins? Lack of getting laid? Sport? I'm really serious about this and want to know.

I think is is all caused by jerks like you.

Ask a stupid question.......

I weally was sewious guys

[(BB)]

I have always assumed that loud-mouthed assholes on-line are loud-mouthed assholes offline.

Bill

[fasstrack]

My theory is that people who act like jerks online are really jerks essentially, as part of their true nature, but they cover it up with a thin veneer of respectability when dealing with people face to face, for their own self-interest if nothing else. When they feel anonymous online, they let their true selves out.

Of course, this could be completely wrong, just my musings.

I think you might just be on the money. All of us are at least in part jerks---just as we're in part knuckleheads, saints, sinners, angels, devils, etc. The potential for human behavior, even in a single day, can cut a pretty wide swath.

For what it's worth I've always posted under my real name, Joel Fass, especially when I said something I was sure I'd get hammered or at least take some heat over. Some of these others haven't been anonymous either, or broke cover when I asked them to, so it's not merely the anonymous thing. But perhaps the distance issue eliminates that veneer you allude to and all the Heironyious Bosch painting figurines in people's heads gush out unafraid.

Edited July 28, 2006 by fasstrack

[David Ayers]

[fasstrack]

Wow. That's a hell of a neck. I'd kill it.....

[7/4]

...and coppin' a feel too!

[Noj]

I'm occasionally a jerk. My bad.

[fasstrack]

Did anyone ever have the following experience: You really think someone on the web is a prick to you but you want to be a gentleman and tell them off in private, then they post your PM like a wounded 9-year-old?

This happened to me twice and it felt brutal. I wanted to crawl under something as I was aghast at my own angry words and also how hurt someone could be by a stranger who wrote a private message.

[Neal Pomea]

I think Hot Ptah got it right.

In my own case, when I get aggressive, I've probably been doing the hooch. Too sleepy to talk but not to type!

It's a good question.

What makes people think they can send false or unreliable info to an online encyclopedia like Wikipedia? Good God, the entry on St. Augustine is not as long as the ones on Brittney Spears and Special Agent Jack Bauer!!! You talk about passive-aggressive behavior there! No sense of proportion or history!

One scotch, one bourbon, and a beer...

Edited July 29, 2006 by It Should be You

[Christiern]

I have had nasty online exchanges that eventually did u-turns. It's always nice when that happens.

As to what it is that makes people show their fangs online, I think two major factors are anonymity and the fact that there is no physical contact--these circumstances easily turn cowards into pixel slinging bullies.

Years ago, when I was in broadcasting, the station and individual on-air people regularly received extremely nasty letters from listeners who--for one reason or another--needed to vent. These letters and cards almost never bore a name or an address. We used to refer to them as crank letters and we took them in stride--it was par for the course. Some writers were regulars and the content of their mail was very reminiscent of the kind of thing we are seeing on the internet--that cry for attention that we call "trolling." Like radio, computers seem to have been invented for the loner who sees the outside world as his/her masked ball. Exceedingly shy people (and I used to be one of them) often become comedians--psychiatrists probably have a name and explanation for that, I just have the personal experience. I still become very nervous when called upon to appear before an audience, whether it is for a book reading or to give a talk, or even just to perform an introduction. All that reserve was instantly wiped away when I was alone in a radio studio, doing my thing. The difference, of course, was that I could not see my audience, that I did not know whether I was entertaining people or making them reach for that dial. I see a parallel between that and the anonymity inherent in online board activity.

Now, like Joel, I have never hidden behind a handle. True, most people don't automatically link "Chris A" to Chris Albertson, but board regulars don't have to Google to find my identity. So, when I express a controversial or unpopular opinion, I am not hiding behind a pseudonym. People who have seen my posts through the years know that I am often critical of people who mask themselves on line, but only if they launch personal attacks from behind a handle. I think that it is a cowardly thing to do, because whatever is said probably would not have been said if the confrontation was face to face. Other than that, I am okay with cyber IDs.

Let me say here that I am as guilty as the next poster when it comes to lashing out (witness my ongoing exchange with Conrad), but I try to keep it somewhat civil. I have been called all kinds of names by other posters, but rarely do I think the mutual antagonism is irreparable. As you point out, Joel, PMs can work wonders. I think that points to a major reason why two posters, essentially strangers, sometimes find themselves at each other's throat. In our case, we are brought together by a common interest in jazz. All jazz not being the same, our likes and dislikes differ, so we have that as a potential basis for argument, but rarely do I see people erupting over the merits of Bechet versus Ayler (although that could happen)--no, we get into heated, escalating arguments over the very same subjects that have started bar brawls through the centuries: religion and politics.

The bar brawls are usually fueled by alcohol and the participants are often people who have a tendency to get physical or become verbally abusive. Many of us, the very same people who fly off the handle on these boards, would never attract the attention of a bouncer. However, we are quick to misconstrue the words of a poster about whom we really know nothing. That, I firmly believe, is the problem--we have only limited knowledge of each other outside of that which can be gained from the board. Familiarity breeds contempt, they say, but it can also prevent it from surfacing. Posters who have met in person are not as likely to engage in embarrassing exchanges--sure, they might disagree, but politely. If I know you very well, chances are that I will also know and understand why your view opposes mine.

I don't know if I have made any sense, but I do know that I have rambled on unmercifully, and, for that, I apologize.

[Uncle Skid]

That made a lot of sense.

And I don't remember Noj ever being a jerk.

[fasstrack]

I

Years ago, when I was in broadcasting, the station and individual on-air people regularly received extremely nasty letters from listeners who--for one reason or another--needed to vent. These letters and cards almost never bore a name or an address. We used to refer to them as crank letters and we took them in stride--it was par for the course. Some writers were regulars and the content of their mail was very reminiscent of the kind of thing we are seeing on the internet--that cry for attention that we call "trolling."

This is more than interesting to me because some time after Branford Marsalis's forum closed down due to trolls and assholes stealing identities of musicians and posting hateful and racist messages he mentioned elsewhere (sort of publicly or I would ask to repeat it) that as MD on the Leno show he used to get hate mail, and always unsigned.

I think a lot of Branford as a person. It's not like we're buddies or anything. Far from it. We met once and my first exposure to these web forums was his. We have emailed each other and that's the extent of our relationship. In terms of this discussion, though, Bran tried a noble experiment in democracy. He let the trolls troll, let the assholes be assholes, the sweethearts be sweethearts, etc.---truly feeling that people reading would be intelligent enough to read and sort it out. he would join or start discussions, argue, play dozens for fun, and even occasionally talk a little shit himself. But he's a hell of a thinker and a good writer and sometimes that board could be really happening, between Bran and the more intellectually curious on there. In the end, sad to say, Bran's noble experiment imploded, done in by malicious haters. The rope that he gave to hang themselves tightened into a noose and it was around everyone's neck. A lot of people came together before that happened though, and Bran did a lot of good.

But the point is: anonymous letters; anonymous trolling=cowardice. It's always a shame when cowards win.

Edited July 29, 2006 by fasstrack

[fasstrack]

I'm also not sure whether it's amusing or sad that on that Crouch thread Chris brought up here after Stanley cut out the people remaining had such unsatisfied bloodlust they turned on each other and started bickering and getting on each other's case.

Some people are just either cruising for a bruising or addicted to the rush of stirring the pots (or having theirs stirred). Maybe some (the instigators) can bedescribed as 'emotional daredevils'. The rest are like open wounds to me because when you go looking to put someone down in essence you are looking to put yourself down. There is a strong element of masochism here.

[connoisseur series500]

That made a lot of sense.

And I don't remember Noj ever being a jerk.

Nojjy starts acting like a beyotch when you mention the "tuck rule."

Edited July 29, 2006 by connoisseur series500

[fasstrack]

This is more than interesting to me because some time after Branford Marsalis's forum closed down.......

Some other the more quality people from Bran's forum moved to a private board run by a nice man named Max Wendt:

www.mydamnforum.org

(PS: Why can I not get the above to appear as a link?)

It was conceived originally primarily as a way to post music one was working on for discussion either there or on Bran's forum and many from the Bran days have tracks up there, myself included (look on the 'our music' page for what people have submitted). There were also the inevitable discussion pages.

Almost everyone there is nice, but some of the instigators/masochists also followed and a lot of the warring continued. One particularly irksome individual was banned by the easy-going Max, resurfaced and was eventually banned again. I myself am not very popular there and considered by some alternately an instigator, long-winded, self-absorbed, and even mean. Others really like me, the music I posted, and my humor and general musings. Most people I have little trouble with and the ones I do get into it with everyone. The one guy it got really ugly with had been baiting me online (following me around the web like a stalker) and in my personal email box almost daily for a time---as he took personally thing I said about some of his heroes/friends--- and, try though I did to ignore him, I finally let go full force. To be fair I was hardly nice to him either. The result was that both of us felt like absolute shit afterwards. He's a good musician too, and building a little name for himself, despite this stupidity.

The other thing that strikes me as interesting is every time I would try to discuss the bickering or reflect on or analyze it a fight almost always ensued and a lot of finger-pointing. I often joined the fracas. Like I said, I'm no angel. Me and Mae West....

I guess the real question should be: whatever the media, Internet, up close, mail, phone, rickshaw travel, etc. why do people get off on getting under other people's skin? Why do those whose skin they are under and whose heads they are inside so attracted to this and cannot let go any more than their torturers? I mean, shit, at least Cole Porter got a tune out of the phenomenon....

I hope this discussion goes on for a while and people relate their web and non-web experiences so we can all learn something here.

Edited July 29, 2006 by fasstrack

[.:.impossible]

That made a lot of sense.

And I don't remember Noj ever being a jerk.

Me neither... he's more of a kcirp.

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

Let me say here that I am as guilty as the next poster when it comes to lashing out (witness my ongoing exchange with Conrad), but I try to keep it somewhat civil. I have been called all kinds of names by other posters, but rarely do I think the mutual antagonism is irreparable. As you point out, Joel, PMs can work wonders. I think that points to a major reason why two posters, essentially strangers, sometimes find themselves at each other's throat.

If certain areas of the board were set up to function as a 'live' chat room, I doubt that people would go off the rails. There's a different dynamic at work when you're in that environment. Actually, would it be possible to experiment with something like that, or is it technically too difficult? For folks who like to post lots of articles and so, I suppose that it would be difficult to navigate a 'live' room.........but it would be a hoot! Much more enjoyable to see how people think on their feet rather than have them duck away to spend an hour or two researching the various this & that(s) of a particular subject on Google so that they can return with a 'weighty' rebuttal. Chris vs. Conrad in 'Live' political chat - tonite!

........or perhaps we'll kick it off with Chris vs. Jerry in 'Live' chat.

Edited July 29, 2006 by Son-of-a-Weizen

[7/4]

If certain areas of the board were set up to function as a 'live' chat room, I doubt that people would go off the rails. There's a different dynamic at work when you're in that environment. Actually, would it be possible to experiment with something like that, or is it technically too difficult? For folks who like to post lots of articles and so, I suppose that it would be difficult to navigate a 'live' room.........but it would be a hoot! Much more enjoyable to see how people think on their feet rather than have them duck away to spend an hour or two researching the various this & that(s) of a particular subject on Google so that they can return with a 'weighty' rebuttal. Chris vs. Conrad in 'Live' political chat - tonite!

........or perhaps we'll kick it off with Chris vs. Jerry in 'Live' chat.

There IS a live chat on this board. Look at the menu at the top of the page.

Dummy.

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

Um, yeah....I was in there the other night. ...been in there with YOU too...remember? I mean having a similar set-up where, for example, the political forum is structured as a 'live' only forum rather than what we now have. Comprende?

Edited July 29, 2006 by Son-of-a-Weizen

[7/4]

Um, yeah....I was in there the other night. I mean having a similar set-up where, for example, the political forum is structured as a 'live' only forum rather than what we now have. Comprende?

No need to tearn down the forum, just go to the chat room. Sheesh...

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

You can't do that......most of those going there now don't not want to yammer on about that stuff.