07-17-2003, 05:50 AM
I mean no disrespect to the Lurker Lounge in what I wrote (not that I think any was taken). From my experience of this place, as I've drifted past it on and off over the last few years, it seems to be a very tight and good community.
I was more interested in the concept of the old vs the new expressed in the post. It's something I've considered a lot in terms of online communities, and I think that it's a common attitude. To me, it seems wrong because it tends to enshrine respect as though it's some constant figure that can be applied universally. I don't think that can ever be true. EVen amoung the "old" members you'll frequently find people who hate each other's guts on most boards (I admit I dont pay enough or frequent enough attention to the politics here to know if that applies to here).
I'm well aware of the need for order, and that someone has to enforce that. Usenet is a prime example of a community without a means to enforce order - and you wont find me calling that a pleasant place.
However, seperating the concept of authority from the one of respect is something I think should be done when considering the issue. Most newcomers will follow the rules as best they can. However, I doubt most newcomers will automatically respect the older members more than a fellow new member. They'll read the posts and see who floats to the top, so to speak.
That's really my point about respect flowing both ways. Until the older members have established themselves in the newer member's mind, they're still earning respect from them. The reason is that I believe respect is a personal thing, not a community thing.
Now, many forums try to hasten the process of old members gaining respect with newer ones with features such as post counts, registration dates or member numbers. Maybe they have some sort of sub concious effect, I don't know, but most people at least proclaim to pay no attention to them, so we're back at square one.
Anyway, to bring this back into context, the whole point I'm making is that it's not as though people ever got together and said "these are the list of people we respect around here". So to say to someone "other people can do it, they're respected, you're not" isn't quite accurate. The newcomer is left thinking "hey, but I don't respect them". So making an appeal to respect is, in my mind, a pretty ineffectual way to make a point.
An appeal to the rules and norms of the community (as I note the post also contained) is generally more successful.
I'll note at this point if I was a more eleoquent writer I'd have been able to articulate "Respect is an individual value, community norms and rules are shared" in one paragraph, rather than half a dozen. Excuse my verbosity, and also any assumption I've made about this being the time and place for such discussion. :)
*tips shako*
I was more interested in the concept of the old vs the new expressed in the post. It's something I've considered a lot in terms of online communities, and I think that it's a common attitude. To me, it seems wrong because it tends to enshrine respect as though it's some constant figure that can be applied universally. I don't think that can ever be true. EVen amoung the "old" members you'll frequently find people who hate each other's guts on most boards (I admit I dont pay enough or frequent enough attention to the politics here to know if that applies to here).
I'm well aware of the need for order, and that someone has to enforce that. Usenet is a prime example of a community without a means to enforce order - and you wont find me calling that a pleasant place.
However, seperating the concept of authority from the one of respect is something I think should be done when considering the issue. Most newcomers will follow the rules as best they can. However, I doubt most newcomers will automatically respect the older members more than a fellow new member. They'll read the posts and see who floats to the top, so to speak.
That's really my point about respect flowing both ways. Until the older members have established themselves in the newer member's mind, they're still earning respect from them. The reason is that I believe respect is a personal thing, not a community thing.
Now, many forums try to hasten the process of old members gaining respect with newer ones with features such as post counts, registration dates or member numbers. Maybe they have some sort of sub concious effect, I don't know, but most people at least proclaim to pay no attention to them, so we're back at square one.
Anyway, to bring this back into context, the whole point I'm making is that it's not as though people ever got together and said "these are the list of people we respect around here". So to say to someone "other people can do it, they're respected, you're not" isn't quite accurate. The newcomer is left thinking "hey, but I don't respect them". So making an appeal to respect is, in my mind, a pretty ineffectual way to make a point.
An appeal to the rules and norms of the community (as I note the post also contained) is generally more successful.
I'll note at this point if I was a more eleoquent writer I'd have been able to articulate "Respect is an individual value, community norms and rules are shared" in one paragraph, rather than half a dozen. Excuse my verbosity, and also any assumption I've made about this being the time and place for such discussion. :)
*tips shako*