A wunch of bankers.
Just so. And it doesn’t even take a radically objectionable thing like hate speech or trolling or sexism to become the target of a bully; any quality or quirk or behavior that irritates a sufficient quota of peers can put a bullseye on anyone’s back, particularly if they lack measurable popularity or peer support (or if the group has made itself myopic toward -or supportive of- bullying by its members). Once the irritating quality is labelled, it’s used by those who bully* as a justification and pretext for rote antagonism and degradation of the target.
Other tells that attacks on a poster amount to bullying include the responses to criticism from outside the clique of supporters:
a) the critic is presumed to be specifically defending the target and each and every instance of their irritating quirk or behavior, and no consideration is given to the specific critique of the bullying behavior, which is presumed by the attacker(s) to be axiomatically justified;
b) although any and all past behaviors of the target are cited, usually explicitly, to justify their attacks, the bullying participants demand for each precipitating event a response from the target in isolation of any previous attacks, which allows the attackers to reduce and refine their pretexts into crystalline moral justifications;
c) criticisms of the bullying behavior are dismissed as appeals to “civility” in an uncivil forum, or misidentified as critiques of the language or insults used, or taken as attempts at censorship or unrestrained political correctness;
d) the target and the critics are derided as humorless, allergic to disagreement, shrinking violets unable to cope with a little conflict.
Obviously, bullying cannot thrive without support from that quota of peers willing to be persuaded toward participation or tacit approval. Which never seems to be a problem on the internet. With so much discussion and education about bullying and cyberbullying available from the past couple of decades, I’m dismayed that so many generally perceptive individuals turn their gaze away from all the indicators.
*I don’t think it’s helpful to label anyone as “a bully” as if that’s a defining feature of the individual. It’s fair in some cases, but I really believe most people who bully or have bullied are not inherently malicious. Some are passionate about a particular issue and don’t see their individual actions in the context of group behavior. Some might be situationally angry or offended, or supportive of friends who are already in the fight. Hardly anyone thinks of themselves as a bully. But bullying happens, every day, in every kind of social grouping.
QFT with thanks.
.
Boooo! Get out of here with your “knowledge” and “citations” ya frickin’ Nerd!
Get 'im boys!
Abe Vigoda saunters out, struggling to free his Saturday night special from his hernia truss
Holy crap that was a good post xeno: well done.
I think it’s fair to characterize Morgenstern as a bully, though I should also acknowledge that he has in the past made constructive contributions to the board. Xeno nails it though: most bullying isn’t conducted by habitual bullies like Morgenstern. Furthermore, habitual bullies often rely on a circle of recruits to support their behavior. So while shit-stirrers are a problem, arguably they are not most of it.
I’m not happy about that as it blunts my [del]bullying?[/del] attacks on Morgenstern. But we’re here to fight ignorance.
I’ll offer a very bright line distinction between legit attacks and bullying. Legit pittings (of which there are few) are constructive insofar as they assist the attacker in their journey-towards-self-actualization-without-being-a-dick. To do so requires a modicum of empathy within the pitting. The attacker asks themselves, “What’s the proper way to make a post like that? Is there a proper way?”
Boy, I’m not sure I’d be on the proper side of that bright line in many of my posts here, but it’s a damn decent aspiration. I think maybe that’s a good distinction between a post that enlightens and a post that just produces heat.
Not sure how to change the community norms on this. For better or worse it seems to me that “bullying” is not something a message board moderation staff can effectively try and police (and there are absolutely valid reasons that they might decide dispositively so, including the chilling effect on discourse which could be an unintended consequence). Possibly we’ll see some more bystander intervention if we keep occasionally pressing the issue. Possibly this can be done in the spirit of empathy. In any case, it doesn’t seem like community culture ever more than imperfectly reflects the consensus of the members.
No worries, it’s a high bar and I rarely meet it either. Polycarp gingerly pushed this Pit ideal in the early 2000s: even then it was practiced rarely. Which is better than never!
Anyway, you only need a handful of constructive posts to change the tone I say. High marginal returns in the beginning, diminishing afterwards.
I think we’re doing a better job recently. We discuss issues, with a few jabs here and there. Thank you xenophon41, andros, delicious, and measure for measure for the exchange here. We need to be aware of a problem in order to effect change.
Do you think it would be worth pulling off your last few posts and starting a new thread on this topic, rather than burying it in this Pit thread?
Honestly, Sunny Daze, if the discussion dies out in this thread, it’s likely to die out if it’s given its very own thread. I’ll admit I’ve considered starting a thread about bullying, but due to several considerations on which I don’t want to elaborate, I believe I’m not the poster to do that.
If you wish to start such a thread, I promise to (gingerly and perhaps sparingly) participate. But rather than extracting whole posts, I think it’s accepted practice to start a spin-off thread with a link or two and some selective quotes that establish the theme.
Morgenstern means morning star. Lucifer means morning star, you figure it out.
(just kidding)
Shut up and give me your lunch money.
Regards,
Shodan
Spent it on the spiral notebook you just trashed. But here’s some eraser caps shaped like bunnies and hearts…
Regrets,
xenophon41
No hamsters?
Your best friend,
Watchwolf
Nah, it probably stopped in this thread because those of us interested in discussing the topic wouldn’t see any reason to check out this thread–at least, after it was new and people were curious.
It is true that some non-bullies will bully unintentionally. And some people get so upset that they bully. But there are also people who make a habit of it. It’s kinda like saying “everybody lies” as a defense of never calling anyone a liar. There are people who just habitually lie.
As for the line between bullying and “Pitting”: I don’t agree that it’s always about actionable statements. The Pit is a place to vent, and that may be all you want to do. It just shouldn’t be the only thing you ever do.
I do think there is danger of watering down bullying to mean just any mean statement, and I don’t think that qualifies. Bullying goes beyond merely being insulting. It’s a pattern of behavior.
And I also think you can bully even if your statements are actionable. Are you saying things with the goal of making someone the laughing stock? Are you piling on for your own amusement? Is your goal to tear them down and make them hurt? I consider that bullying, too.
As for moderation: I know many places that enforce civility rules that basically cover it. But, for a place that has a forum designed for flaming people, I agree it would be hard to know where to draw the line. I don’t think, however, that a chilling effect would be a problem, for the same reason I don’t think civility rules create a chilling effect.
And MorningStar Farms is a producer of meatless sausages and burger patties that contain no beef whatsoever. Eerie coincidence?
Strangely enough, you still don’t want to know how the sausage is made…
One nice thing I’ll say for him: despite never apologizing for his shittastic behavior over the last couple of weeks, since this thread started he has at least quieted the fuck down. I suspect it’s a strategy–realizing how close he was to banning he backed off, hoping people would forget about what he did–but hell, I’ll take it.
Morgenstern isn’t popular on this board?
Das Nasobēm
Auf seinen Nasen schreitet
einher das Nasobēm,
von seinem Kind begleitet.
Es steht noch nicht im Brehm.
Es steht noch nicht im Meyer.
Und auch im Brockhaus nicht.
Es trat aus meiner Leyer
zum ersten Mal ans Licht.
Auf seinen Nasen schreitet
(wie schon gesagt) seitdem,
von seinem Kind begleitet,
einher das Nasobēm.
The Nasobame
Striding on its noses
there comes the Nasobame,
with its young in tow.
It isn’t yet in Brehm’s
It isn’t yet in Meyer’s
And neither in Brockhaus’
It trotted out of my lyre
when it came first to light.
Striding on its noses
thereon (as I’ve said above),
with its young in tow,
there goes the nasobame.
Or is it because his humour is lost in translation?
Ein Werwolf eines Nachts entwich
von Weib und Kind und sich begab
an eines Dorfschullehrers Grab
und bat ihn: »Bitte, beuge mich!«
Der Dorfschulmeister stieg hinauf
auf seines Blechschilds Messingknauf
und sprach zum Wolf, der seine Pfoten
geduldig kreuzte vor dem Toten:
»Der Werwolf«, sprach der gute Mann,
»des Weswolfs, Genitiv sodann,
dem Wemwolf, Dativ, wie mans nennt,
den Wenwolf, – damit hats ein End.«
Dem Werwolf schmeichelten die Fälle,
er rollte seine Augenbälle.
»Indessen«, bat er, »füge doch
zur Einzahl auch die Mehrzahl noch!«
Der Dorfschulmeister aber mußte
gestehn, dass er von ihr nichts wußte.
Zwar Wölfe gäbs in grosser Schar,
doch »Wer« gäbs nur im Singular.
Der Wolf erhob sich tränenblind–
er hatte ja doch Weib und Kind!
Doch da er kein Gelehrter eben,
so schied er dankend und ergeben.
THE WEREWOLF
A Werewolf, troubled by his name,
Left wife and brood one night and came
To a hidden graveyard to enlist
The aid of a long-dead philologist.
“Oh sage, wake up, please don’t berate me,”
He howled sadly, “Just conjugate me.”
The seer arose a bit unsteady
Yawned twice, wheezed once, and then was ready.
“Well, Werewolf' is your plural past, While Waswolf’ is singularly cast:
There’s Amwolf' too, the present tense, And Iswolf,’ `Arewolf’ in this same sense.”
“I know that–I’m no mental cripple–
The future form and participle
Are what I crave,” the beast replied.
The scholar paused–again he tried:
“A Will-be-wolf?' It's just too long: Shall-be-wolf?’ `Has-been-wolf?’ Utterly wrong!
Such words are wounds beyond all suture–
I’m sorry, but you have no future.”
The Werewolf knew better–his sons still slept
At home, and homewards now he crept,
Happy, humble, without apology
For such folly of philology.
There wolf. There castle.
.