Has civility on ASR declined recently?

[Slayer]

If it has, then I would say just slightly. I think pozz's post is pretty accurate. Add in the political driven environment we seem to be in and have been in for the last decade or so and people seem to get riled up much more easily. Tribe mentality has become very common in all aspects of life these days.
Sad for sure, most people forget rather easily how much we are more similar than dissimilar. Throw in folks being couped up and locked down, things are bound to go off the rails, then add in the news that no one can trust these days, eventually things boil over somewhere.
But I will say, this site is has nowhere near the issues and angst as do most others. Even though things can get mildly heated sometimes, I see no grudges ever being held. So that a plus in itself.

 

[PierreV]

I find unquestionably silly, like letting us members quality-vote products we have no experience with, that actually devalues the forum and it's intentions.

I don't see user feedback as a vote on quality, but more like a "user desirability rating".
The few times I voted the question I was asking myself was "would I want to purchase it at this price?"

Amir probably introduced the feature because many people argued about the correct panther that should have been attributed. Let the plebs (us) express their opinion and vent their eventual frustration through a vote. Clever, not silly

 

[audio2design]

One thing to keep in mind is that over the last 18 months, Covid and the lack of socialization has put many on edge. Without any outlets to blow off steam, people are doing it online.

 

[Jim Matthews]

Oh I'm definitely not a fan of the "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge" mindset.

I was referring to more off-topic threads where the main subject is opinions. Stating opinions as facts is a good way to get me going.

Love me a good Asimov reference.

 

[Walter]

EV?
Electrovoice?

My first thought also!

 

[Jimbob54]

I notice some things that have a tendancy to turn conversation sour.
The "uh huh" response , usually used when something is said that runs contry to the narrative (cables and dac sound spring to mind)

Guilty of using it and seeing others use it. Would a better alternative be "got any evidence to support that?" - but then it is at risk of becoming a debate about what constitutes evidence for such statements/ claims. I dont think many here want this to be a forum populated by unchecked sighted opinions on how something "sounds".

 

[BDWoody]

Guilty of using it and seeing others use it.

Uh huh...

It's part of the culture...people can get over it.

 

[Walter]

This has been a very enlightening topic, that has brought up points I never even considered. At one point in my career I managed a team in charge of English language written external communications--user manuals, user interfaces, online tech support, etc.--for a medium size software company. They had done a lot of research into best practices and had a very comprehensive writing style guide. One thing it emphasized was to never talk down to or chastise users. I have tried (and of course often failed) to apply those same rules to my own personal communication. Since much of this was brand new to me when I learned it, it occurs to me that there might be people on here who would be interested, also. For anyone who cares, here are some of their guidelines that apply well to forum discussions:

• Never tell someone what they should do. (Like I just did in the previous sentence.) Instead, try saying "I recommend...", "I suggest...", "You might try...", etc. We were actually forbidden from ever using the word should--it either implied we were being condescending to the user or that we were uncertain about our own products.
• When you absolutely feel that you need to tell a poster they are doing something wrong, avoid using the word "you." Instead of saying "You are doing it wrong," try "The recommended way to do that is..."
• Never, ever, ever, personally attack the other person. Don't call them a liar. Don't say they don't know what they are talking about. Don't tell them that their mother dresses them funny! Keep any negative comments about their ideas or actions, not them personally.
• Try to avoid negative comments entirely! Don't start a reply with "No, that is wrong." Don't say that their idea is stupid--maybe it is, and yeah, you are technically attacking the idea and not the person, but you are doing it in a way that immediately puts them on the defensive. A lot of times, you can simply state the right way to do something. There's no need to point out that they were doing it wrong before--that is often obvious
• If you find yourself writing, "With all due respect," realize that whatever you are about to write next probably shows no respect whatsoever. So if you actually do respect that person, you should probably find a different way to say it, or just not say it at all.
• If you are going to criticize or disagree, first acknowledge any points the other person made which were good. Don't just focus on what they did wrong. "That was a pretty clever idea to convert your expensive speakers to using biamping with active crossovers. However, the fact that the tweeter flew past you in a ball of fire indicates that you had the 400 watt bass amp connected to the wrong input." (True story. Not my speaker, thankfully, so highly entertaining at the time. )
• Don't try to "play the semantics game." In other words, don't make a comment that is technically correct but relies on the people who read it understanding a very fine distinction in your wording that may not be obvious. (I inadvertantly did this on post recently, myself.) Similarly, don't seize on what could easily have been a typo or minor mistatement by another poster and use that as the basis for discrediting what they have said. This is especially important when English is not the native language of many of the users/posters.
• Lastly--and this is actually something I was taught years earlier after writing a factually correct but rather insulting email to the VP of a very large corporation who was supplying much of the funding for a startup company I worked for--if you really feel that a negative reply is warranted, write it, but wait a minimum of 60 minutes before sending it. And then read it carefully again before you do. This can be really, really hard, but I have been really thankful I did it.

I definitely don't mean to be holier than thou or a know-it-all and I hope I don't come across as one. I have knowingly violated at least one of these rules on this very forum within the last three days, and possibly several other times unintentionally. However, if your goal is to have fun, and to actually help people learn, and you think any of these techniques sound good, then give 'em a try. Or don't. It is totally up to you.

 

[voodooless]

I definitely don't mean to be holier than thou or a know-it-all and I hope I don't come across as one.

With all due respect, but I think you failed miserably

Obviously, that comment was totally not in line with any of your points, so please take it with a healthy batch of Sodium(edit:Chloride) I can understand these points, coming from a company talking to customers. But for individuals on the internet, I think this goes way too far. Besides, some people need a bit of a jolt sometimes to wake them up.

 

[KSTR]

^ This!

IMHO, netiquette is the common ground we all stand upon, otherwise things go downhill quickly.

Let's just be aware that netiquette alone might not save all problems... if you want to make someone look like an idiot you still can do between the lines, it just requires better skills than just being blunt ;-)

I think it's all about the mindset. For example I often find myself starting to type in replies where I might go a bit too far because something annoyed me. Instead of pressing the send button I go have a tea break or something and then I re-read the lines and often start asking myself does this really add something to the case (not: the involved persons) in a constructive way? More often than not it doesn't, and then I scrap the answer.
The other point is give some leeway in general. Somebody might have had a bad day or whatever and when you'll see things already heating up, then don't engage for the moment, that's at least what I'm trying to do.

 

[Snarfie]

Reality these days is difficult to comprehend. It is like the scene in the matrix If reality is to much Ignorance is Bliss.
Compared with lots of other social media ASR is good place to be.

 

[Walter]

With all due respect, but I think you failed miserably

OK. You are welcome to your opinion.

some people need a bit of a jolt sometimes to wake them up.

In life, I agree. On this forum, not so much--but I also don't ever remember seeing a post from you that I thought was uncivil.

 

[voodooless]

OK. You are welcome to your opinion.

I hope you read the next line as well.

In life, I agree. On this forum, not so much--but I also don't ever remember seeing a post from you that I thought was uncivil.

You can still jolt people without being uncivil. Telling people "no" is not uncivil. Telling people what they should do, is not uncivil. Calling people a liar is not uncivil (depending on context). Telling people they are wrong without praising them for something is not uncivil either.

 

[Walter]

With all due respect, but I think you failed miserably

After waiting several minutes before replying, I just wanted to add while I do not wish to pedantic and I realize that English may not be your native language, that was a pretty clever idea to use one of my own points in rebuttable. However, the recommended way to make a snarky comment most effectively, even in jest, is to use proper grammar. I recommend that you delete the extraneous "but" from your reply.

Obviously, that comment was totally not in line with any of your points, so please take it with a healthy batch of Sodium

Understood, I did not take any offense.

 

[litemotiv]

In life, I agree. On this forum, not so much--but I also don't ever remember seeing a post from you that I thought was uncivil.

Some things are subtle, for instance using pseudo-intellectual or out of place scientific terms unnecessarily in conversation can be a form of passive aggression.

As an example, no one uses the word Sodium as a replacement for salt in a normal conversation between individuals, so it can come across as intentionally patronizing or condescending when used. Someone may use that word casually in a sentence and still appear 'civil', but at the same time signal that they are not looking for a constructive dialogue but are more concerned with looking intellectually superior.

 

[Walter]

I hope you read the next line as well.

You can still jolt people without being uncivil. Telling people "no" is not uncivil. Telling people what they should do, is not uncivil. Calling people a liar is not uncivil (depending on context). Telling people they are wrong without praising them for something is not uncivil either.

I'm not sure whether you mean this in context of my reply to you, or my original post, but either way, I clearly did not make myself understood. I am absolutely not saying that a person needs to follow any of those rules to avoid being uncivil. My original post was specifically about a few posts I have seen lately where posters did things like calling another poster a liar with no solid basis in fact, or blatantly stating that other posters did not know what they were talking about (and being wrong), etc. The topic morphed into one where some people seemed to be talking more about general ideas on how other posters should be treated. I just wanted to share some thoughts about some guidelines that I have found personally useful. I'm not telling anyone that they have to follow any of them.

I agree with everything you said except calling someone a liar. While it may often be justified and true, I don't think it is ever civil. However, if someone IS telling lies, in many situations being civil is less important than making sure that their lies do not go accepted as fact, which may be what you meant.

 

[tomtoo]

If someone uses sodium as replacement for NaCl. ( Cooking salt). He has no clue and gives to me the intellectual impression of a pygmy rabbit,

 

[Walter]

Some things are subtle, for instance using pseudo-intellectual or out of place scientific terms unnecessarily in conversation can be a form of passive aggression.

As an example, no one uses the word Sodium as a replacement for salt in a normal conversation between individuals, so it can come across as intentionally patronizing or condescending when used. Someone may use that word casually in a sentence and still appear 'civil', but at the same time signal that they are not looking for a constructive dialogue but are more concerned with looking intellectually superior.

I hate passive aggressive behavior! I've been trying like heck to break one of my step kids of it. Even though I value civility and courtesy, if someone has a problem with something I have said or done I'd much rather they just told me to my face so we could resolve the issue, or if that was not possible, at least I would know where I stood with them.

As for the use of Sodium in the context above, I took it as an attempt to make it clear that he was being a smart-ass, but not in a mean way. Maybe he and I have similar senses of humor. (The poor guy.)

 

[Raindog123]

please take it with a healthy batch of Sodium

I am sure you did not mean that - as consuming any amount of alkali metal is rather dangerous!
[However, there are more inert compounds of it that are more suitable for consumption.]

the intellectual impression of a pygmy rabbit,

In the name of science, quantitatively, what is the Pygmy rabbit’s IQ?

 

[nc42acc]

Civility is declining in the declining civility thread.