A safe, unsafe space
There was a comment on one of my posts today from someone who avoids confrontation here out of fear of retaliatory flags which is something I find worth having a talk about, at least from my experience. I haven't been flagged very much at all here (other than people I have flagged for plagiarism or nonsense) despite being pretty argumentative at times across many topics.
What I have found personally is that one thing Steem is very good at is holding discussions (sometimes arguments) but without it spilling into flags. This is especially true with the more senior and invested users. I can argue with bidbot operators about their business practices, make suggestions or criticise their various behaviours and they can do the same back but it doesn't have to resort to abuse. I am not saying they are my best friends but for the most part, there is mutual respect at the higher levels when it comes to arguments, especially those concerning the platform.
Of course, this all changes when things get personal and people attack the individuals themselves but, I don't really go there too often which means my arguments, even with the people involved are nothing personal. But, for many people they take criticism very personally even if it is justified or, not even pointed directly at them.
In the lower levels there are more likely users who do not understand much of the system and therefore do not understand the usage of flags well. They see them as something they can retaliate with. Retaliatory flags are stupid and serve no real purpose and those who are more heavily staked generally understand this. It does happen though, especially when there are personal vendettas and pride on the line or an image to uphold.
All in all though, argumentation is usually conducted well here and most people will either engage civilly or, walk away from the argument. There is no problem with walking away unless perhaps it is walking away to avoid answering questions. I guess even then it is better than resorting to ad hominem attacks to discredit someone.
In my opinion, argumentation is part of the road to building strong relationships through cooperation to solve problems facing both parties. This in turn is the way to also build strong communities as they are comfortable to tackle the challenges they face even if they happen to be in uncomfortable or taboo areas.
Strong communities don't shy away from conflict, they embrace it as a question to solve. There might not be a correct answer or, the correct answer might not be possible to implement immediately but, working at the problem will approach the correct answer. I think this is why at the higher levels there is less retaliation as people are generally doing and saying what they believe (right or wrong) is correct, at least by them.
If the people involved in the discussions come across as being genuine in their views without being unnecessarily aggressive, most people will accept the argument as a differing of opinions and take the 'agree to disagree' approach. There are some people I discuss things with regularly and still don't see eye to eye on much but, I can't expect everyone else to be right all the time ;)
It is good to recognize that this isn't the experience of all users here though and the less people understand the system, the more personally they seem to take arguments and criticism. As for flags, they definitely take those personally and I find those that take them the worst are the least emotionally stable. No surprise really as generally emotional instability comes with feelings of victimization and oppression.
Surprisingly, I find Steem a safe space to discuss topics as for me, the safe spaces that don't allow open discussion are the unsafe environments engineered to keep people separated and in eternal conflict. This political correctness, anti-bully mentality is what is creating an increasing amount of exactly what it claims to want to stop. The only way humans can really end the current conflicts is through discussion or extinction, with the latter solving all problems..
There is never going to be an end to arguments as we all have various views and positions and this is the same for Steem. The complexity is much too high, the incentives and desires so broad and the people with such a range of skills that no matter how good the code, humans will still be unable to agree on everything. It is because of the disagreement we tend to evolve and innovate though. Innovation is essentially someone saying, I have a better way than you.
So, the answer to a strong community isn't ending arguments, it is learning how to argue well enough that solutions are created instead of walls to defend what isn't working. Not an easy task but it is up to each individual to develop their skills to achieve this.
Taraz
[ a Steem original ]
There definitely are a few bad actors who maliciously downvote minnows who friend the "wrong" whale. Ive seen that personally.
I say what I say. I resteem and upvote what I like and consequences be damned but there are some whales with agendas that show it for sure.
yeah there are but they are a minority but often, the visible minority.
That's right. I really do believe Steemit is mostly a great place to post and participate, but we have our problems. Idiots who have a lot of steem power and "abuse it", whatever that subjectively means, are one of the things that are holding us back.
But I really believe if the people who want to see this place grow keep posting, talking and creating a space that invites visitors we are going to redesign this platform, more and more, into the place that we all want it to be.
Thanks @tarazkp
Do you think some of this is fallout from coming to Steemit from other social media websites e.g. facebook, twitter, etc.?
I feel like facebook and twitter have becoming hostile breeding grounds where people of differing opinions constantly flag each other. It seems unsurprising to me that this is the case for new Steemit users.
You sum things up really well in the last paragraph (restated here for emphasis):
"So, the answer to a strong community isn't ending arguments, it is learning how to argue well enough that solutions are created instead of walls to defend what isn't working. Not an easy task but it is up to each individual to develop their skills to achieve this."
Hopefully all the new users will continue to learn this so that steemit can remain a positive place that is almost a refuge from the hostility that is seen elsewhere online.
Thanks for the writing this!
Upvoted/resteemed
Perhaps it is the internet in general since it gives the ability to echo chamber easily so there is less criticism to deal with. When someone finally pushes back, they retaliate instead of building an argument. People are also thinner skinned and more entitled. They think freedom of speech means no critical response is allowed.
"Perhaps it is the internet in general since it gives the ability to echo chamber easily" - That's a good point as there are so many sites that allow full anonymity and no accountability.
"People are also thinner skinned and more entitled." - Agreed... anyone can look up the famous and wealthy and feel that the same level of opulence is deserved. When it isn't, it may translate to self image issues which could cause one to lash out. I'm no doctor but there have been a number of studies showing self-esteem issues related to internet/social media use.
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
there are many conflicts the internet fantasy creates and most people do not recognize the influence.
When I have the tie I try :)
I completely agree @tarazkp, and it's a matter of communication where people actually listen to someone else's point as opposed to only figuring out their next retaliatory argument.
There's a little something I like to call fair fighting; no personal attacks, no insults, look for a compromise, like you stated here, agree to disagree when you can't meet that compromise, no generalizations, no degrading language, and if you're angry, wait to comment the next day when you've had time to cool down :) Works the same with relationships in our real lives as well I think.
They say all is fair in love and war. Love I understand because love is unlimited. In war however, it is only because of the fear of losing. When it comes to understanding there is no loser, which means in a good argument, I can lose and still win because my understanding has grown.
Bingo! but you are preaching to the choir here :) Why can't everyone just get this though? What a nicer world this would be...if only.
Curated for #informationwar (by @openparadigm)
Relevance; A Real Safe Space For Ideas.
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 150+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call Pt 8
Ways you can help the @informationwar
Imagine that, information wars showing up on a discussion about flagging. There should be no use for flagging in information wars, it works against their whole objective yet they, like the people who they claim oppress others do exactly the same thing with the use of flags.
I am not a big believer of safe spaces for men...........but that is a discussion for another time. I find this post interesting because I have faced this issue here. I am not confrontational by nature, I actually try to do my best to avoid it, but sometimes that isn't an option. So when I did get into a confrontation despite my unwillingness I wasn't flagged but actually got upvoted. Some dudes are just that awesome :-)They not only know how to take a hit, they can actually be graceful about it.
Some of the best conversations that I have had here have arisen from debate rather than being agreeable (Although I will admit that I have tendency to nod along)
Indeed, and I do my best to upvote comments of arguments (not all deserve) to encourage the continuation.
Some of the biggest arguments I have had have created the best relationships. If we make it through starting from an argument, it means we can argue more as friends and perhaps solve some real issues.
Most of my highest-upvoted comments have been from times I thought I was being a jerk. I'm not sure that's really how we want it to go, but it is what it is.
I've upvoted some of your comments before I thought you were a jerk and some after I thought you were a jerk....I guess your a mixed bag, it really is what it is at the time I suppose.
I agree with this sentences. One that I notice lately is... some of the newbies maybe didn't know yet the meaning of spamming other content and yet once they start asking for upvote in one's comment box, their post are ignore eventhough they actually have a good writting of their own.
I took the initiative to reply their comment and gave a little bit of explanantion so that they won't fall into the 'flag zone'as I called it.
Sometimes, I think flagging without looking throughly become the cause of many abandoned account in this platform.
People are afraid to write eventhough steemit is actually a freewrite community that support good contents.(My opinion will be different for those who are taking this platform for granted)
I can't agree more with this one.
You have explain this part perfectly well.
My understanding in english is not so good and I don't quite understand the exact meaning of heavily staked...
but in my opinion, flag actually serve the purpose of protecting this community from those who do not appreciate other original content.
But me myself actually doesn't like the idea of flagging other content. I think it is better to leave them a comment of my thought and if they still didn't change then I will just ignore them and maybe someday they will have the initiative to write a better content.
I chose to ignore because by ignoring they will have to take a long way up and that could be the time needed for someone to truly u derstand this community litle by little.
Just a share of thought though
Hopefully none taken.
Heavily staked means 'large steem power holders'. Steem power (SP) is 'stake' (claim) on the pool. So, those who hold a lot of stake have more influence on how the pool is distributed. It also means they are heavily invested.
Yes, this is the case and what the flag is meant for. The people using it as an attack on a person don't use it well in my opinion.
Thank you for explaining this to me.
Yes I agree with you and I think we can call this kind of attitude of abusing too.
I think this kind of attitude may be one of the reason that can cause this community to collapse someday. I hope not.
Most of the big accounts, when they really want to hurt someone, do it by moving their witness vote. It's not that they're not doing it.
For those with witnesses yes and there are other ways to show displeasure but, it is still different to the on-chain arguments of users. When it comes to witnesses, an argument may actually be a deal breaker considering that the witness makes decisions for the platform.
I remember having two conversations here in the comment section of this blog on politics, religion and philosophy with one user whose views were radically different from mine. In the first of the debates we both upvoted each other's comments. In the second, that didn't happen. But I've always thought highly of that guy (I don't remember his username, unfortonately) because he tacitly agreed to monetize the debate for the benefit of both of us despite the radical difference in our views. There was never a sense of personal attack on his part despite him demonstrating blatant contempt of my views. I really respect the way he keeps people and the ideas they hold separate.
I apply that strategy myself with some. Usually because either I can see some of their viewpoint and/or I respect their right to view something differently then I do. If though I feel strongly that someone really has a warped sense of something I don't always, even at that sometimes I will just to see where we can go further on the discussion.
The people who actually want to work out what is what in this life argue well. Those who only want to push their views, do not as they are like religous zealots, blind to themselves.
We either seek knowledge or in our pride deny we have more to learn.
The way one argues always shows which type he is.
This user that I'm talking about does, in my opinion, have very deeply held convictions that, I believe, stem partly from analysis and partly from philosophical approach based on temperament (It is quite normal for people to have their politics to be informed by their temperament). He is not stupid by any means and debating someone like that always makes one dig a little deeper and often learn something. But I'm not buying his views. There are too many holes in them, in my opinion. But for all practical purposes there exists no such thing as a worldview without flaws or failure to cover important aspects of life, universe and everything.
This is why the discussion is so important as it closes some old holes so we can move on and find new flaws :)
I welcome disagreements, but the moment it goes ad hominem I clock out like a chuckee cheese employee when the buzzer goes off.
Discourse today has become for the most part full of "I got you moments" and ego stroking. So when I detect that's the intention of the person I'm having the disagreement with. I got no interest at all. I'm not going to learn, he/she is obviously not interested in perspective either.
And what do you know? I've never flagged for disagreements...
Generally when people resort to personal attacks they have either lost the argument or unable to think of why they should win.
The only times I flag for disagreement is of reward for me ;)
.....sometimes people just jump in feet first even though they know they are not going to win, the argument had already been lost in their view a long time ago.
I like to play Devil's Advocate so I don't mind this. Some people just like to double-down because they can't face losing.
I totally agree. I've had some great and epic conversation/debates. There are some people who are reasonable enough to have a conversation with.
I avoid those who just want to call names and act like anyone who disagrees is obviously wrong. There is no purpose in having those discussions. I love a thoughtful disagreement and it is rare that it doesn't change my perspective at least a little.
It is one of the best parts about the platform and it is a shame that so few atualy use the opportunity but instead say crap like:
"its really such nice post. yes true opinion its right have a good day"
At times it's so hard to win on a debate..it gets heated...