The New Wild West: How we act in online communities
Recently an event occurred which got me to thinking about a number of things. Two days ago I got into an argument with my friend Thomas Hawk (one of the best photographers I’ve ever had the pleasure to see the work of) over a bit of commotion that happened on Flickr. The issue was the deletion of his friend Pierre Honeyman’s account being deleted for being abusive to the staff. Now I’m not going to go into all the details of why they deleted his account or who was right and who was wrong, mostly because I already had it out with Thomas on both FriendFeed and Digg about the subject, and that’s not what this post is about. In arguing with Thomas I got to thinking about how people act in online communities, and how different that is from the behavioral expectations in face to face experiences.
There are several great things that are exclusive to an online community as opposed to a face to face community, the greatest of which being that cliques are actually a good thing. You add or follow or subscribe (whatever they call it where you hang out online) to whomever you like and interact with only those people. Through this model each individual can build their own customized view of the community at large, making for a happier populace who only hears the voices they want to. You can add and subtract people at will, meaning if you want to sample a person’s offerings and decide its not for you, that’s ok too. This makes everyone much happier, as the ‘noise’ that often occurs in online communities is greatly reduced. This leads me to the point of this paragraph, which is:
Blocks aren’t bad.
Whether getting blocked or blocking someone else, one of the greatest advantages of participating in an online community is the block feature, or the ability to block out any of those participants who you’ve decided don’t have a place in your bubble. Its no big deal, it just means that you and that particular person just weren’t made for each other. In face to face communities everyone deals with everyone else, like it or not. When you go to your local Barnes and Noble or Starbucks (I assume people still go there) and have a seat to enjoy some lively political conversation with your friends there is no way to turn off the annoying lady who is really certain the person she is with is so deaf that she needs to talk about her last doctor’s visit in the loudest voice she can muster. In the same vein there is no way to stop the guy that decides you and your friends could benefit so much from his opinion that he just has to share it with you. Now some people might go in for this sort of thing, I don’t, and that’s why I enjoy online communities more. If I am having an issue with a person where their noise is annoying me or they are constantly butting into my conversations adding nothing and only being inflammatory (trolling) I just set the block and move on. This doesn’t mean the person who has been blocked is bad, it simply means that we don’t get along. In order for the block feature to be used to it’s full advantage it has to be completely ok to block as well as to be blocked. Flickr are you listening? Any community that would delete a user’s account for having too many blocks renders this valuable tool completely impotent and the entire community is the worse for it.
Another great thing about online communities is that there is always someone somewhere who wants to talk about the same thing you do. There are so few times in life I find someone face to face who wants to discuss the finer points of Nietzsche, however I can always find someone online. The problem comes when too many subjects interweave themselves into my community, then it loses its identity in my mind. This turns my community into the Wal-Mart of interesting subjects, where I’m getting the cheap watered down version of every conversation I want to be a part of. A solution which I have found to work beautifully is the ‘lists’ feature in FriendFeed. I can keep all of the subscriptions I want to, and separate them out so I can take full advantage of each person’s main offering in an arena that complements it by placing them side by side with others who generally talk about the same thing. Any community developers out there looking for great features, this is it.
Well I’m already halfway into this post and I have yet to explain my title. Anyone who has seen even one episode of Deadwood can attest to the extreme level of profanity that can be strung together in one sentence. Similarly, anyone who has had the misfortune to peruse some of the more tasteless YouTube comments knows that the kind of profanity used in the lawless time known as the Wild West has carried over into online communities. Now this isn’t the case for most people participating in online communities, but as usual a few foul mouthed denizens can ruin things for everyone, especially if a community has already made it so that the block feature is a bad thing. Some people don’t mind the uncouth language and rampant profanity, and to be honest it doesn’t really bother me all that much, but others who don’t want to see or hear that sort of thing shouldn’t have to. This means that if you want to be profane prepare to be blocked, and don’t take it as a bad thing. They just aren’t into you. This, however, cannot be carried over to members of the staff, whom should always be treated in the highest respected position; the host of the community you want to be a part of. I don’t care who you are or how well loved in the community you have become, in my humble opinion the first time you are abusive towards a staff member your account should be deleted. Period.
When I was still a wee one cutting my teeth on the internet in place like IRC we revered moderators and ops as demigods. Those who had helped to build the community we valued or those who were so valued by their contributions that they were granted admin access themselves were seen as leaders of the community. The latter group was always my favorite because I aspired to be like them, to give something so great to the community I valued that they felt the need to reward me with such an honor. Those days seem long gone, as evidenced by Pierre Honeyman’s less than subtle departure from Flickr. This is something that needs to come back in a big way, and we as users need to be the ones to spearhead that. We need to start valuing the caretakers of our communities again, and make sure they receive the proper level of respect their position warrants. I’m not saying you can’t disagree or bring those disagreements to light, what I am saying is that if you choose to do so in a manner that is abusive or disrespectful I hope your account gets deleted as soon as they have read what you had to say. Staff doesn’t get the ability to block users, they aren’t that lucky.
Community managers, the burden of acting respectfully towards your staff doesn’t lie completely in the hands of community members. Your community needs to have a clear Terms of Service that states in no uncertain terms that this type of activity will not be tolerated in any way, and you need to stick with that axiom from day one with zero tolerance. Any deviation from this only invites more of the same. Again, I want to make clear I don’t mean the people who disagree with you or your rules, I mean the people who choose to be outright abusive in communicating with you. Don’t make it so no one can disagree, that’s the fastest way to getting a stale and unused community. Make it so that all ideas are tolerated in an open atmosphere with the 900lb gorilla in the room being the Terms of Service. Teddy Roosevelt said "Walk softly and carry a big stick", and this phrase applies to all community managers. Walk softly, making it so that any disagreements can be brought to you without fear of repercussion, and carry a big stick, making it known how those disagreements need to be brought to your staff and never deviating from that. This means you always take the high road too, the instant one of your staff is abusive to a community member that trust is broken and all the work you’ve done to foster a community of tolerance is broken as well. Make it fair across the board; if a staff member is abusive either reassign them to a non customer facing position or let them go. These staff members aren’t doing you any favors anyway, they are destroying your community.
In closing, as long as everyone decides to act with maturity about situations that might occur in your community, you shouldn’t need to exercise these rules all that often anyway, which is what being completely clear about what will happen to abusive members will foster. Also, Pierre, I had a chance to see some of your work and I must say I am impressed. I wish you luck and hope you continue to post photos, whether under your new Flickr account or over on Zoomr with Thomas. I hope that you’ve also learned that being abusive in your community only hurts you and the community you were a part of.
On FriendFeed, this post was liked by 1 person and commented on 1 time hide