part of the Forum Rules
(full document here: http://personalitycafe.com/announcements/540-personality-cafe-forum-rules.html)
(full document here: http://personalitycafe.com/announcements/540-personality-cafe-forum-rules.html)
Back in the INFP forum, it wasn't easy to locate even small instances of rules being broken. At first I considered the possibility that any such incidents would simply be quickly and quietly removed by moderators, but exploring the whole site further I discovered a thread in which moderators documented all observed cases of offense, pointing out exactly how the user in question broke the forum rules, and what was done to remedy the situation. All of those examples also included links to the original rule-breaking situations, which were left un-edited with the exception of removing offensive or private information or images. So there must be another explanation for the lack of any visible cases in the INFP forum.
Moderators documenting rule-breaking & sanctions
A possible reason may be related to the particular nature of the INPFP personality type, which in all probability is a major influence on the unofficial and unwritten rules that govern interaction in that particular forum. Rather than reacting in an openly critical or judgmental manner to posts and users that don't fit in or violate either written or unwritten rules, the most common responses in the INFP forum seem to involve either offering advice on how to correct the improper behavior, or simply ignoring it altogether. The possibility of members alerting moderators in private can't be ignored either, but with no cases sowing up in the "Infractions" thread, one could conclude that this forum simply doesn't attract many troublemakers, and the offenses that do show up are usually minor and easily ignored or dealt with internally. This certainly seems to make the forum a relatively peaceful place, but it also makes for three pretty unexciting examples of rule-breaking situations, none of which necessitated any moderator involvement. Even posts on topics that commonly attract conflict due to widely differing views, such as religion, simply didn't provide me with any juicy rule-breaking material.
1. rule #7: Post Legibly & rule #12: No Discriminatory Remarks
A user posts an emotional rant titled "I HATE having this personality!", detailing why being and INFP sucks terribly, CAPSLOCK (which violates rule #7) and swearing inclusive. Although he doesn't address another user directly, his broad negative statements about the personality type could definitely count as "typism". His post attracts quite a few comments of users being sympathetic to his plight, at most asking him nicely to calm down and relax, and letting him know he's not the only one feeling that way.
At least one commenter is critical of his stereotypical descriptions of the personality type, another replies with this image, and several disagree with his perceptions or point out why being an INFP can be pretty awesome, yet almost all these disapproving replies lack real unfriendliness, and certainly no one reported the original user for any rule violations. One of the commenters points out that despite the fact that the poster, as a newbie to the forum, in essence told everyone there that as INFPs they really sucked, he still received a lot of thoughtful and even welcoming responses, and that alone should tell him something. To me that also sums up the mentality and the positive of the community to deal with conflict and rule-breaking quite nicely… but of course there's always more than one side to the story.
emo-rant
comments
2. rule #6: Post with Quality in Mind
This rule essentially discourages off-topic posting. The Personality Café site includes a large number of forums specifically for different personality types and theories, as well as places for discussion completely unrelated to psychology or personalities, covering pretty much all the various ways users might want to express themselves, which makes off-topic posts even more unnecessary. The still pop up quite frequently though, and finding several instances in the INFP forum was not hard… I simply looked for all the posts with zero comments, and the large majority will be unrelated to any specific INFP issue. For example, a user posted a quote about frustration from another site, without explaining how this related to the community or INFPs.
Rather than pointing out that fact to the posters or making moderators aware so such content can be moved elsewhere, those posts are simply ignored and so vanish into history. Admittedly many of them sit somewhere on the borderline of being off-topic (unlike my next example), so there may not actually be a real need for moderators to deal with them, but their existence does illuminate a certain passivity and unwillingness to become involved on the side of the community.
This rule essentially discourages off-topic posting. The Personality Café site includes a large number of forums specifically for different personality types and theories, as well as places for discussion completely unrelated to psychology or personalities, covering pretty much all the various ways users might want to express themselves, which makes off-topic posts even more unnecessary. The still pop up quite frequently though, and finding several instances in the INFP forum was not hard… I simply looked for all the posts with zero comments, and the large majority will be unrelated to any specific INFP issue. For example, a user posted a quote about frustration from another site, without explaining how this related to the community or INFPs.
Rather than pointing out that fact to the posters or making moderators aware so such content can be moved elsewhere, those posts are simply ignored and so vanish into history. Admittedly many of them sit somewhere on the borderline of being off-topic (unlike my next example), so there may not actually be a real need for moderators to deal with them, but their existence does illuminate a certain passivity and unwillingness to become involved on the side of the community.
off-topic post with no replies
3. rule #6 again
This is the flipside of the previous situation, in that some of the most active threads in the INFP forums are actually wildly off-topic and even less related to the personality type or anything connected with it than the previous example. Threads such as "Post funny youtube videos" or "how was your day" tend to attract a large number of comments, yet if one goes strictly by the forum rules, they don't belong in the INFP forum at all, especially since Personality Café offers several forums for such off-topic conversations. But again, neither members (at least those who don't participate in that kind of thread) nor moderators take any steps to make sure the rules are enforced.
This is the flipside of the previous situation, in that some of the most active threads in the INFP forums are actually wildly off-topic and even less related to the personality type or anything connected with it than the previous example. Threads such as "Post funny youtube videos" or "how was your day" tend to attract a large number of comments, yet if one goes strictly by the forum rules, they don't belong in the INFP forum at all, especially since Personality Café offers several forums for such off-topic conversations. But again, neither members (at least those who don't participate in that kind of thread) nor moderators take any steps to make sure the rules are enforced.
off-topic post with tons of replies
Imagining myself as an administrator my first action would probably be to compile separate rules for the most active forums, keeping in mind the characteristics that make each community unique and in need of different guides of behavior. As Grimes pointed out, administrators (or designers) need to take users' needs seriously in order for communities to thrive, otherwise users may either ignore policies (does anyone even read forum rules, much less documents such as terms of service or privacy agreements?) or if that's no longer possible, leave for greener pastures. Maybe this is one reason why moderators allow off-topic threads, seeing that many users enjoy them. Still having a subset of rules specific to various communities might be helpful, especially if there was a way to involve members in the process of putting such a document together.
Sometimes ignoring potential troublemakers or not giving them the reaction they might be looking for (outrage, anger, etc) does seem like the right choice. In the first example the mostly positive reaction to the poster's rant certainly seemed to disarm him, and if he did post with the intention to troll (which I doubt) he would not have much ammunition to attack people who obviously were not fazed by the insults to their personality. In a much more extreme and serious shape this is how Dibbell describes the Something Awful founder dealing with threats and flames, yet in the case of online experiences leaking into real life there are definitely reasons to be cautious. As Kollock pointed out, there are various ways to sanction rule-breaking, from pointing out the rules to ignoring and making fun of the offender to banning them, and knowing the best way to react to any given situation depending on the community it takes place in is one of the major responsibilities of an administrator (even though many of those sanction can be applied by members without moderator involvement) A comment that's perfectly normal on Failblog would probably have INFP forum members up in arms (or determinedly ignoring). So being an administrator definitely requires more than just swinging the ban-hammer at every violation of the rules (and going through Personality Café's infraction documentation thread I noticed that while warnings were somewhat common, mostly for "inappropriate language" and "insulting other users", any further sanctions including bans seemed rare).
And while I didn't find an example of highly disruptive user behavior, visible or otherwise, in the INFP forum, I think Dr. Gazan made a very important point looking at such behavior from a different angle. It's easy to judge users that engage in behaviors that are destructive to themselves and the community, yet looking for ways to redirect such behavior is much more effective in the long run. Many of us wonder of anyone can get so involved, even addicted to any online community, but this is something that seems to become more and more common, with examples like virtual worlds such as Second Life, or even simple online games such as Farmville, environments that users spend enormous amount of time and oftentimes real money on. When members start deeply emotionally identifying with their online communities, administrators and designers will also have to re-think the ways that they can offer the best possible experience for all users, casual as well as highly involved.
Finally, here are my 5 unwritten rules for the INFP forum, some of which members clearly follow already, and a few that I believe would be useful for the community:
1. Approach all interactions, especially with new members, with an open mind.
2. If necessary, correct others' improper behavior rather than judging, criticizing, or ignoring them.
3. Practice peer oversight instead of involving moderators in rule-breaking situations.
4. Don't be silent or wait for some other person to deal with an issue... become involved!
5. To deal with deliberately annoying, complaining, or rude users: reply with pictures of cute furry animals with appropriate quotes.
Sometimes ignoring potential troublemakers or not giving them the reaction they might be looking for (outrage, anger, etc) does seem like the right choice. In the first example the mostly positive reaction to the poster's rant certainly seemed to disarm him, and if he did post with the intention to troll (which I doubt) he would not have much ammunition to attack people who obviously were not fazed by the insults to their personality. In a much more extreme and serious shape this is how Dibbell describes the Something Awful founder dealing with threats and flames, yet in the case of online experiences leaking into real life there are definitely reasons to be cautious. As Kollock pointed out, there are various ways to sanction rule-breaking, from pointing out the rules to ignoring and making fun of the offender to banning them, and knowing the best way to react to any given situation depending on the community it takes place in is one of the major responsibilities of an administrator (even though many of those sanction can be applied by members without moderator involvement) A comment that's perfectly normal on Failblog would probably have INFP forum members up in arms (or determinedly ignoring). So being an administrator definitely requires more than just swinging the ban-hammer at every violation of the rules (and going through Personality Café's infraction documentation thread I noticed that while warnings were somewhat common, mostly for "inappropriate language" and "insulting other users", any further sanctions including bans seemed rare).
And while I didn't find an example of highly disruptive user behavior, visible or otherwise, in the INFP forum, I think Dr. Gazan made a very important point looking at such behavior from a different angle. It's easy to judge users that engage in behaviors that are destructive to themselves and the community, yet looking for ways to redirect such behavior is much more effective in the long run. Many of us wonder of anyone can get so involved, even addicted to any online community, but this is something that seems to become more and more common, with examples like virtual worlds such as Second Life, or even simple online games such as Farmville, environments that users spend enormous amount of time and oftentimes real money on. When members start deeply emotionally identifying with their online communities, administrators and designers will also have to re-think the ways that they can offer the best possible experience for all users, casual as well as highly involved.
Finally, here are my 5 unwritten rules for the INFP forum, some of which members clearly follow already, and a few that I believe would be useful for the community:
1. Approach all interactions, especially with new members, with an open mind.
2. If necessary, correct others' improper behavior rather than judging, criticizing, or ignoring them.
3. Practice peer oversight instead of involving moderators in rule-breaking situations.
4. Don't be silent or wait for some other person to deal with an issue... become involved!
5. To deal with deliberately annoying, complaining, or rude users: reply with pictures of cute furry animals with appropriate quotes.
Interesting post! I think the almost Aikido-like approach to redirecting the energy of disruptive behavior somewhere else is a great thing to try when confronted by a troll.
ReplyDeleteYour idea of dealing with annoying, rude, or complaining users via... adorableness is something I will use in the future.
Good post!
Outstanding observations and examples; it is rare to see a ban/infraction log publicly available, because motivated users would use it to document claims of moderator inconsistency, bias, etc.. Privacy is an issue here as well, as some sites treat the moderator-user relationship as privileged communications, not to be shared.
ReplyDeleteYou touch on one of the core challenges of moderating online communities, which is letting the community decide the ways in which they want to interact. Off-topic posts often allow users to express themselves and give a flavor and life to the community that would be missing is everyone stayed on topic all the time. Adhering to the spirit, not the letter of the law seems to be the most concise way of defining this line, though lolcats work too...
Oh gosh the user in Example 1 sounds like such a jerk, but leave it to the Feelers to diffuse a tense situation. :) Without getting into steretypes about M-B types, I can imagine such a post getting more hostile reactions on another community.
ReplyDeleteI agree that on M-B sites I find very little harrassment and cases of trolling; it seems to happen only occasionally. I think your idea of ignoring it actually does work, or responding with a little bit of humor also seems very appropriate.
Very interesting that the moderator’s archive rule breaking cases and that this information is available to users. I think this could help users’ self-awareness of being careful what they post and not violating the rules in similar cases. Not doing so could eventually lead to a decrease in the quality of the community. In the second example, people posting off-topic issues, can they delete the post by themselves or should they ask moderators to delete it or move it to another forum? If users can delete their own posts, I totally agree with you that peer oversight is a better way of encouraging people to deal with mistakes and contribute more.
ReplyDelete> it wasn't easy to locate even small instances of rules being broken. At first I considered the possibility that any such incidents would simply be quickly and quietly removed by moderators.
ReplyDeleteI think I understand this situation. I had similar experience with a traveling and vacation OC. When I just started going through its forum, things looked very peaceful, questions were asked and answered, people were exchanging holiday blessings, and so on. After being on the OC for a while, I realized that inappropriate conversations were being removed in a daily bases, and most discussions related to the focus of the site were happy and peaceful. This is determined by the nature of this OC. When people are sharing their traveling experiences or preparing for vacations, they are generally in a pretty good mood.
A lack of offending posts may be the result of judicious moderation. While some websites simply lock offending posts which can be viewed at a later date, others outright delete them. I had trouble finding examples on my website because I know that anything blatantly offensive gets deleted.
ReplyDeleteThe rant about him disliking his personality seems somewhat disturbing. It feels as if he needs the help of a psychologist to discover exactly how he can change, because a personality is not set in stone; with enough effort and determination, it changes according to how you want it to be. I think it's amazing that people did show support for him, despite him essentially insulting everyone with the INFP personality type. The picture was amusing, although I suppose the original poster may or may not have thought so (I've always found clever cutesy pictures + text -- whose formal name I can't quite remember -- to be funny).