Respectful Discourse
Is it possible to have a passionate disagreement respectfully in any medium? This is not a post like the last one where I just say no. Some forms of communication are more difficult than others. Face to face it is easier to have a respectful debate than it is online, and debating online in public is even more difficult. Not only do you have the lack of body language and vocal tone, but a subtle gang mentality can come into play as can "losing face", "public humiliation", and the peanut gallery of sycophants can make a normally rational person behave in ways they usually would avoid.
Here are some loose suggestions to try when you are attempting to have an online discussion with the main goal of exploring a point of mutual interest. There are some cases where the topic isn't the point, such as a display of ego or an attempt to discredit or silence another. In those cases respectful discourse is unlikely and these suggestions won't help much.
Content
In respectful disagreement personal attacks are not acceptable in most circles. Avoiding cursing, name calling, and threats is usually better for the conversation. It can have legal implications to do otherwise in extreme cases! All repercussions aside, anger trumps logic. If you or those you wish to communicate with are too filled with anger even the best debate will be wasted.
A few more subtle types of content that may undermine your message are using CAPS which is yelling online to most people, or using terms of oneupmanship, like "actually", "whatever", "regardless". Sarcasm is risky and if a topic is heated, it may cost you a joke, but it is worth the price if you are seen as a bully.
Namedropping is also a weak form of content to most of us. "Well it was good enough for Harvard!", or "It's not Rocket Science." "Cem Kaner once thought my idea was brilliant, so who are you?"
So, in addition to this "let's be nice" stuff, how about not being a total wuss. If you are asked an on topic question, quit whining about your feelings and answer it. If you get feedback that you don't like, consider it and respond how best works. How you respond to critics is part of what defines you. Those who decline all character defining moments become weaker over time. More than that, they become dull and complacent. Being boring is a far worse crime than being a jerk. Think about that for a moment before sending me scathing comments (which I will consider respectfully and respond to when calm).
Most importantly, be on topic and insist on bringing the conversation back to the topic if respectful discourse is your intent. Your conversation be more likely to be productive, but as an added bonus others can follow it and find it again. They can even contribute their own thoughts.
One last thought on content, be aware of what is shared in confidence and do not share in public what was meant just for you. When in doubt, ask first before going public with what someone said or did. It is always possible to share something more broadly later, but going to other direction isn't possible, as many regretful starlets have found out in recent years. It is indeed an awful feeling to have overshared in your enthusiasm only to find out you breeched the trust of someone who's respect mattered to you. I speak from recent experience on this. I don't mean a wardrobe malfunction or anything, but I shared something in email earlier than I should have about a conference. I was able to make amends, but still, check first when in doubt if trust is on the line.
Pace
When having a face to face conversation, unless you are on the Jerry Springer show, generally there is turn based discussion. Listening is a rare and underrated skill in all formats, but in any online format, all bets are off! You can't even count on turns. In fact, unless you block another person there is literally no way to forbid them from responding, and even then they can publically say whatever they like. It may seem rude at first when you are trying to answer a question that someone asked to get 3 followup questions before you can respond, but as the reader it can help to simply assume good intent, read all of the questions as one lump question, and answer them all at one time.
As the writer, try to wait for an answer if you ask a question, and also when possible, if a person tells you that they aren't finished, for example by typing 1/2, or - at the end of a tweet or IM, wait for the second part before responding. This shows that you are listening and reading what they are saying rather than talking "at" them.
Even if you disagree with most of what they are saying, if you can find some common ground and rather than simply restating your point, respond to some of the points they make, the conversation will be more productive for both sides.
It should be perfectly acceptable to take a break, or even to think further on something so long as you let the other person know. The key here is to tell the person. Obviously debate isn't the only thing in our life, so if you need to go to dinner, get some rest, or even just think more on what you've learned, so long as you let the other person know when you plan to answer their question, it should be fine to take a break. In fact, if you are getting too emotional to have a productive conversation, I'd recommend taking a 10 minute walk and just let the other person know so they aren't left hanging.
Purpose
Lastly, if your debate has gone off track, it is acceptable to ask what the purpose of the conversation is. If you don't remember, maybe it's time to end the discussion. While being wrong on the internet is a little bit annoying, being boring is far less forgivable. Please at least meet the bottom line of having a point, or opt for silence. I know it may be too much to ask, but I'll try my best to ask nicely. Please kindly have a purpose and a point you care about. If you don't care enough to hear the answer, don't ask the question.
Other People
It is hardly a fair fight when many people gang up on one, but let's face it, that is the more common dynamic online than a one on one spar or debate. It's a full out battle royale between many people and once again our best intentions to keep the debate productive can easily devolve into name calling and childish lunchroom behavior, like shunning, defriending, threats, and name calling. I urge you to consider this aspect and wait 24 hours before defriending, escalating, flouncing (this is where you leave a forum with a petty note about why), or blocking anyone. If you rationally decide to take those actions, fine, perfectly normal. If you are doing so in the heat of debate, think about what you are saying. You are saying that you can't keep it productive and it has become personal.
Will this even matter?
Even if you are the only person following any rules of engagement, you can walk away proud of your decisions and having done no harm to the respectful discourse on the topic, in fact, you've done all that you can to ensure lively discussion can flourish even in public online forums.
Here are some loose suggestions to try when you are attempting to have an online discussion with the main goal of exploring a point of mutual interest. There are some cases where the topic isn't the point, such as a display of ego or an attempt to discredit or silence another. In those cases respectful discourse is unlikely and these suggestions won't help much.
Content
In respectful disagreement personal attacks are not acceptable in most circles. Avoiding cursing, name calling, and threats is usually better for the conversation. It can have legal implications to do otherwise in extreme cases! All repercussions aside, anger trumps logic. If you or those you wish to communicate with are too filled with anger even the best debate will be wasted.
A few more subtle types of content that may undermine your message are using CAPS which is yelling online to most people, or using terms of oneupmanship, like "actually", "whatever", "regardless". Sarcasm is risky and if a topic is heated, it may cost you a joke, but it is worth the price if you are seen as a bully.
Namedropping is also a weak form of content to most of us. "Well it was good enough for Harvard!", or "It's not Rocket Science." "Cem Kaner once thought my idea was brilliant, so who are you?"
So, in addition to this "let's be nice" stuff, how about not being a total wuss. If you are asked an on topic question, quit whining about your feelings and answer it. If you get feedback that you don't like, consider it and respond how best works. How you respond to critics is part of what defines you. Those who decline all character defining moments become weaker over time. More than that, they become dull and complacent. Being boring is a far worse crime than being a jerk. Think about that for a moment before sending me scathing comments (which I will consider respectfully and respond to when calm).
Most importantly, be on topic and insist on bringing the conversation back to the topic if respectful discourse is your intent. Your conversation be more likely to be productive, but as an added bonus others can follow it and find it again. They can even contribute their own thoughts.
One last thought on content, be aware of what is shared in confidence and do not share in public what was meant just for you. When in doubt, ask first before going public with what someone said or did. It is always possible to share something more broadly later, but going to other direction isn't possible, as many regretful starlets have found out in recent years. It is indeed an awful feeling to have overshared in your enthusiasm only to find out you breeched the trust of someone who's respect mattered to you. I speak from recent experience on this. I don't mean a wardrobe malfunction or anything, but I shared something in email earlier than I should have about a conference. I was able to make amends, but still, check first when in doubt if trust is on the line.
Pace
When having a face to face conversation, unless you are on the Jerry Springer show, generally there is turn based discussion. Listening is a rare and underrated skill in all formats, but in any online format, all bets are off! You can't even count on turns. In fact, unless you block another person there is literally no way to forbid them from responding, and even then they can publically say whatever they like. It may seem rude at first when you are trying to answer a question that someone asked to get 3 followup questions before you can respond, but as the reader it can help to simply assume good intent, read all of the questions as one lump question, and answer them all at one time.
As the writer, try to wait for an answer if you ask a question, and also when possible, if a person tells you that they aren't finished, for example by typing 1/2, or - at the end of a tweet or IM, wait for the second part before responding. This shows that you are listening and reading what they are saying rather than talking "at" them.
Even if you disagree with most of what they are saying, if you can find some common ground and rather than simply restating your point, respond to some of the points they make, the conversation will be more productive for both sides.
It should be perfectly acceptable to take a break, or even to think further on something so long as you let the other person know. The key here is to tell the person. Obviously debate isn't the only thing in our life, so if you need to go to dinner, get some rest, or even just think more on what you've learned, so long as you let the other person know when you plan to answer their question, it should be fine to take a break. In fact, if you are getting too emotional to have a productive conversation, I'd recommend taking a 10 minute walk and just let the other person know so they aren't left hanging.
Purpose
Lastly, if your debate has gone off track, it is acceptable to ask what the purpose of the conversation is. If you don't remember, maybe it's time to end the discussion. While being wrong on the internet is a little bit annoying, being boring is far less forgivable. Please at least meet the bottom line of having a point, or opt for silence. I know it may be too much to ask, but I'll try my best to ask nicely. Please kindly have a purpose and a point you care about. If you don't care enough to hear the answer, don't ask the question.
Other People
It is hardly a fair fight when many people gang up on one, but let's face it, that is the more common dynamic online than a one on one spar or debate. It's a full out battle royale between many people and once again our best intentions to keep the debate productive can easily devolve into name calling and childish lunchroom behavior, like shunning, defriending, threats, and name calling. I urge you to consider this aspect and wait 24 hours before defriending, escalating, flouncing (this is where you leave a forum with a petty note about why), or blocking anyone. If you rationally decide to take those actions, fine, perfectly normal. If you are doing so in the heat of debate, think about what you are saying. You are saying that you can't keep it productive and it has become personal.
Will this even matter?
Even if you are the only person following any rules of engagement, you can walk away proud of your decisions and having done no harm to the respectful discourse on the topic, in fact, you've done all that you can to ensure lively discussion can flourish even in public online forums.
Posted by Testy Redhead at 23 Dec 2009 
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: words career online questions community manners testing debate social media
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: words career online questions community manners testing debate social media
I want to understand better what you are saying and what you are implying. This issue is important.
My big questions are, why does this matter? And where does this suggested protocol come from? I would like to see you address these things.
Compared to most people, I bet I do a lot of arguing online. Sometimes I flip the bozo bit. I have blocked people. I have unfollowed people. Sometimes it gets personal. I have made personal attacks on people whom I felt had earned the attack, because I think personal honor and responsibility matters. I think we should not be allowed to hide behind the concept that saying something reckless, abusive or dangerous should not be held against us personally as well as professionally.
I believe arguing is essential to the development of our craft, and that tolerance of determined incompetence is one of the things holding back our craft and contributing to the crisis of technology quality in the world. Therefore, I'm not very tolerant of it. If that makes me an unpleasant person to some people, I accept that.
I would like advice on how to communicate better, especially to people who aren't like me (such as you). For that advice to be helpful to me, it must be specific (e.g. Say X instead of Y) and it must not promote inauthenticity.
A few questions. These are serious questions, not rhetorical ones:
- What exactly is name dropping? What exactly is wrong with aligning oneself with the views of someone better known? "I consider myself a skeptic in the mold of Pyrrho" does include the name of a famous skeptic, but that is not just name dropping. It's real content.
- What exactly is wrong with using words like "regardless?" I don't see that as one-upmanship. I see that as using words of the English language to communicate.
- Why advise us not to use capital letters? Why not instead advise people not to lose their shit when THEY see capitals?
What you have written represents your feelings. And you are sharing those feelings with readers of your blog. That is fair. What would help me appreciate them better is if you couched this more explicitly as your feelings, rather than as common sense or otherwise well established rules of online discourse.
Reply to this
This blog isn't about that, but I have my own version of it that I'm sure is less extreme than yours. I asked Jon to write about why it is important because I really want to know. Why do you think it still matters? There have been heated debates in our community for decades and I don't see them helping much yet. If they have, can you show me? I may be missing it. I understand the value in pushing yourself past fear and assumption for growth. I see the value of pushing others a bit (but not so far they quit), but I don't see the value of disrespect or pushing past that. I don't think it works. I am being sincere that I don't get it.
I'm going to answer your questions in a another blog so I can work on them.
So, one question answer here-I suggest avoiding yelling and capitol letters because the reaction to them is emotional. It's far easier to prevent unintended emotion than to feel less in reaction. I'm saying I can't help change human nature, and that isn't specific to testing. Many people dislike yelling. Not everyone, but many. If they know it to be unsafe the fear is too deep for reason to reach. I am glad it is safe for you to be around yelling, but it isn't for many of us. It has bad associations. I do my best to read anyways, but if you understand why it is difficult maybe you can see why I bring it up as something easy to avoid for a higher purpose? Can you think of a way to convince people who feel unsafe around yelling to stay rational? I couldn't.
I'm going to work on a followup soon!
Hope you and your family enjoy Christmas. I will rephrase this to make it more specific because it isn't a common sense guide for all times. It is a means to an end. My opinion on what will keep conversations productive and respectful when that is the true purpose.
Reply to this
There are a few major differences in belief we are hitting here. I don't see the tolerance of incompetence as our main threat, because I don't think testers do tolerate incompetence. The problem is we don't have the power to do anything about it. The problem in my view is that we have not done an adequate job of communicating why good testers are worth the money to this business, and that is why less ethical people who are willing to lie and better at explaining why we are not worth the expense are winning. Our explanations seem flimsy and their metrics and charts seem attractive when tempted with supposed savings. Good testers are not good salesmen right now, and that is more of a problem then incompetence.
If I could say that I think this is just my opinion, I would, but what I mean to say with this blog is not that you should follow these rules, because I don't think that you should. I think that if your key purpose IS respectful discourse and you want to intentionally keep it respectful, that it is far more likely to happen this way than any other way. If it were just my feelings, I'd already be over it and I wouldn't have written this blog. I'm a really passionate person, but the good thing is that I move on quickly and am forgiving. So, basically, you can make me cry on Monday, but Tuesday I'm not pissed and I'm ready to talk about something else. That's life as a redhead I think. What I am trying to say is that some of these are flat out triggers for many groups of people and they will stop reading, opt out, or consider you a bully even when it isn't intended.
Jon said that there is merit in disrespectful discourse and I agree that there can be (not that there always is). I do things that scare me and that hurt on purpose to grow.1/2
Reply to this