It is the delivery or style of the Gillmor Gang that creates such bitterness not the content. I’m glad Steve seems to be realizing that the style of the discussion on the show could get in the way of and overshadow the content.

People online will be mean because they can hide behind anonymity. But it there it will be harder for them to do so if the public personalities online don’t give them an easy excuse to be hateful by having harsh delivery and/or content.

Steve was a catalyst! A catalyst is:
- something that causes activity between two or more persons or forces without itself being affected, or
- a person whose talk, enthusiasm, or energy causes others to be more friendly, enthusiastic, or energetic
Source: Dictionary.com

I miss, first and foremost, the Gillmor Gang, but just importantly Steve, without whom it would not have been worth listening to.

I am sorry that the ferment of debate seems to have destroyed a great asset for those listened.

John

Yes, I have been wounded by the words of others, but upon reflection I realized that the wounds were really self-inflected.

My deepest condolences to you and your family in this time of personal loss.

Peace,

Rob:-]

Mike just keep on what you do, but think about how you say stuff, not just what you say.
Your post raised an important question, but in a way that infuriated a good deal of a big community.

When you use the metaphor of syphilis to make a point about a community gathering spot that many feel passionate about, it seems to me that you do so with the sole intention of raising a WTF response.

When you do so and you have one of the largest geek followings on the Internet, it follows that some people are going to react with irritation and anger that you would wield your power (or perceived power) in a negative way, and they respond negatively.

When you express strong opinions, there’s a strong response.

Note: I am not justifying any tone, nor am I making excuses for those who react with cruel, threatening, or intimidating words. At the same time, I think it’s a little bit silly to give them any power at all.

Your options with regard to mobs are to: a)moderate discussions within your control (a la Friendfeed, Twitter, Facebook); b) moderate your tone or consider how your words will be received and either care or not care; or c) continue to rant about the lack of manners on the web and maybe it will change, though I find people change when they’re led toward change, particularly positive change.

With regard to the Leo thing, he lost the most credibility of anyone. Oh sure, his fans cheered his temper tantrum, but anyone with half a brain knew that it was out of proportion to what was said and that by losing his temper on a self-proclaimed family friendly network and then blaming it on the culture of the Gillmor Gang, he was passing responsibility off to everyone but himself, giving permission for the bashing to continue instead of end. While the two of you may have patched it up, there wasn’t much leadership toward patching the wellspring of vitriol that was unleashed in the community.

Your struggle isn’t new. You use strong imagery to evoke strong reactions. Don’t be surprised when you get them.

I suspect part of the problem feeding this behavior online is the persistent nature of the communication. In real life when tempers flare and words are exchanged, we quickly focus on the fact that we are upset and allow the memory of what specifically was said to fade into the background. Once the emotional response subsides, the memory is already fuzzy.

With text, you don’t forget what was said. You re-read it, possibly over and over. The emotional response is triggered again and again, building upon itself and being amplified. This can happen in real life if one obsesses over slights or insults, but the nature of social media particularly encourages such obsession.

Agree, Edward. Not only that, vituperation has gone unchecked for so long that people see it as the very nature of the internet. That’s going to be hard to change, but it’s possible through a mix of technological and den mother countermeasures.

So, can we raise the bar for online behaviour to the level currently present offline, and can we make people treat strangers better in-general both offline and on? In the latter, I think we have always and will continue to make glacial progress. In the former, I think we can do a lot better. Aside from just being careful to always treat people online the same way we would offline (not slipping into the “it’s only the Internet – harden up” mentality), I think it’s important, particularly for online community leaders, to be willing to act against any individual involved in nasty behaviour that would be unacceptable offline. It might not be comfortable confronting and potentially blocking people from FriendFeed, Twitter etc., but I think the “do nothing” approach is going to work out a lot worse for everyone.

I just wanted to say I will miss the Gillmor Gang. It was always my top priority podcast.

-Jeff

It is time to put the past in the past. Let’s move on.

“With the past, I have nothing to do; nor with the future. I live now.”

Ralph Waldo Emerson.