Simpler solution: repeal Section 230. Social media thrives on strife and harassment (or "engagement"). It is fundamentally broken.
De-escalating social media conflict
31–40 of 350 posts
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#32Right now it feels like more of a way for attackers to cheaply drive engagement and get likes. I think we need a broader cultural shift of making it not cool to attack someone without an intent to genuinely educate.
Also, at the same time, fundamentally, people use social media for different reasons and you can't necessarily dictate what people should do
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#33I've always had a policy of promptly admitting when I'm wrong. It worked great, when I worked at a Japanese company. The Japanese respected it. The Americans, on the other hand, looked at it as a sign of weakness, and tended to "go for the jugular" (Carpe Jugulum) . I think that explains why so many folks "double down," when asked to correct statements. Also, lawyers. A standard piece of advice at American accident s…
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#34In social media people are signalling they don't like your behavior but they don't actually care about you individually.
If Twitter really wants to fix this they should make it against the rules to screenshot or share deleted tweets. It will be much harder to dogpile after someone deletes their tweet if people can't just keep resharing the offending tweet for likes.
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#35Truth seekers will simply update the coefficients they have for you. It's just information interchange. If you don't issue errata, your coefficients will just drop.
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#36I'm very much convinced that one should never admit a mistake on social media after a dogpile. I think there is too much bad faith for a Mea Culpa option to even work. Apologies work well in smaller circles because an apology implies a correction in behavior that's necessary for those around you to trust you again. In social media people are signalling they don't like your behavior but they don't actually care about…
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#37I've always had a policy of promptly admitting when I'm wrong. It worked great, when I worked at a Japanese company. The Japanese respected it. The Americans, on the other hand, looked at it as a sign of weakness, and tended to "go for the jugular" (Carpe Jugulum) . I think that explains why so many folks "double down," when asked to correct statements. Also, lawyers. A standard piece of advice at American accident s…
Unless it's followed by "that you're an idiot" ;)
Joking aside, I think in American culture it's often more important to say "I did $x badly" than "I'm sorry about $x". I feel like many American's (especially in white collar work) assume a certain cut throat mentality and don't believe that you are actually sorry, but they do agree you fucked up. Generally when talking to people you want them to be mentally agreeing with you and not thinking that you're lying to them.
And the car crash thing is just litigation, it doesn't apply to 99% of screwups.
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#38I've always had a policy of promptly admitting when I'm wrong. It worked great, when I worked at a Japanese company. The Japanese respected it. The Americans, on the other hand, looked at it as a sign of weakness, and tended to "go for the jugular" (Carpe Jugulum) . I think that explains why so many folks "double down," when asked to correct statements. Also, lawyers. A standard piece of advice at American accident s…
> is "NEVER say "I'm sorry!"" Unless it's followed by "that you're an idiot" ;) Joking aside, I think in American culture it's often more important to say "I did $x badly" than "I'm sorry about $x". I feel like many American's (especially in white collar work) assume a certain cut throat mentality and don't believe that you are actually sorry, but they do agree you fucked up. Generally when talking to people you want…
Empty apologies are empty. They need to know that the issue is "owned," regretted, a solution/amend is offered, and it won't happen again. Not a fun time.
Americans, in my experience, don't care. They just find satisfaction in being a bit "better than" I am, and their reactions are purely emotion-driven. They usually would try to pile extra transgressions (that I was not responsible for) onto my apology. Lots of shaming involved.
It was annoying, but I got used to not reacting. Since most of my bosses were Japanese (not really a fun bunch to work for), I didn't need to face the music with Americans too often.
I will say that the end result was that I was given an awesome level of trust and respect. It was the kind very few foreigners ever have.
Re: De-escalating social media conflict
#39I'm very much convinced that one should never admit a mistake on social media after a dogpile. I think there is too much bad faith for a Mea Culpa option to even work. Apologies work well in smaller circles because an apology implies a correction in behavior that's necessary for those around you to trust you again. In social media people are signalling they don't like your behavior but they don't actually care about…