My two cents:
A good thread, which I think will periodically be revived as we continually get new members. This issue is never going to disappear completely.
I think most of the issues could be solved by courteous and helpful suggestions to adapt, and in some cases, correct behaviour of junior members. By behaviour, I mean the common issues of Poor Posting Protocol (P3)™
from our perspective.
So long as this site remains public, we will never completely stem this trend. Nor do I think any of us actually believe we will. However, we are equally as unlikely to reduce it to a level that fails to irritate some of us. That is a function of our military bearing (for those with military experience). We generally do not suffer fools gladly. But I reiterate – it is a public site. If we want to make it private, make it pay only. I guarantee you that will sort out the vast majority of our issues. We can hope that people who come here will have a certain set of values and maturity level – but we cannot “expect” it. For goodness sake – it is the INTERNET.
People fear power - understandably so. I don’t see much discord or angst when a regular member of this forum dog piles someone. In fact, usually a Mod steps in, exercises the appropriate power and shuts it down. I think the issue is when Mods dog pile. By that I mean, when a Mod is posting in a non-moderator capacity. It can be difficult for observers to separate the function, even when it is explicitly stated either in the post or in the tagline below it. Postings by Mods – even in non-mod capacities – carry a certain set of expectations. No way around it. Maybe their post wasn’t even an honest-to-goodness dog pile post, but owing to a lack of non-verbal and verbal cues, it potentially sets off the others and perhaps gives de-facto and implied permission. The Mods have tremendous power – ultimately, the power to ban someone from this site. That power, seemingly unchecked, causes people to get defensive, perhaps irrationally so, but that is, in my opinion, the result.
What we lack are the verbal and non-verbal cues that are critical to effective communication. I don’t think technology currently exists to overcome that. So, we the membership must adapt to that reality. Seeing someone’s age, facial expression and hearing their tone of voice when they ask me “We have a Navy???” will determine the nature of my response. A 10 year old will get a different response than the university student, who will get a different response than the new immigrant to Canada. I have friends in civilian occupations – doctors, scientists, etc – that are the recipients of what must certainly sound like dumb questions from me. They fill fascinating occupations that I couldn’t even begin to understand without the years of education and experience they possess. The military is sometimes viewed the same way. Perhaps even more so because we have the coolest toys, things that little boys dream about – tanks and ships and fighter jets and the like – things that most civilians only see in pictures. It is incumbent on us to realize this and deal with it.
The lack of non-verbal and verbal cues is also an issue when someone writes “use the search function” or some variation. Even adding the words “have you tried to” can come across as sarcastic and unhelpful. I can say that phrase half a dozen different ways – in sarcastic, helpful, caustic, indifferent, inquisitive or exhausted tones. Emoticons can help here, but are not always used in the manner they were originally intended – to add context. Often they are used to reiterate a tone that was already clear in the statement that preceded them. Internet communication requires effort on both the sender and the recipient. Effort by the sender to phrase things properly, so as to remove as much ambiguity as possible and effort by the recipient to realize that their first impression of the response might not be the right one. But effort requires just that – effort, and is measured in time and action, and not all of us, myself included, have the time or inclination to provide that effort every time we log on. This is, in my view, a role for mentors as I explain below.
The “We are Family” thread has obvious and excellent advice to new members:
• We can’t discuss that here, it is an Operational Security (OPSEC) issue
• Your question is poorly worded, but I think you mean [this], and therefore your answer is [this]
• Please don’t use MSN speak, it reflects poorly on the professional communications skills we prefer and encourage at Army.ca. For now, the information you are looking for can be found [here].
• Your answer can be found in [this] FAQ [here]
• Your question has been asked before; you should start your reading with [this thread].
• You can find answers to these questions using the [search page], try a search using [these terms]
• The best person on the forums to answer your particular question is [this person], try contacting him by PM or wait a few days for him to find the thread
• Sorry, but you can’t just join as a [sniper / JTF 2 / etc.], please start with the [Recruiting FAQ] and with [searches] on these terms ...
But wow – 7 of the 8 tips require “effort” on the part of us to direct the member to the correct info. The real and accepted limitations on our time have been raised throughout this thread.
Another issue I see is an inability to simply ignore something. Mods and mentors – and anyone else with correct info to add – should step in when incorrect or inaccurate info is posted. But I don’t think most of the dog piles are a result of that. They appear to be the result of stupid things being posted or being posted stupidly. I think most of these things – like the helicopter thread - are ultimately harmless in the big picture. Annoying, certainly. But harmful to our goals here? I am not so sure. If bandwidth is an issue, then delete the photos or the whole thread, send the guy a PM and briefly explain that. If there is a danger of someone taking away bad info, lock the thread. But if it just some user talking out of his a$$, well, it is a public forum – what did we expect? We don’t have Mods who are paid to be here and might thus be expected to spend 8 hours a day “working” on the site. And if we are too busy to police the thread, then we have to let some things be, some of the time.
I think a solution - I use that term loosely – is for the Mentors to step in. Again, none of the issues raised in this thread appear to have much, if anything to do with gross and egregious violations of the site guidelines. They are related to expected and desired protocols for this site. Some of those protocols are part of the guidelines, but violating them does not, in my opinion, pose a grave danger to the success of this site. As a mentor I have had a roughly 50% success rate in PMing some of our more notable members of late. The tone of their PMs is amazingly different than of the public post which caused some sort of issue. Not perfect tones, but different, in a good way. Well, 50% is better than 0%. I admit, I have been remiss in my mentor responsibilities of late – blame it on Staff College and pre-deployment preps. But I reiterate that I think these issues are a perfect example of the Mentor function and what it was designed to accomplish.
Routine Orders for the past 4 months indicate an increase in new users of approximately 400 per month – sustained. We receive around 100 000 unique visitors per month and sustain about 2000 active users each month. I don’t know how that membership stacks up against other comparable websites, regardless of whether they deal with military issues or not. I do think they are statistics that represent a successful website on the whole. In addition, I think – and I have no data to back this up – but it appears to me that our website has a very active and involved membership. Perhaps more than most? I dunno. What I am getting at it is that people feel a sense of attachment here that they may not feel to the other forums they are involved in. Which is perhaps why the issues that are raised in threads like this are such sensitive topics – because we care.
So, I think this website is and will continue to be a resounding success on the whole. We continue to grow and we clearly remain relevant. We can always do better, but to do so requires a constant effort that we simply cannot sustain all the time, which we realize and accept. We appear to have reluctance to accept that, regardless of how often or prominently we post the terms of use, there will always be transgressions. Simple Command thought process: is this a problem? If yes, is it my problem? If not, then whose? Let
that person resolve it, be it a Mod or Mentor or SME. We might do better to take a breath and ask ourselves if this is something that requires me to post a reply. If it does, what is the most effective way to resolve the issue that concerns me? Is my post really going to resolve the issue or am I posting simply to hear myself speak, and perhaps try to be funny? Is my post going to encourage poor behaviour on the part of the rest of the membership – either because of my status or seniority or posting history?
Again, my two cents. If you read this far, thanks for listening.
MARS
Edited for grammar and clarity
rly:
