Whether or not she meant it, I had just hoped she'd go away and not return.

Yeah, see, I don't think this is the idea we want to get across with new posters.

To me it seemed that the whole kerfuffle started over the word "aptitude". As LJ noted, Beej had pasted the screed from VVAW. The "aptitude test" was the VVAW writer's attempt to put the screed in a "humorous" frame. Beej simply posted the screed verbatim, without giving a second thought to how the word "aptitude" could be interpreted, and certainly didn't appear to intend for it to be taken the way it was.

My back went up on the "quiz" and then in two subsequent posts.

Her first subsequent post reads like a sincere apology to me. Am I missing something?

But, being a strong believer in signs. This will be me signing off. God bless you all.

This bothered me. (Oh no! Come back!)

And then the following apology seemed to be more of an education on how to properly communicate.

But these are my "back up" issues. She's hitting them all with a sledgehammer, and so, I mostly ignored. Mostly. I scroll past, and often don't respond to, people who get my back up on a regular basis. It's not really their fault, I just protect the easily bruised areas and move on. Me me me me me.

Which this isn't about.

Also? I feel like I'm talking about her behind her back, and I wish she were here.

Poked my head into the Minearverse (Thanks, Nilly), and I have to say, I don't see a whole lot of difference in the way people responded to TypoBoy and to Beej. The only difference is that she's newer. So do we modify our behavior around newbies, or do we toss them in and let them sink or swim?

(That's an honest question, by the way, and shouldn't sound quite as ruthless as it does.)

Many, many valued posters started here with more than a few trips into the guacamole dip.

Yeah, but you don't react to tripping in the dip by telling the rest of the people at the party they shouldn't have had the dip in the way in the first place, which is what the apology of sorts felt like.

I was blunt after she asked what got people's backs up, specifically because she'd asked, and I meant it when I said it wouldn't be fair to not be blunt.

Edited to add:

So do we modify our behavior around newbies, or do we toss them in and let them sink or swim?

Somewhere between the two? Depends on how they jump in the water?

I'd like to point out in fairness to the non-new people that we have a lot of new people right now, and not every new person has received a cross-posted smackdown. While I see where we are a lot less patient than we were ages ago (once bitten, twice shy), we're not exactly out for newbie blood.

I think David's original post was requesting behavior modification. I think it's a fine line (and I haven't read the conversation that led to this, so am speaking generally). I mean, I'd like us to be friendly and give people a chance, but at the same time, there's no way people should let things slide. Crossposting is what leads to the "piling on" effect, and that'll never change -- we crosspost about everything! In a group this big, there will often be four people with the same reaction to a give post, posting at the same time. Sometimes it's funny, sometimes it feels like piling on. It is what it is.

I do also agree with Elena that as a group we've been a little prickly lately, but I see it more as a cycle than as a change.

Me too. I resent it. But it's not a big deal either.

No, it's not. Just one of those tiny papercutty issues.

This bothered me. (Oh no! Come back!)

Well, yeah. I hate that type of posting, especially since it's actually followed through on maybe one time in ten. But it seems to be SOP for many people whenever they get into a heated discussion online.

So do we modify our behavior around newbies, or do we toss them in and let them sink or swim?

That's the dilemma, isn't it?

So do we modify our behavior around newbies, or do we toss them in and let them sink or swim?

Well, I am advocating for modifying our behavior. If the poster is not actively insulting, or flamebait, and if the offense is generated as a matter of tone - then I especially think it's worth being gentler.

I was blunt after she asked what got people's backs up, specifically because she'd asked, and I meant it when I said it wouldn't be fair to not be blunt.

I think it takes time to learn our expectations about not only tone, but how to respond to criticism as well. People do learn to bite their tongues, or scroll past, or step away before responding. But I think that's a learned response, and I think people learn it by seeing that while we're blunt, we're fair. That we don't go out of our way to be punitive. I don't think we gave that impression in this instance (blunt but fair, non-punitive).

I'd like to point out in fairness to the non-new people that we have a lot of new people right now, and not every new person has received a cross-posted smackdown. While I see where we are a lot less patient than we were ages ago (once bitten, twice shy), we're not exactly out for newbie blood.

Yes, this.

I honestly don't think we have a problem here. The responses to Beej in Minearverse were, IMO, both called-for and diplomatic.