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.

as a group we've been a little prickly lately, but I see it more as a cycle than as a change.

I would completely agree with this. The board as a whole has been more prone to kerfuffles as of late, probably due to a variety of reasons (lots of new posters, the season, U.S.-ian tension).

Not much more to add, I guess. I think that we need to keep in mind the fact that everyone is more prickly than usual, but I'm unsure about a direct behavior modification when dealing with new posters. I guess I lean more toward the side of "sink or swim", but that could be a reaction to how many new posters we have had recently. Enough of them have fit in to make me think that we're doing okay. Perhaps if we weren't getting such an influx, I would feel differently.

edit: Good lord, could I be any more wishy-washy? Okay - we're all prickly, and we need to remember that, but we have enough new posters who aren't doing belly-flops in the guac, so I think we're doing just fine for now.

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.

David, if someone's tone is repeatedly bothering people, then something is wrong. If gentle attempts at correction, which, by the way, happened days ago in the F2F thread, haven't worked or cooled the tone, then what in heaven's name do you expect people to do? You can only turn the other cheek so much before your head starts to spin.

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.

But this is just basic, basic communication skills. This isn't something unique to here, or something that people should have to be gently trained to follow.

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'm not sure how long ago these ages ago were. Reason being, I did a spectacular belly-flop into the guacamole at Table Talk. A couple of them, actually. I can say this: while no blood was shed, I also wasn't hugged and offered lollypops.

I think the attitude in Buffista threads has pretty much always been that people need to prove themselves before being adopted. Some people prove themselves in .5 nanoseconds; for others of us, it takes a couple weeks or months or years and a few times when we leave the conversation with our tails between our legs.

(And I think I'm coming around to the "beej overreacted" school of thought.)

I don't think we have a big problem. As people we are more hands-off to people we don't know-- but we expect the same respect. I'm not going to tell someone they don't need to sign all their posts, but I would get pretty pissed off if she started lecturing me about law. One of those things is cultural, and one is common sense.