4 ms·

I see a huge problem with the piece. There is certainly overlap between thick-skinned and abusive individuals but the sets are not identical. There are many a

I see a huge problem with the piece. There is certainly overlap between thick-skinned and abusive individuals but the sets are not identical. There are many abusive individuals who are covering for their own insecurities, and many quiet, confident people who have thick skins but don't abuse others. Additionally there's a difference between taking offence to abusive behavior and taking offence where none was intended. I am of the opinion that it is worth expecting members of the community to be thick-skinned, professional, courteous, and respectful. If you have the latter three down well, then telling someone that no offence was meant but that you stick by your original point, that has a great deal more credibility. Thick skins are good. But expecting them doesn't have to mean tolerating abuse.

obtu 14y ago
I think part of his point was that expecting everyone to have a thick skin is a small step away from requiring everyone to have that thick skin, and to not reacting appropriately to people who direct flames against those supposedly thick skins. “Thick skin” is often used but poorly defined when talking about online communities, and I think the end of the article does a good job of deconstructing the notion by explaining more precisely what is a good standard for reacting to abuse. Another point to make is that this is a stronger expectation than simply: don't be an asshole, and that acceptance criteria that don't match the emotional reality of most people (for example, if “thick skin” means you're not allowed to feel bad after being treated harshly) will ghettoise a community.
- einhverfr 14y ago
  Ok, perhaps I wasn't clear, perhaps as you say because "thick skin" is relatively ill-defined. To sum up my point, if you don't tolerate abuse and everyone knows this, then saying "What so-and-so said wasn't really out of line. Please be more professional when taking criticism" is credible. When you personal attacks and trolling, it isn't.

obtu 14y ago

I think part of his point was that expecting everyone to have a thick skin is a small step away from requiring everyone to have that thick skin, and to not reacting appropriately to people who direct flames against those supposedly thick skins. “Thick skin” is often used but poorly defined when talking about online communities, and I think the end of the article does a good job of deconstructing the notion by explaining more precisely what is a good standard for reacting to abuse. Another point to make is that this is a stronger expectation than simply: don't be an asshole, and that acceptance criteria that don't match the emotional reality of most people (for example, if “thick skin” means you're not allowed to feel bad after being treated harshly) will ghettoise a community.

einhverfr 14y ago
Ok, perhaps I wasn't clear, perhaps as you say because "thick skin" is relatively ill-defined. To sum up my point, if you don't tolerate abuse and everyone knows this, then saying "What so-and-so said wasn't really out of line. Please be more professional when taking criticism" is credible. When you personal attacks and trolling, it isn't.