> "I'm starting to think everybody is a bit schizophrenic." Given the "online disinhibition effect," I think that observation can be considered a statistic (th

> "I'm starting to think everybody is a bit schizophrenic." Given the "online disinhibition effect," I think that observation can be considered a statistic (the presence of that trend demonstrates real, if hidden, attitudes). The collective response is naturally quite defensive and misanthropic. (Heck, people still burn "witches"... Or anyone else they are afraid of.) Even before the Internet, it was obvious that the criticism of strangers was harsher than the criticism of friends and colleagues. Addressing strangers is the new norm, but it's far from second nature. I think some of the schizophrenia can be attributed to the natural tendency to fear the unknown (racism, etc), and to another very basic thought process: 1) I want people to think I'm important/knowledgeable (Internet "street cred"). 2) OK, I have to at least post something if people are going to know I'm awesome. 3) So, what's my opinion? (People post to type, not because they have a thoughtful insight.) 4) I'm short on time... I'll just skim... 5) Post the first thing that passes the spell check. ("Boy, I sure tore him a new one.") 6) Profit!!! (The Karma comes rolling in... See 1) (The rest of the misanthropy might have medical and economic components.) The group-think phenomena, however, has negative and positive attributes though, so please don't choose to be pessimistic ("not participating in public, unmoderated fora") simply because of the presence of the negative ones. We should all try to be more respectful, and understanding, but I'm convinced that the absence of another thoughtful voice will only amplify those of the bullies.