4 ms·

The bizarre thing is most reactions to a shame posting are negative. Which results in the poster being publicly shamed on social media for daring to shame someo

The bizarre thing is most reactions to a shame posting are negative. Which results in the poster being publicly shamed on social media for daring to shame someone. That is, the most frequent online recrimination I encounter is shame-shaming. Which I think can be generalized to it being socially incorrect these days to express a negative opinion. It seems to be an overreaction to trolls and brigades that anyone who says something that isn't supportive of the main topic is considered to be disruptive. Except among communities that are small enough so the frequent contributors are well known and trusted to be able to express their possibly controversial opinions. Essentially, if you consider reputation the currency of social trade, then there is a tragedy of the commons in large forums.

zby 11y ago
The problem is amplification of negative emotions. People are mimetic animals and when negative emotions are displayed publicly they are copied and they spread. People intuitively adopt to that and are very careful when in public (especially speaking in public) - but on-line they somehow don't feel the same pressure.
PopeOfNope 11y ago
> The bizarre thing is most reactions to a shame posting are negative. Do you have data for this, or are you judging this based on the reactions from your own social circle? If the latter, then it sounds like you hang out with cool people. Kudos. Unfortunately, I don't think that's the common reaction to shame postings. GamerGate is a great counter-example where shaming those who support GamerGate is positively received by a great number of people. > Except among communities that are small enough so the frequent contributors are well known and trusted to be able to express their possibly controversial opinions. And even then, if those communities are able to be viewed by the public (ie: on a public forum, like a subreddit), they will eventually have negative media campaigns run against them. Public shaming on the scale of an entire subreddit.
- whoopdedo 11y ago
  > GamerGate is a great counter-example where shaming those who support GamerGate is positively received by a great number of people. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. The controversy of GamerGate was not that there was sexism among gamers. It was that there was conflict regarding when someone complains about sexism. The debate turned away from the salient issue and to arguing for and against whether there should even be a debate. People were complaining about other people complaining, which leads to complaints about those people complaining and so on. Of the public shaming instances I've been aware of, the discussion on the internet has been about whether or not the incident should have been made public, and less about justifying or recriminating what originally happened. It's an odd and frustrating social feedback loop. I wonder if it's related to bureaucratic inertia. Where problems fail to reach a solution because the bureaucracy gets stuck in a cycle of studying the problem, then studying the study of the problem, etc.

zby 11y ago

The problem is amplification of negative emotions. People are mimetic animals and when negative emotions are displayed publicly they are copied and they spread. People intuitively adopt to that and are very careful when in public (especially speaking in public) - but on-line they somehow don't feel the same pressure.

PopeOfNope 11y ago

> The bizarre thing is most reactions to a shame posting are negative. Do you have data for this, or are you judging this based on the reactions from your own social circle? If the latter, then it sounds like you hang out with cool people. Kudos. Unfortunately, I don't think that's the common reaction to shame postings. GamerGate is a great counter-example where shaming those who support GamerGate is positively received by a great number of people. > Except among communities that are small enough so the frequent contributors are well known and trusted to be able to express their possibly controversial opinions. And even then, if those communities are able to be viewed by the public (ie: on a public forum, like a subreddit), they will eventually have negative media campaigns run against them. Public shaming on the scale of an entire subreddit.

whoopdedo 11y ago
> GamerGate is a great counter-example where shaming those who support GamerGate is positively received by a great number of people. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. The controversy of GamerGate was not that there was sexism among gamers. It was that there was conflict regarding when someone complains about sexism. The debate turned away from the salient issue and to arguing for and against whether there should even be a debate. People were complaining about other people complaining, which leads to complaints about those people complaining and so on. Of the public shaming instances I've been aware of, the discussion on the internet has been about whether or not the incident should have been made public, and less about justifying or recriminating what originally happened. It's an odd and frustrating social feedback loop. I wonder if it's related to bureaucratic inertia. Where problems fail to reach a solution because the bureaucracy gets stuck in a cycle of studying the problem, then studying the study of the problem, etc.