Myers-Briggs May Have Gotten It Right...Where Forum Fights Are Concerned, Anyway.
I get all kinds of shit from my family for answering honestly when they ask me things. Like, "How are you?"
Well, okay, then. Don't ask me anything if a less-than-bubbly response is going to chafe your serenity. Because you are going to get the truth, and nothing but.
Usually my answer is "busy, tired, but alive," or some variation thereof. They don't like that. They want to hear "GREAT!" with lots of smiles and pom-pons and confetti.
Despite the fact that "bubbly joy" hasn't happened, ever, not once, since I was born. You'd think they'd clue in eventually that it isn't part of my programming. I can be joyful, but bubbly isn't going to happen.
*sigh* Even rats eventually change their methods when the established method is PHAIL; humans seem to get stuck beating their heads against one kind of wall or another because the method worked once in the past or they have hopes it will work in the future, or because they have rationalized that it SHOULD work. I strive to be smarter than a rat.
I love my family, but the constant shit I get for being honest, even though I am polite and tactful and soft-spoken in my honesty, just leads me to believe they prefer pretty lies that sound nice, and my actual state of wellness or infirmity is not important. I wish they'd stop asking if they don't want to know the answer, but they never do. Attempts to fake a bubbly response to forestall the inevitable shit are also full of PHAIL, as I am apparently not so great at lying. Maybe it is the eyerolling that gives me away? (Just kidding)
Current battle is over whether I want to fly up during the last week of school to attend a baptism of the new niece. Honestly? No. School comes first, I'm not religious, and I don't feel like traveling right now. One the plus side, because they are all pissed off and disappointed, they are not calling me trying to be my "best friends forever" this week, which is grand, because I have a shitload of work to do and the calling and stopping by unannounced and persistent requests for favours were driving me crazy. One can only hope it persists until next week, because I need the peace and quiet.
Yep, I'd say I rate pretty high on the "T" end of the Myers-Briggs "T/F" scale. Funny how I have no trouble making and keeping friends (some of which I've had for decades) or getting dates/long-term relationships/engagement requests; it's just my family who resent not being lied to in order to make them feel warm and fuzzy all the time. They all rank high on the "F" scale, and logic is the enemy more often than not.
NOTE: I wrote the following when in a cranky, caffeine-deprived, grouchy mood and was overly snarky. I won't delete what I said, but a new Helpful Character, "Sweetness Fair", will pop up to interject a much more pleasant spin on things. "Sweetness Fair" is far less crabby and frustrated, and thus better at not being grumbly.
On a forum I read regularly, civil war broke out, and has been going on for about two-three weeks. There were already cracks showing before the latest brouhaha. There were forum members who belonged to other fora, and two fora in particular seemed to delight in posting (on a regular basis) any negative feeling they had concerning other members of the bigger forum in restricted areas.
Sweetness: That implies that this is all they did, which is not FAIR. Those sections were apparently only small parts of those fora.
Me: Duly noted! I am actually a member of one of the forums, though I rarely have time to stop by. Haven't, in months.
Let's be fair: the big forum is rather Wild West in nature. You sink or swim there, and personality conflicts happen on a regular basis.
The smaller forums tended to share a lot of personal data, which is frowned on at the bigger forum. Don't give the big forum denizens any ammo, you know. They also tended to be higher on the sparklee-fuzzy-unicormz-and-reinbeauz scale, with lots of e-hugs and e-glomps and e-snuffles. Tonstant Weader thwowed up.
Sweetness: You don't like Precious Moments figurines, either, but that doesn't mean they are EVIL.
Me: Not sure I agree.
Sweetness: Well, nothing's wrong with LOVE! All you need is LOVE! LOVE, LOVE, LOVE! The Power of The Beatles Compels You!
Me: LOOOOOOVE! *flowers* You win. *hugs everyone*
The glompage invaded the bigger forum, and was tolerated to a degree when it was restricted to a few occasional thread derailments. Eventually, however, you had threads derailed in every section of the forum by posts that were content-free, and only offering snuffles and glomps and fake emoticons, and there were eventually enough people at the big forum pissed off and annoyed by this that someone begged for the glompage to stop. It took months and months for the irritation to build to that point, but you can imagine, perhaps, how it would irk you if every time you saw there were new posts in a thread you were enjoying you stood at 75% chance of seeing nothing but glomps and snuggles and other off-topic crap.
The backlash against the glomping naturally was reflected in the little fora, with harsher and more pointed criticisms and ventings against big forum members being posted and elaborated upon.
I should interject here that this is but one of the issues, and a grossly simplified version at that.
Sweetness: Darn tootin'. You're being mean to the glompers, and you don't even dislike them. What's that all about?
Me: I need caffeine. Sorry. And I'm not a fuzzy-wuzzy person by nature.
Sweetness: You just need a hug.
There were other issues, such as squabbling over fake "power" positions on the board that, in truth, gave only two benefits: a bigger mailbox at the forum and the option to post in a specific forum (that all could read) which had only four kinds of "legal" post options, all of which required votes, and most of which resulted in nothing at all being done as a result of the voting. That's it.
One of the most disliked (by the smaller fora denizens) big forum members decided to suggest that one of the members of this sub-forum be removed, as she had not been present, other than making seven posts in six month's time, was no longer interested in the topic the big forum was designed to discuss, was not pleased with how the owner of the forum was running things, and, in all honesty, was unlikely to even realize she'd been voted out at all, given her then-current lack of participation, interest, and so on.
Sweetness: It was suggested that this was part of some power struggle you weren't made aware of. Is that possible?
Me: Meh, anything's possible.
Sweetness: How would you feel if it happened to you?
Me: Bad argument; I've already said that if I vanish for half a year and am known to no longer be interested in the forum topic, removing me if I forget to ask first for removal is fine. I won't be bummed.
Sweetness: Hmm. Well, is it possible the Mean Person disliked the Absent Person?
Me: From what I'm told, she had nothing against her beforehand, but, I suppose, she is probably less than chuffed with her after being called every vile name under the sun in a Very Special "You Suck, Mean Person!" thread. But you should ask her. It's not something I've asked about, myself, lately.
This started a major war on the big forum, smaller fora people rushed to inform the absent member of her imminent removal from the unimportant position she had shown no interest in for months on end, and lots of rage erupted on the smaller fora. The absent person showed up, full of rage, but not until after rallying one of the most outspoken friends she had to spew rage on her behalf at the forum member the smaller fora were regularly hatin' on.
You follow that so far? Are you shaking your head and saying "Wow, Internets! Srs bizniz!" yet?
So, civil war. And all the fora erupted with angry posts.
Attempts to defuse the fighting took several avenues.
1. Some mostly neutral parties and people who liked the Most Disliked Person decided that an entire thread that existed only to tell the Most Disliked Person what a horrible [used tampon] she was, and what a [cornflake head] she was being, and how she should [expire in a conflagration post haste] was [retarded to the Nth degree] and jumping in to insert logic would be [maximum amount of PHAIL that can be measured]. Insert your own phrases in the bracketed areas. it doesn't matter. So they LOLCATted the thread into oblivion for an hour and a half.
This was win, as the thread collapsed upon itself like a dying sun, and rumours of its continued survival are greatly exaggerated, as any minor twitches noted were mostly ignored, derailed, or LOLCATted anew. Thread's dead, baby. Thread's dead.
A sub-sub-sub-issue arose where the deprived glompers immediately cried foul, pissing and moaning that they hated LOLCATs and LOLCHAT just as much as the rest of the big forum hates glomping and all derivations thereof, and if glomping wasn't allowed, then, by gum, LOLCATs should be abolished as well.
People pointing out that months on end of glomping that was disliked by most, and an hour and a half of LOLCATS could not be compared fairly, that the Forum Owner likes and allows LOLCATs and demanded the faux-emoties and glomps cease forthwith, and that LOLCATting is inclusive and open to all, rather than exclusive (and not annoying) to all but a few also met with serious PHAIL, on both sides (that rarely happens), so both sides are continuing to be stroppy and aggro about it.
Some particularly loud pro-glomp folks are claiming not to be able to "understand" LOLCHAT, which, frankly, is their problem, and only makes them seem dim. But I digress.
Sweetness: Girlfriend! That's HARSH!
Me: Oh, come on. I ignored eighteen different posts aimed at me for daring to use a few words of lolchat in a post. Eighteen. (Or so.) I'm only human, it finally caught my attention and annoyed me.
Sweetness: You mean you'd post an otherwise articulate comment and get picked at for using a word or phrase of lolchat, and that was the only thing the picker discussed in that thread?
Me: More or less, yes.
Sweetness: Okay, you get a free pass on this one. But you're on probation, missy.
2. Cries for peace rang out. These proved to be PHAIL, as it was soon revealed by members of the smaller fora to members of the bigger forum that nastiness was continuing. Links were shared. The smaller fora were revealed to be indulging in all the behaviors they reviled in the Most Hated Person, only ten times worse. Add a dose of paranoia and accusations of Evil Plots and Brainwashing and Forum Owner Puppeteering, a pinch of amateur psychologists trying to figure out what was wrong with Most Hated Person (all without examining why they were focusing so much energy on her in the first place, and without examining their own bad behavior), a smattering of copypasta wherein private communiques were made public and picked apart, a dash of rancor and bile, and a heapin' helpin' of self-pity and self-congratulations and glomping.
Sweetness: That sucks that someone at those fora posted their personal stuff elsewhere.
Me: Yes. It does indeed suck. We agree.
3. People who genuinely wished to remain neutral while all the assiness was going on were dragged forcibly into the fight and accused of belonging to one side or the other. Inevitably, many of the neutral parties got disgusted and ended up siding with whichever side the accusers WERE NOT on. So that was also MASSIVE PHAIL.
4. Old forum friends, being informed that the glomping and similar annoying politicking might be coming to an end (much of the fussing hides a rather obvious power struggle between The Hated Person and a member who has been around since time began who enjoyed less abuse than most from the Forum Owner, and thus assumed Special Privileges, and Ms. Specialness has threatened to leave, oh, about a dozen times this week alone), rushed "home" and waited eagerly for the glompers to actually follow through on their promise to depart, which, alas, most have not yet done. They are unhappy, yet do not go. IT ARE A PUZZL.
Sweetness: But the forum is their home, too! They have a right to have opinions about it!
Me: True. And, in the comments, some of us have discussed just that. I'm not sure we have a solution hashed out, but it has been noted.
5. Attempts to throw bones of peace to the masses resulted in massive nomination sprees to the Useless Section of Big Inboxness, all of which was likewise deemed an Evil Plot. Counter-removal nominations aimed at The Hated Person in retaliation for the suggested removal of The Absent Ghostly One were proposed. Both The Ghost and The Goat are still members of the Useless Section, BTW, as both nominations for removal were PHAIL. All new nominees were accepted. Irritated pro-glompers dramatically begged to be voted off the island in protest, and it looks like two are Sayonara Permanente. A blow to the glompers, I guess, or they finally and belatedly realized that the Useless Section was what it has always been, a Big Fat Joke of No Importance.
In the interest of full disclosure, I was voted in a month ago. I abstained from most of the current drama. When nominated, my response was that other people who had been there far longer than I should get the Meaningless Position, but I didn't fight it or encourage it, I just let people do what they wanted. When I was nominated, it took me three days to find out I had been. So you see how seriously I take being a member of the Useless Section. I.e., Not Very. But I digress.
Sweetness: So the new nominations were done in an attempt to be fair?
Me: Believe it or not, yes. A handful of forumites looked around at some folks who had been overlooked, in our opinion, unfairly. My criteria was simple: who has been around longer than me OR has done a lot of work that benefits a lot of people on the forum? I can't speak to others about why they nominated folks, but that was my main concern. If me, why not X? Or Y? So I nominated X, and Y.
Sweetness: Did they get in?
Me: Yes, they did. So they can share in the non-prestige and uselessness, and a bigger inbox, with the rest of us. Whoo hoo! :P
Meanwhile, two trolls sauntered in, pooped all over the forum, and were probably surprised that their antics barely caused a ripple. They were not as interesting as the civil war going on at the same time.
Dire predictions that the forum was sick or dying rang out!
Maybe a forum is sick when a Troll Attack fails to derail forum politics long enough for both sides to combine powers and react to trollery.
Sweetness: Well, one claimed to be a pedophile, and that got people mad.
Me: Yeah, but we had it pegged as a deliberate attempt to troll, and mostly ignored it. So it didn't get the desired response, though it tried, even going so far as to attack forumites personally. If anything, it united the two or more factions in a common goal: acknowledging that trolls suck.
One member who had been struggling with a health concern related to pregnancy, and being rather dismissive and rude to others with similar pregnancy issues ("well, at least you can GET pregnant!" was one winning response to a forum buddy who was upset after a miscarriage), got pregnant (supposedly, though she announced this long before the treatment she was taking would have had time to be a known success) and then had a miscarriage (supposedly, though [see above]). Instead of keeping this news on the smaller fora, where her buddies who had not been offended by her prior MEMEME callousness towards other women with fertility issues were still hanging out, she announced it on the big forum. The Forum Owner shrugged, and lived up to his bastardly ways by "congratulating" her.
Sweetness: This sounds like you didn't care about this person.
Me: Not true. I feel bad for her. The situation sucks.
Sweetness: What did you do?
Me: I expressed my sympathy to mutual friends, as she was probably ignoring all the PMs she got from people who didn't know the situation. Then I left it alone. Not my scab to pick.
Sweetness: What's this about the bad attitude towards other forumites this person allegedly displayed?
Me: I shouldn't have mentioned it. I wasn't there. But I was told by more than a half dozen people about it, and am sick of the topic. I hope they are wrong about all of it. And the Forum Owner WAS an arsehole.
MOAR FIGHT!
People restrained themselves from pointing out the Bad Karma the aggrieved party may have brought upon herself, or the medical facts as pertain to how humans typically get pregnant (and so on), or that similar drama occurred in the past at the same small fora when another user claimed to have lost a child and was busted for lying to get attention and support. Neutral parties restrained themselves vigorously from commenting on this, as did several parties who could have had every natural urge to comment. Even The Hated One posted a genuinely empathetic comment, which was dissected for non-existent spite, as are all posts she makes.
During all the fussing, the Smited By Karma person has yet to comment one way or another, but has been lurking and watching the whole time. Attention! In spades!
Sweetness: Or, perhaps, she is overwhelmed by her personal problems right now.
Me: Entirely true. I did not put a nice spin on it. I'm sorry for that.
Small fora owners threatened the Big Forum owner, demanding that he change his ways or they would leave / not follow through on a promised favour / other crap I can't remember, because it was lame. The Forum Owner ignored it, as it is his choice to be an arsehole or not, as he chooses. His sandbox, his "shuvel", his rules.
MOAR FIGHT!
Disgruntled members packed their bags and huffed off (though, alas, not the most disgruntled, who seem to be hanging on out of pure stubbornness and spite--they hate the forum, hate most of the most active members, hate the Most Hated Person, hate the LOLCATs, and so on, but they MUST STAY, to hate--because to actually go where they won't be constantly annoyed would, in some way, be "losing" in some fashion).
As it stands now, the small fora have had their crankiness revealed on the big forum, and the big forum is increasingly annoyed with their antics. The smaller fora denizens tried to claim that the big forum had similar secret areas and secret chats, and that they, too, had damning conversations to share, but, as of this moment, no such conversations have been posted. And it has been several days.
Sweetness: And ARE there any conversations?
Me: Beats me. It is equal-opportunity sporking on the IRC channel, really.
The Forum Owner, seeing an opportunity to stretch out the fighting, appointed the Most Hated Person as a Moderator.
Bricks were shat.
More huffy departures, more impotent threats to leave that were not met with the expected "oh, please, don't go, please stay" responses, suggestions that the Forum Owner be replaced with a sci-fi villain as Supreme Dictator, silly polls and quizzes, and lots of LULZ and ARGHZ continue, even now.
The current state of the big forum is that feeling you get when a big storm has passed, and the air smells fresher. Most of the angriest smaller fora people have huffed off. Those that remain are doing themselves no favours, becoming increasingly unglued and rabid.
Sweetness: Hey! Not just the small fora people.
Me: Entirely true. Some neutrals and big forum people have been frothing, too. Though less so, this week.
In this atmosphere, someone brought up Myers-Briggs personality testing. And an interesting result was noted.
INTJs are among the most rare personality types on the Myers-Briggs scale, making up an estimated little-over-2% of the population. You would expect that only a little-over-2% of the big forum would be INTJ personalities.
Oddly, no.
This effect was noted on the big forum, and the important part of the INTJ type to notice is the T (thinking) parts.
The demarcation line between the small fora people who were typically unable to accept disagreement with their ideas without taking it personally, typically unable to comprehend sarcasm or dry humour, typically griping that people were "mean", typically engaging blindly in hypocritical behavior without noticing same, typically reacting without forethought, typically psychoanalysing others and claiming they must be unhappy and have no friends or be bitter hags...all these hairtrigger people were typically ExFx personality types.
The big forum people who typically posted dispassionately, logically, and, yes, even somewhat snarkily more often than not were typically IxTx types.
Other trends: Looking back at other threads where politics or religion or sexual preference was discussed at all, the F types tended to be more religious and more conservative than the T types. There are exceptions, notable ones, but the MAJORITY fell into those categories.
Draw from this what you will.
Sweetness: I would yell at you for this, but you did say "typically".
Me: There were lots of exceptions to both gross generalizations.
Sweetness: I still don't think "typically" is the word you wanted.
Me: Not, it's not. I need something in between "allegedly" and "notably," but which is more accurate. Then again, this IS opinion. I don't claim I'm right. I don't even claim to have read every single thread on the big forum.
Sweetness: So, you'd say exceptions to these statements exist?
Me: Definitely. This is just one cranky person's grossly generalized half-arsed perception. Your mileage may vary, and probably will. That is okay.
My biggest questions, however, remain. If a forum no longer suits your needs, why would you stay? If you have other places to go, where you are happy, why would you stay? If you disagree with the Forum Owner and the new Moderator, why would you stay?
Is it wrong to Feel? Is it right to Think? (Or vice versa?) Are Feelers doomed to be illogical and poor at debating and prone to take disagreements personally? Are Thinkers doomed to be rough-spoken androids, unmoved by even the most tear-jerking AT&T commercials?
Why would this be the most obvious divergence point between the two factions?
Why wouldn't Judging or Perceiving differences cause similar rifts? Even the Extroverts (prone to assume everyone is dying to hear their opinion at all times, but otherwise not noticeably different online than Introverts) didn't seem to be as divided, with Extrovert Thinkers merely being more likely to jump into the fray than the Introvert Thinkers. And so on.
Is it so simple? Are all forum wars essentially divided in this way? Somehow, I doubt it.
But it is interesting to me that, in this forum war, the Thinkers and Feelers went to war, and will probably not ever be reconciled. The Thinkers will eventually be bored and move on to more interesting discussions, as they have attempted to do multiple times already, but the Feelers are still, well, feeling raw, and angry, and vengeful, and unhappy. Their feelings were collectively hurt, and logic simply doesn't come into play at all.
Sweetness: And hurt feelings are no good.
Me: That is true. Hurting feelings is bad. But where the responsibility for those hurt feelings lies is far more murky.
So what's a nice Thinker to do? I am more of a Feeler than most Thinkers on the forum, and conscious of how words can hurt, and sympathetic to those who feel pained, but my Thinker self just overrides it all. For example, it's hard to offend me, because I take so few things personally. I actually go out of my way to be fair, even when I lose in the bargain. I play Devil's Advocate with myself in many debates and discussions, and try to see things from others' points of view.
Sweetness: You kinda sucked at it in this post. Until you hired me to interject.
Me: That's true. Thanks.
Sweetness: Can we go get some Dippin' Dots and buy some cute shoes, now?
Me: I'll treat you to a drink and some live music.
Sweetness: Well, okay! That could be fun.
Me: You do like vodka, right?
Sweetness: *clutches the pearls* C-can I have some milk, instead? I have an image to maintain, here!!
But it is a forum. What's to feel about it? It's the Internet. When I shut my computer down to do "Real World" things, I do not think about online stuff at all. My life remains unaffected, mostly. Do I not have online friends? Well, actually, sure, I have many. I just don't support them blindly, or think everything they do is always right, no matter what. Each situation is to be examined independently of how I feel about the people involved. Do I not have any emotional reactions to online stuff, ever? Well, actually, sure, I do, on occasion. I just don't act on those feelings when posting. I take a deep breath before posting when I'm feeling emotionally engaged.
Sweetness: That's not the only way to be, you know. Other people are different from you.
Me: I'm not saying my way is the only, or best, way to be. I'm just sayin', full stop, what my usual modus operandi is.
WHAT IF most forum fights come down to a deeply-ingrained personality clash that divides along Thinking/Feeling lines? How would knowing this prevent (if that is your goal) or mitigate future power struggles and clashing?
What are your thoughts? Have any similar clashes happened on fora you frequent?
If you're a Feeler, what would be your ideal forum? If you're a Thinker, what would be YOUR ideal forum? Can the two polarities of personality ever be pleased with the same forum?
Sweetness: Sure! All you need is LOVE LOVE LOVE!!
Me: I'd settle for spellcheck, some research, and counting to ten before posting when angry, but, okay.
Sweetness: LOVE! LOVE! LOVE!
Me: Vodka!
Sweetness: LOVE!!
Me: Rock'n'roll!
Sweetness: LOVE!!!
Me: Pizza!
Sweetness: LO-- What? Oooh! PIZZA!
Me: Hmm? You like that? Yeah! How about LOVE FOR PIZZA?
Sweetness: RAWK! I mean, my gosh, that would be nifty keen! Count me in, pizza is swell! YAYZ!! *sequins and glitter!*
Me: PIZZA FOR EVERYONE!!
Sweetness: Psst, I'm a vegetarian.
Me: Oh, shut up.
It's given me a lot to think about.
Edited to add: Miss Sweetness Fair, the more glittery and mild-mannered half of my conscience. Ms. Snarky McBitchipants is on vacation and will be back after these messages.
Well, okay, then. Don't ask me anything if a less-than-bubbly response is going to chafe your serenity. Because you are going to get the truth, and nothing but.
Usually my answer is "busy, tired, but alive," or some variation thereof. They don't like that. They want to hear "GREAT!" with lots of smiles and pom-pons and confetti.
Despite the fact that "bubbly joy" hasn't happened, ever, not once, since I was born. You'd think they'd clue in eventually that it isn't part of my programming. I can be joyful, but bubbly isn't going to happen.
*sigh* Even rats eventually change their methods when the established method is PHAIL; humans seem to get stuck beating their heads against one kind of wall or another because the method worked once in the past or they have hopes it will work in the future, or because they have rationalized that it SHOULD work. I strive to be smarter than a rat.
I love my family, but the constant shit I get for being honest, even though I am polite and tactful and soft-spoken in my honesty, just leads me to believe they prefer pretty lies that sound nice, and my actual state of wellness or infirmity is not important. I wish they'd stop asking if they don't want to know the answer, but they never do. Attempts to fake a bubbly response to forestall the inevitable shit are also full of PHAIL, as I am apparently not so great at lying. Maybe it is the eyerolling that gives me away? (Just kidding)
Current battle is over whether I want to fly up during the last week of school to attend a baptism of the new niece. Honestly? No. School comes first, I'm not religious, and I don't feel like traveling right now. One the plus side, because they are all pissed off and disappointed, they are not calling me trying to be my "best friends forever" this week, which is grand, because I have a shitload of work to do and the calling and stopping by unannounced and persistent requests for favours were driving me crazy. One can only hope it persists until next week, because I need the peace and quiet.
Yep, I'd say I rate pretty high on the "T" end of the Myers-Briggs "T/F" scale. Funny how I have no trouble making and keeping friends (some of which I've had for decades) or getting dates/long-term relationships/engagement requests; it's just my family who resent not being lied to in order to make them feel warm and fuzzy all the time. They all rank high on the "F" scale, and logic is the enemy more often than not.
NOTE: I wrote the following when in a cranky, caffeine-deprived, grouchy mood and was overly snarky. I won't delete what I said, but a new Helpful Character, "Sweetness Fair", will pop up to interject a much more pleasant spin on things. "Sweetness Fair" is far less crabby and frustrated, and thus better at not being grumbly.
On a forum I read regularly, civil war broke out, and has been going on for about two-three weeks. There were already cracks showing before the latest brouhaha. There were forum members who belonged to other fora, and two fora in particular seemed to delight in posting (on a regular basis) any negative feeling they had concerning other members of the bigger forum in restricted areas.
Sweetness: That implies that this is all they did, which is not FAIR. Those sections were apparently only small parts of those fora.
Me: Duly noted! I am actually a member of one of the forums, though I rarely have time to stop by. Haven't, in months.
Let's be fair: the big forum is rather Wild West in nature. You sink or swim there, and personality conflicts happen on a regular basis.
The smaller forums tended to share a lot of personal data, which is frowned on at the bigger forum. Don't give the big forum denizens any ammo, you know. They also tended to be higher on the sparklee-fuzzy-unicormz-and-reinbeauz scale, with lots of e-hugs and e-glomps and e-snuffles. Tonstant Weader thwowed up.
Sweetness: You don't like Precious Moments figurines, either, but that doesn't mean they are EVIL.
Me: Not sure I agree.
Sweetness: Well, nothing's wrong with LOVE! All you need is LOVE! LOVE, LOVE, LOVE! The Power of The Beatles Compels You!
Me: LOOOOOOVE! *flowers* You win. *hugs everyone*
The glompage invaded the bigger forum, and was tolerated to a degree when it was restricted to a few occasional thread derailments. Eventually, however, you had threads derailed in every section of the forum by posts that were content-free, and only offering snuffles and glomps and fake emoticons, and there were eventually enough people at the big forum pissed off and annoyed by this that someone begged for the glompage to stop. It took months and months for the irritation to build to that point, but you can imagine, perhaps, how it would irk you if every time you saw there were new posts in a thread you were enjoying you stood at 75% chance of seeing nothing but glomps and snuggles and other off-topic crap.
The backlash against the glomping naturally was reflected in the little fora, with harsher and more pointed criticisms and ventings against big forum members being posted and elaborated upon.
I should interject here that this is but one of the issues, and a grossly simplified version at that.
Sweetness: Darn tootin'. You're being mean to the glompers, and you don't even dislike them. What's that all about?
Me: I need caffeine. Sorry. And I'm not a fuzzy-wuzzy person by nature.
Sweetness: You just need a hug.
There were other issues, such as squabbling over fake "power" positions on the board that, in truth, gave only two benefits: a bigger mailbox at the forum and the option to post in a specific forum (that all could read) which had only four kinds of "legal" post options, all of which required votes, and most of which resulted in nothing at all being done as a result of the voting. That's it.
One of the most disliked (by the smaller fora denizens) big forum members decided to suggest that one of the members of this sub-forum be removed, as she had not been present, other than making seven posts in six month's time, was no longer interested in the topic the big forum was designed to discuss, was not pleased with how the owner of the forum was running things, and, in all honesty, was unlikely to even realize she'd been voted out at all, given her then-current lack of participation, interest, and so on.
Sweetness: It was suggested that this was part of some power struggle you weren't made aware of. Is that possible?
Me: Meh, anything's possible.
Sweetness: How would you feel if it happened to you?
Me: Bad argument; I've already said that if I vanish for half a year and am known to no longer be interested in the forum topic, removing me if I forget to ask first for removal is fine. I won't be bummed.
Sweetness: Hmm. Well, is it possible the Mean Person disliked the Absent Person?
Me: From what I'm told, she had nothing against her beforehand, but, I suppose, she is probably less than chuffed with her after being called every vile name under the sun in a Very Special "You Suck, Mean Person!" thread. But you should ask her. It's not something I've asked about, myself, lately.
This started a major war on the big forum, smaller fora people rushed to inform the absent member of her imminent removal from the unimportant position she had shown no interest in for months on end, and lots of rage erupted on the smaller fora. The absent person showed up, full of rage, but not until after rallying one of the most outspoken friends she had to spew rage on her behalf at the forum member the smaller fora were regularly hatin' on.
You follow that so far? Are you shaking your head and saying "Wow, Internets! Srs bizniz!" yet?
So, civil war. And all the fora erupted with angry posts.
Attempts to defuse the fighting took several avenues.
1. Some mostly neutral parties and people who liked the Most Disliked Person decided that an entire thread that existed only to tell the Most Disliked Person what a horrible [used tampon] she was, and what a [cornflake head] she was being, and how she should [expire in a conflagration post haste] was [retarded to the Nth degree] and jumping in to insert logic would be [maximum amount of PHAIL that can be measured]. Insert your own phrases in the bracketed areas. it doesn't matter. So they LOLCATted the thread into oblivion for an hour and a half.
This was win, as the thread collapsed upon itself like a dying sun, and rumours of its continued survival are greatly exaggerated, as any minor twitches noted were mostly ignored, derailed, or LOLCATted anew. Thread's dead, baby. Thread's dead.
A sub-sub-sub-issue arose where the deprived glompers immediately cried foul, pissing and moaning that they hated LOLCATs and LOLCHAT just as much as the rest of the big forum hates glomping and all derivations thereof, and if glomping wasn't allowed, then, by gum, LOLCATs should be abolished as well.
People pointing out that months on end of glomping that was disliked by most, and an hour and a half of LOLCATS could not be compared fairly, that the Forum Owner likes and allows LOLCATs and demanded the faux-emoties and glomps cease forthwith, and that LOLCATting is inclusive and open to all, rather than exclusive (and not annoying) to all but a few also met with serious PHAIL, on both sides (that rarely happens), so both sides are continuing to be stroppy and aggro about it.
Some particularly loud pro-glomp folks are claiming not to be able to "understand" LOLCHAT, which, frankly, is their problem, and only makes them seem dim. But I digress.
Sweetness: Girlfriend! That's HARSH!
Me: Oh, come on. I ignored eighteen different posts aimed at me for daring to use a few words of lolchat in a post. Eighteen. (Or so.) I'm only human, it finally caught my attention and annoyed me.
Sweetness: You mean you'd post an otherwise articulate comment and get picked at for using a word or phrase of lolchat, and that was the only thing the picker discussed in that thread?
Me: More or less, yes.
Sweetness: Okay, you get a free pass on this one. But you're on probation, missy.
2. Cries for peace rang out. These proved to be PHAIL, as it was soon revealed by members of the smaller fora to members of the bigger forum that nastiness was continuing. Links were shared. The smaller fora were revealed to be indulging in all the behaviors they reviled in the Most Hated Person, only ten times worse. Add a dose of paranoia and accusations of Evil Plots and Brainwashing and Forum Owner Puppeteering, a pinch of amateur psychologists trying to figure out what was wrong with Most Hated Person (all without examining why they were focusing so much energy on her in the first place, and without examining their own bad behavior), a smattering of copypasta wherein private communiques were made public and picked apart, a dash of rancor and bile, and a heapin' helpin' of self-pity and self-congratulations and glomping.
Sweetness: That sucks that someone at those fora posted their personal stuff elsewhere.
Me: Yes. It does indeed suck. We agree.
3. People who genuinely wished to remain neutral while all the assiness was going on were dragged forcibly into the fight and accused of belonging to one side or the other. Inevitably, many of the neutral parties got disgusted and ended up siding with whichever side the accusers WERE NOT on. So that was also MASSIVE PHAIL.
4. Old forum friends, being informed that the glomping and similar annoying politicking might be coming to an end (much of the fussing hides a rather obvious power struggle between The Hated Person and a member who has been around since time began who enjoyed less abuse than most from the Forum Owner, and thus assumed Special Privileges, and Ms. Specialness has threatened to leave, oh, about a dozen times this week alone), rushed "home" and waited eagerly for the glompers to actually follow through on their promise to depart, which, alas, most have not yet done. They are unhappy, yet do not go. IT ARE A PUZZL.
Sweetness: But the forum is their home, too! They have a right to have opinions about it!
Me: True. And, in the comments, some of us have discussed just that. I'm not sure we have a solution hashed out, but it has been noted.
5. Attempts to throw bones of peace to the masses resulted in massive nomination sprees to the Useless Section of Big Inboxness, all of which was likewise deemed an Evil Plot. Counter-removal nominations aimed at The Hated Person in retaliation for the suggested removal of The Absent Ghostly One were proposed. Both The Ghost and The Goat are still members of the Useless Section, BTW, as both nominations for removal were PHAIL. All new nominees were accepted. Irritated pro-glompers dramatically begged to be voted off the island in protest, and it looks like two are Sayonara Permanente. A blow to the glompers, I guess, or they finally and belatedly realized that the Useless Section was what it has always been, a Big Fat Joke of No Importance.
In the interest of full disclosure, I was voted in a month ago. I abstained from most of the current drama. When nominated, my response was that other people who had been there far longer than I should get the Meaningless Position, but I didn't fight it or encourage it, I just let people do what they wanted. When I was nominated, it took me three days to find out I had been. So you see how seriously I take being a member of the Useless Section. I.e., Not Very. But I digress.
Sweetness: So the new nominations were done in an attempt to be fair?
Me: Believe it or not, yes. A handful of forumites looked around at some folks who had been overlooked, in our opinion, unfairly. My criteria was simple: who has been around longer than me OR has done a lot of work that benefits a lot of people on the forum? I can't speak to others about why they nominated folks, but that was my main concern. If me, why not X? Or Y? So I nominated X, and Y.
Sweetness: Did they get in?
Me: Yes, they did. So they can share in the non-prestige and uselessness, and a bigger inbox, with the rest of us. Whoo hoo! :P
Meanwhile, two trolls sauntered in, pooped all over the forum, and were probably surprised that their antics barely caused a ripple. They were not as interesting as the civil war going on at the same time.
Dire predictions that the forum was sick or dying rang out!
Maybe a forum is sick when a Troll Attack fails to derail forum politics long enough for both sides to combine powers and react to trollery.
Sweetness: Well, one claimed to be a pedophile, and that got people mad.
Me: Yeah, but we had it pegged as a deliberate attempt to troll, and mostly ignored it. So it didn't get the desired response, though it tried, even going so far as to attack forumites personally. If anything, it united the two or more factions in a common goal: acknowledging that trolls suck.
One member who had been struggling with a health concern related to pregnancy, and being rather dismissive and rude to others with similar pregnancy issues ("well, at least you can GET pregnant!" was one winning response to a forum buddy who was upset after a miscarriage), got pregnant (supposedly, though she announced this long before the treatment she was taking would have had time to be a known success) and then had a miscarriage (supposedly, though [see above]). Instead of keeping this news on the smaller fora, where her buddies who had not been offended by her prior MEMEME callousness towards other women with fertility issues were still hanging out, she announced it on the big forum. The Forum Owner shrugged, and lived up to his bastardly ways by "congratulating" her.
Sweetness: This sounds like you didn't care about this person.
Me: Not true. I feel bad for her. The situation sucks.
Sweetness: What did you do?
Me: I expressed my sympathy to mutual friends, as she was probably ignoring all the PMs she got from people who didn't know the situation. Then I left it alone. Not my scab to pick.
Sweetness: What's this about the bad attitude towards other forumites this person allegedly displayed?
Me: I shouldn't have mentioned it. I wasn't there. But I was told by more than a half dozen people about it, and am sick of the topic. I hope they are wrong about all of it. And the Forum Owner WAS an arsehole.
MOAR FIGHT!
People restrained themselves from pointing out the Bad Karma the aggrieved party may have brought upon herself, or the medical facts as pertain to how humans typically get pregnant (and so on), or that similar drama occurred in the past at the same small fora when another user claimed to have lost a child and was busted for lying to get attention and support. Neutral parties restrained themselves vigorously from commenting on this, as did several parties who could have had every natural urge to comment. Even The Hated One posted a genuinely empathetic comment, which was dissected for non-existent spite, as are all posts she makes.
During all the fussing, the Smited By Karma person has yet to comment one way or another, but has been lurking and watching the whole time. Attention! In spades!
Sweetness: Or, perhaps, she is overwhelmed by her personal problems right now.
Me: Entirely true. I did not put a nice spin on it. I'm sorry for that.
Small fora owners threatened the Big Forum owner, demanding that he change his ways or they would leave / not follow through on a promised favour / other crap I can't remember, because it was lame. The Forum Owner ignored it, as it is his choice to be an arsehole or not, as he chooses. His sandbox, his "shuvel", his rules.
MOAR FIGHT!
Disgruntled members packed their bags and huffed off (though, alas, not the most disgruntled, who seem to be hanging on out of pure stubbornness and spite--they hate the forum, hate most of the most active members, hate the Most Hated Person, hate the LOLCATs, and so on, but they MUST STAY, to hate--because to actually go where they won't be constantly annoyed would, in some way, be "losing" in some fashion).
As it stands now, the small fora have had their crankiness revealed on the big forum, and the big forum is increasingly annoyed with their antics. The smaller fora denizens tried to claim that the big forum had similar secret areas and secret chats, and that they, too, had damning conversations to share, but, as of this moment, no such conversations have been posted. And it has been several days.
Sweetness: And ARE there any conversations?
Me: Beats me. It is equal-opportunity sporking on the IRC channel, really.
The Forum Owner, seeing an opportunity to stretch out the fighting, appointed the Most Hated Person as a Moderator.
Bricks were shat.
More huffy departures, more impotent threats to leave that were not met with the expected "oh, please, don't go, please stay" responses, suggestions that the Forum Owner be replaced with a sci-fi villain as Supreme Dictator, silly polls and quizzes, and lots of LULZ and ARGHZ continue, even now.
The current state of the big forum is that feeling you get when a big storm has passed, and the air smells fresher. Most of the angriest smaller fora people have huffed off. Those that remain are doing themselves no favours, becoming increasingly unglued and rabid.
Sweetness: Hey! Not just the small fora people.
Me: Entirely true. Some neutrals and big forum people have been frothing, too. Though less so, this week.
In this atmosphere, someone brought up Myers-Briggs personality testing. And an interesting result was noted.
INTJs are among the most rare personality types on the Myers-Briggs scale, making up an estimated little-over-2% of the population. You would expect that only a little-over-2% of the big forum would be INTJ personalities.
Oddly, no.
This effect was noted on the big forum, and the important part of the INTJ type to notice is the T (thinking) parts.
The demarcation line between the small fora people who were typically unable to accept disagreement with their ideas without taking it personally, typically unable to comprehend sarcasm or dry humour, typically griping that people were "mean", typically engaging blindly in hypocritical behavior without noticing same, typically reacting without forethought, typically psychoanalysing others and claiming they must be unhappy and have no friends or be bitter hags...all these hairtrigger people were typically ExFx personality types.
The big forum people who typically posted dispassionately, logically, and, yes, even somewhat snarkily more often than not were typically IxTx types.
Other trends: Looking back at other threads where politics or religion or sexual preference was discussed at all, the F types tended to be more religious and more conservative than the T types. There are exceptions, notable ones, but the MAJORITY fell into those categories.
Draw from this what you will.
Sweetness: I would yell at you for this, but you did say "typically".
Me: There were lots of exceptions to both gross generalizations.
Sweetness: I still don't think "typically" is the word you wanted.
Me: Not, it's not. I need something in between "allegedly" and "notably," but which is more accurate. Then again, this IS opinion. I don't claim I'm right. I don't even claim to have read every single thread on the big forum.
Sweetness: So, you'd say exceptions to these statements exist?
Me: Definitely. This is just one cranky person's grossly generalized half-arsed perception. Your mileage may vary, and probably will. That is okay.
My biggest questions, however, remain. If a forum no longer suits your needs, why would you stay? If you have other places to go, where you are happy, why would you stay? If you disagree with the Forum Owner and the new Moderator, why would you stay?
Is it wrong to Feel? Is it right to Think? (Or vice versa?) Are Feelers doomed to be illogical and poor at debating and prone to take disagreements personally? Are Thinkers doomed to be rough-spoken androids, unmoved by even the most tear-jerking AT&T commercials?
Why would this be the most obvious divergence point between the two factions?
Why wouldn't Judging or Perceiving differences cause similar rifts? Even the Extroverts (prone to assume everyone is dying to hear their opinion at all times, but otherwise not noticeably different online than Introverts) didn't seem to be as divided, with Extrovert Thinkers merely being more likely to jump into the fray than the Introvert Thinkers. And so on.
Is it so simple? Are all forum wars essentially divided in this way? Somehow, I doubt it.
But it is interesting to me that, in this forum war, the Thinkers and Feelers went to war, and will probably not ever be reconciled. The Thinkers will eventually be bored and move on to more interesting discussions, as they have attempted to do multiple times already, but the Feelers are still, well, feeling raw, and angry, and vengeful, and unhappy. Their feelings were collectively hurt, and logic simply doesn't come into play at all.
Sweetness: And hurt feelings are no good.
Me: That is true. Hurting feelings is bad. But where the responsibility for those hurt feelings lies is far more murky.
So what's a nice Thinker to do? I am more of a Feeler than most Thinkers on the forum, and conscious of how words can hurt, and sympathetic to those who feel pained, but my Thinker self just overrides it all. For example, it's hard to offend me, because I take so few things personally. I actually go out of my way to be fair, even when I lose in the bargain. I play Devil's Advocate with myself in many debates and discussions, and try to see things from others' points of view.
Sweetness: You kinda sucked at it in this post. Until you hired me to interject.
Me: That's true. Thanks.
Sweetness: Can we go get some Dippin' Dots and buy some cute shoes, now?
Me: I'll treat you to a drink and some live music.
Sweetness: Well, okay! That could be fun.
Me: You do like vodka, right?
Sweetness: *clutches the pearls* C-can I have some milk, instead? I have an image to maintain, here!!
But it is a forum. What's to feel about it? It's the Internet. When I shut my computer down to do "Real World" things, I do not think about online stuff at all. My life remains unaffected, mostly. Do I not have online friends? Well, actually, sure, I have many. I just don't support them blindly, or think everything they do is always right, no matter what. Each situation is to be examined independently of how I feel about the people involved. Do I not have any emotional reactions to online stuff, ever? Well, actually, sure, I do, on occasion. I just don't act on those feelings when posting. I take a deep breath before posting when I'm feeling emotionally engaged.
Sweetness: That's not the only way to be, you know. Other people are different from you.
Me: I'm not saying my way is the only, or best, way to be. I'm just sayin', full stop, what my usual modus operandi is.
WHAT IF most forum fights come down to a deeply-ingrained personality clash that divides along Thinking/Feeling lines? How would knowing this prevent (if that is your goal) or mitigate future power struggles and clashing?
What are your thoughts? Have any similar clashes happened on fora you frequent?
If you're a Feeler, what would be your ideal forum? If you're a Thinker, what would be YOUR ideal forum? Can the two polarities of personality ever be pleased with the same forum?
Sweetness: Sure! All you need is LOVE LOVE LOVE!!
Me: I'd settle for spellcheck, some research, and counting to ten before posting when angry, but, okay.
Sweetness: LOVE! LOVE! LOVE!
Me: Vodka!
Sweetness: LOVE!!
Me: Rock'n'roll!
Sweetness: LOVE!!!
Me: Pizza!
Sweetness: LO-- What? Oooh! PIZZA!
Me: Hmm? You like that? Yeah! How about LOVE FOR PIZZA?
Sweetness: RAWK! I mean, my gosh, that would be nifty keen! Count me in, pizza is swell! YAYZ!! *sequins and glitter!*
Me: PIZZA FOR EVERYONE!!
Sweetness: Psst, I'm a vegetarian.
Me: Oh, shut up.
It's given me a lot to think about.
Edited to add: Miss Sweetness Fair, the more glittery and mild-mannered half of my conscience. Ms. Snarky McBitchipants is on vacation and will be back after these messages.