Ship of Fools: Emotional Tone of the Boards

Thread: Emotional Tone of the Boards Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=028911

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

Sioni asked an interesting question on another thread.

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:
If anyone can provide me with a halfway reliable means of divining the emotional state of another poster, in Purgatory, Hell, All Saints or even Heaven, do let me know.

It led me back to this Facebook experiment demonstrating there may be influence on emotion through electronic media.
I certainly find specific threads have a specific tone. I had always assumed this was secondary to the topic itself and it would certainly play a big part, but I haven't really considered how our interactions also set the tone. One example would be the concurrent depression threads in All Saints and Hell. One is for shouty tears and the other gentle tears.

I wonder how much emotional influence our Hosts actually have on the boards? (By setting the rules around discourse). Does our emotional state alter in response to where we read on this ship.

And yes, it would certainly depend upon how much time we spent on board.

In real life, my workplace has had a budget crisis, and people are scared. My own work runs out in August. I am actively trying to lift and support my colleagues. (Because I believe setting the culture is a major role of leadership). At times, there is a visible impact. At times, not.

Do we see an impact here on board? And do your contributions affect my emotional state and hence my workplace?
And if this is the case..
Lift your game. My workplace in still suffering. [Biased]

I think it reflects my relational understanding of theology. Every interaction, every relationship counts; good, bad and worse- indifferent.

What do you think, my learned peers?

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

To answer Sioni's question: No. There is no reliable way.
On to yours. First, I think Facebook not completely analogous of the Ship. For one, Facebook is more about emotion and the Ship is more about discussion.
That said, I think there can be transference, depending on how one approaches the Ship and how one sees the interactions here.
Are the interactions personal? Do you consider said interactions as on-line v. "real" life?

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

Perhaps the most significant difference between facebook and the Ship is that facebook isn't usually anonymous, and often (at least for me) the conversations are with people you know in real life. So it's a lot easier to judge other people's tone, intent, meaning, since you are able to match their written words up with something you've heard them say verbally. Much harder to do on the ship.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Sioni Sais: If anyone can provide me with a halfway reliable means of divining the emotional state of another poster, in Purgatory, Hell, All Saints or even Heaven, do let me know.

Sometimes I can. When someone is bloody angry, I can usually see it pretty well.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

I am on two Labrador forums. Each has its own 'tone' which is pretty much led by the mods and regular posters. A lot of people buy Labrador puppies thinking they are an 'easy' dog, then they quickly discover they've got a crocodile who rips their arms and clothes to shreds - so they rush to our forums for advice.

One is friendly and positive, the other not so much.

The first has much more success in helping the enquirers raise their pups than the second.

I think that it's great to be in a positive, forward thinking environment. I only work one day a week now, but the school I work in is like that. I really look forward to Fridays because of it, despite the early get up and long-ish drive.

I think hosts on forums and bosses in workplaces certainly help to set the tone. But a couple of negative grumblers can easily drag things down emotionally.

At Church, if someone says 'one person really disliked *whatever*' I always ask "Was it a habitual complainer?" If the answer is "yes" then I say ignore them. They would grumble whatever happened so what they say becomes totally irrelevant.

Posted by Teufelchen (# 10158) on :

The other forum I'm active on has a very different moderation policy to the Ship. Its mods police the discussion quite closely, and are firm in dishing out suspensions and bans to users who breach the rules. Certain political positions (eg Nazism, GamerGate, MRAs) are regarded as unacceptable: if a person hold such views, they should keep them to themselves on the forum or expect to be banned.

It makes for a peaceful, well-ordered forum. The theology discussions can be quite interesting - it's not a religious forum, but the 'miscellaneous' board allows such discussions, and we get Christians, Pagans, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and Atheists chipping in quite civilly.

I like the way that forum works. But I also like the way the Ship works, or I wouldn't have come back.

t

Posted by Not (# 2166) on :

My observation - as someone who has read the boards for over a decade, but doesn't post a lot - is that the ship tends to run through an 'emotional tone' cycle every few months. At its best it is playful and creative with energetic debate over a wide range. This tends to tip over at 'regularly irregular' intervals into explosions of irritation/trolling/accusations/noisy conflicts which, though usually focussed in purgatory, dead horses, hell and styx, have an impact across the boards. Once the spleens have been vented, the odd suspension/expulsion taken place and the noise died down, there seems to be a period of peaceful but rather low key and even dull posting before it all becomes more lively again.

I've never attempted to map or time it, but because I read from the 'recent posts' board, it is surprisingly easy to get an overall flavour of the mood of the ship and where in the cycle we are.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:
Sioni Sais: If anyone can provide me with a halfway reliable means of divining the emotional state of another poster, in Purgatory, Hell, All Saints or even Heaven, do let me know.
Sometimes I can. When someone is bloody angry, I can usually see it pretty well.

I initially read this as 'When I am bloody angry, I can usually see it pretty well'. Meaning one's own emotional state colours one's perception of another's. Which is a more accurate statement than many of us might which to concede.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Not:

I've never attempted to map or time it, but because I read from the 'recent posts' board, it is surprisingly easy to get an overall flavour of the mood of the ship and where in the cycle we are.

So, where in the cycle are we? [Smile]

Posted by Not (# 2166) on :

Hah! good question, think it's a neap tide at the moment, but whether falling or rising I'm not entirely sure!

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

I think we're in a fairly calm phase at the moment.

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
What do you think, my learned peers?

Anyone who disagrees with me is a deranged, hate-filled tosspot consumed with arrogance and rage. Civility and decency are completely foreign concepts to them.

That, or they just see things a little different.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

I was not on this board at the time Bush was leading up to the Iraqi invasion, but I was probably one of the few liberals on another board that served Lutherans. On that board I was labeled a communist (my son even was given to saying I was so far to the left I made Karl Marx look like a tea partier). I was accused of being un-American. And several other names.

There were times I was so exasperated with that board, my wife would ask me why I stayed on it. My response was because I did not want other people to think all Lutherans thought the same.

I actually started visiting this board because I was invited my a fellow Lutheran. I found these boards much more rational and open to disagreements.

There are times, though, I think the moderators are a little heavy handed when it comes to controlling the content of the threads, but I am only a shipmate.

I very much enjoy the different boards and most of the threads on them. It has become part of my morning and evening routine to check these boards.

Keep up the good work, people; and carry on.

Posted by frin (# 9) on :

I think that there are more genre conventions at play in our interactions with others than we realise. We are attuned to pick up the patterns of language and effective rhetoric of a conversation (or thread, or workplace). The hosts of a board shape these things, but so do all board users, and because conventions are collaborative they shift over time.

'frin

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

There are so many variables and factors from hither and yon that moderating a board like this must be fiendishly difficult. I think there are phases though and I imagine it'd be possible to foresee emerging patterns over time. It's also possible to identify regular posters' style and pressure points over time - but that is a different thing to moods and emotions

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

Formally, Hosts aren't required to second-guess emotional content, nor read between the lines. Essentially, we measure up words against rules.

Functionally, I guess it is not that simple. There's a kind of ongoing "temperature-taking" going on, but we probably don't have calibrated thermometers. When I first started as Host, the basic advice was to let the threads run as "hot" as possible within the guidelines, since that fits in best with the general ethos of unrest. If we get it right, or right-ish, then you get vigorous arguments involving folks with strongly held and differing viewpoints. Those aren't always comfortable, or emotionally "safe"; cherished positions can get heavily criticised. But that comes with the territory, hence the guideline "don't offend easily, don't be easily offended".

So I don't think these boards are always comfortable. Participation may get a bit bruising from time to time, even when folks avoid personal attack. When you're on the receiving end, criticism of an opinion can feel pretty much the same as personal attack. I've experienced the discomfort of that.

[ 28. February 2015, 23:54: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

I suspect you've been on the receiving end rather more often than meting it out ... but with most posters I suspect it's a both/and thing ...

[Biased]

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0