E-Bullies
Sat, June 16, 2007
Filed under: Internet, Reviewing
… or if you prefer: generators of e-drama. They give the innocent webmaster an unrequested review and the whole world turns against the victim. The latter, wishing to fight back, starts to complain to everything and everyone, causing even MORE bullying. Since this seems to be “all the rage” these days, I couldn’t possibly deprive the world of my take on said topic.
Wonder why it all degenerated into petty “cat fights”? See below.
First of all: you asked for it.
There is no such thing as an unrequested opinion. You might not have specifically asked for a certain person’s opinion, but you published your work for all to see. Everyone has a right to form an opinion on it… and yes, voice it. No one is obliged to like and/or agree with you. It’s called freedom of thought respectively freedom of speech.
Second: you’re actually privileged to have visitors.
You’re not God’s gift to Net surfers. On the contrary, you’re lucky enough to have that many visitors take an interest in your website. Keep in mind that your site would be NOTHING if it weren’t visited by anyone. It would defeat the purpose of having it.
Third: they’re generally right in some aspects.
If they dedicated an entire blog entry to your site, it means that it made a big impression on them. If people just feel the need to flame you for no reason(i.e. jealousy) spamming your tagboard/comments is much easier. There may also be exceptions, hence the use of generally instead of always.
Fourth: he/she IS entitled to do it.
Regardless of parentage, ethnicity, age, artistic and/or coding skills the person IS actually allowed to think negatively of you. Just because I can’t compose music or write lyrics doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to think badly of Eminem, for example. I’m not saying that the instigator’s reasoning is always correct, but that is in no way related to his/her
right to express an opinion. Like I said before: freedom of speech.
Fifth: no one likes whiners.
It is not good to be pitied, so don’t start telling people how sorry you feel for yourself because the whole world is targeting you. Not only aren’t you important enough to be targeted by the whole world, but there’s a high chance that lots of other people are going through a similar experience. Also, by whining you just give others more fodder for
ridicule.
Sixth: heed the majority.
If one person tells you that “you suck” he/she may very well just be jealous. If 10 (or more) different people tell you the same thing, they must be on to something. Bigger font sizes and larger layouts won’t compromise your personality.
Seventh: commenting systems, tagboards and guestbooks mean you CARE.
DON’T try to tell us that you have no interest in others’ opinion. You are practically BEGGING them to give you their opinion, providing the necessary means for this.
Eight: never EVER be rude.
Name calling is petty, immature and denotes a striking lack of education. If you’re convinced the other is mistaken, then you are also able to argue your point. An action which can ALWAYS be done in a civilized manner.
In conclusion: before you go on a rampage, sit down and consider the ‘accusations’. Try them out if unsure. Sometimes you need a proverbial “slap in the face” to see things as they truly are. It’s not pleasant, but you’ll know better next time.
Also, there will always be more rudely worded reviews than polite and thoughtful ones. Let’s face it: it’s much easier to just say things as they occur to you. Then again, these are the risks of having a site for all to see.
While I agree with what you’ve said here, I think something needs to be said about the actual reviewer themselves. There’s been a lot of attention on those who react negatively to an unrequested review; the points you made above are basically all the things that people have said about them.
However, what about the reviewer themselves? Why are they reviewing? What is their main purpose? Is it to help someone who has a crappy site? I have nothing against harsh but fair criticism, but I think there are reviewers out there that cross the line. Sure they may have a few helpful opinions, but the vast majority of their review would be spiteful, mean and seem to intend to mock and make fun of the other site. People who simply didn’t know of their mistakes don’t deserve a slap to the face, maybe a tap on the shoulder to point them the right direction.
I agree with most of what you’ve written. A site is created to be consumed, just like a book or movie, so it seems only fair that unrequested site reviews can be published, too. I’m sure most authors and film makers don’t appreciate the fact that anyone can publish a scathing review of their work on Amazon, but anyone can and anyone does. Site owners need to come to terms with that.
On the other hand, I think you’ve got a right to complain if the reviewer uses ad hominem attacks and other logical fallacies. It’s one thing to criticize a site harshly, but it’s quite another to berate someone mercilessly. Sometimes that line is blurred.
I agree that a polite review is more helpful, but life’s unfair. You can’t do anything about people who rudely dismiss your site. There will always be people like this, and to be honest, these will be the majority of them. Why? Because it’s easier to just say things as they pop into your mind, rather than think of wording it nicely.
I think that if you start writing a review with nothing but “OMG THIS SITE SUCKS, DIE DIE DIE” in your head, you can’t help but be rude…but if you start it with “Well, this site’s a bit shit, but how can I help them improve?”, the review would automatically be better worded.
It’s like what Belinda said…you need to have the right reasons for reviewing. A senseless attack simply isn’t worth it.
I think you hit the nail on the head with point 2, and it can be expanded on well beyond the scope of unrequested reviews etc. People, lots of people - young and old, seem to think that by opening a website they automatically deserve respect, visitors, positive comments and the like and I think it’s that mindset that is a big failing for a lot of inexperienced bloggers.
You already know my opinion on unrequested reviews, and it won’t be changing any time soon because a small minority are too ’sensitive’ for them. Like I said at the end of my last post - you choose what you read. If people find them that objectionable they could always review me in return
Good post! I agree with your points a lot. Unfortunately it isn’t people who wouldn’t mind a unrequested review who will receive one… The it wouldn’t be truly unrequested though… Anyway. I agree.
Sometimes though, you just have to wonder if someone wrote that requested review just to create some kind of drama like this. For some people, drama is fun. And then they can play the good guy (which is obviously the better side of drama) if they aren’t the one who flipped shit. I think my best advice is, just ignore things you don’t want to hear. If you didn’t put your site up for the purpose of being reviewed, and someone gives you a review you don’t agree with, ignore it. One person’s opinion doesn’t always represent the masses.
@Amanda: 99% of the time those people don’t bother to write a review in a blog post, they just start spamming tagboards/comments.
@Kimmie: “if one person tells you that “you suck” he/she may very well just be jealous. If 10 (or more) different people tell you the same thing, they must be on to something.”
^ if no one else agrees, then there won’t be an e-drama.
If I could, I’d post a sticky note on everyone’s brain saying “freedom of speech.” lol I agree with what you have written. But I think some of the e-dramas happening are deliberately planned to obtain more visitors. Maybe I should do that!
While I agree with most everything you’ve said, freedom of speech is not unlimited. There ARE limits to what you can say legally and what you cannot say and as long as the line isn’t crossed, your freedom still exists.
@Jamie: unfortunately someone can actually say your site “sucks” with no additional explanation. It’s extremely rude, but you can’t really do anything against it.
I think this is a very tricky issue, mainly because while yes, putting a site on the internet means that it’s up for scrutiny, a lot of the unrequested reviews aren’t made with the best intentions in mind. Sometimes, they’re mean and purposely shred a site to bits for no reason (or a petty one). However, there’s a lot of merit in your argument. While I would never give an unrequested review personally, I don’t look down on people who do (especially if they have well formed arguments, and can aptly point out problems instead of using blanketing statements).
I wonder if those who claim that unrequested reviews/e-drama/etc are purely for hits have actually done any research? To me it reeks of ‘I’m going to undermine those with an opinion because I haven’t got the balls to simply say “I don’t like it”.’ I can say for a fact that my own little dabbles in the puddle of e-drama does nothing for my hits. I had almost 200 more hits on the 4th, 5th and 6th of June than the 11th (when I gave my last award) or the 12th and 13th (the aftermath).
As for the whole freedom of speech thing — I’m not sure how much I believe in it on the whole, but ultimately I know that I am entitled to an opinion as long as it is not infringing on libel/slander laws, which my Pants Awards are not.
@Brianna: *points at number 3* I’m not referring to those who want nothing more than slander. However in my experience, those who actually don’t have anything constructive to say never really bother with a blog entry. After all, comments on the victim’s site are harder to overlook.
@Jem: you’re not a very good example, because you’re most know for your coding scripts which lots of people use. Nevertheless there are lots of sites relatively unknown whose hits can skyrocket when entering e-drama.
So there is some truth in it, but with popular sites hits are not really an issue.
Depending on the person I will sometimes make fun of the people I “review” or cut down. There has to be a good reason, extreme stupidity, for example for me to comment on a persons personality. The “reviews” at Internet Police (sry shameless plug :cool: ) are a good example of that.
E-Drama isn’t as big as you’d think, IP is still fairly new and at any given time there is anywhere from 1-0 people browsing it, and that’s after a new entry! Similarly my blog doesn’t really spike in visits when I blog about someone doing something stupid, it’s not fair damnit because I hear about people receiving extra traffic from this shizzle and I want in!
On the other side of the fence there are a few
rulesgentle guidelines to follow when e-bullying (I use that term loosely for lack of a proper one):1. Don’t post anything that isn’t true. Unless you can verify it, it’s not worth posting and you should find something better.
2. If you have sources then post them! Makes you look a little better, that means linkage, linkage and more linkage. If you can back up your claims you are better than they are because then you truly are right and they truly are wrong.
3. Respect the persons privacy. With Erin I had a chance to grab, and post, the screenshot of a private blog on her LJ, seeing as I don’t have access to it myself and it was a locked entry I declined and left it as it was. Even though it was her talking about closing her website and probably would’ve been worth a few laughs. If it’s on a locked forum, though, or hell it’s just really bad looking (racism, beastiality [lulz], etc.) then it’s up for grabs in my opinion. Of course, I really wanted to post it for everyone to see, that would’ve been pretty sweet.
In the end you can either act like an adult either way, or you can act like a little freakzoid running around sobbing about how much your life sucks. Just remember this: Whichever side you’re on, you posted it for the public to see and therefore the public can comment on it. If people don’t like it they are well within their rights to say so, tell me where there is a law against saying you don’t like something.
Oh and before I go, because this comment is getting way too long, I’d just like to say that constructive criticism comes in a few different forms. As long as it’s helpful it’s technically constructive criticism. Show me where, in the definition of either word, the word “nice” or “good” or “mannerly” is used and I will then turn and start giving nice constructive criticism. I used to pwn people on Vortex with that argument all the time
I think I’ll add an article to my WPR related ones on this topic, but as a blog post I decided against writing something extremely long. As such I assumed a lot of things, which seems some people didn’t get.
When I said that generally the “reviewer” is right on some aspects, I meant your rule 1. :smile: As for rule 3, that’s a given. If the person didn’t answer publicly, but rather in an e-mail, or locked forum/lj then it would be just plain idiotic to do that.
Oh, and just because I’m lazy and I remember seeing on someone else’s blog that you wanted to read this… I give The Glasswright’s Apprentice two thumbs up. I wouldn’t put it up there in my top ten list with like Lord of the Rings, but as far as girlie fantasy novels go, it was definitely a great one. I also recommend The Novice, by Trudi Canavan if you enjoy that one. That one is also a series with three books. Order all three books!!! The first and second books end with cliff hangers.
@Becky: Excuse me if I’m wrote (is sleepy) but I’m interested to know what exactly you mean about what you said about constructive criticism… so people you’ve argued with are claiming that constructive criticism has to be nice or mannerly? Because that IS pretty silly. Criticism is neither necessarily nice or rude. However, while criticism is not tagged with any particular “style” it doesn’t mean people can mock others under the guise of constructive criticism… because that’s a problem in itself.
Yes that’s what I mean. It used to be widely used on Vortex before the whiners were driven off :grin: I don’t think someone saying “your bloody site sucks, close it” is constructive (although I suppose it could be construed as such being that there is a suggestion, which in a lot of cases is sound).
There is an assumption amongst people, particularly untalented people, that constructive criticism is nice and sugary when there isn’t really a way to tell someone that something they’ve done is wrong. No matter how you put it, you’re still saying “This is wrong, here’s how to fix it.” The only thing that makes constructive criticism tolerable is that it helps us, if we’re willing to take the help.
Unfortunately, and this is true to the teenybopper set (or the old teenyboppers who are having trouble letting go), people don’t always verify their information before posting it. I try to make sure that everything I post is true, and right out there for everyone to see. Unfortunately it’s not fool-proof, but it does help win me at least a few brownie points
As for locked forums: Well I think that if you posted it there then it’s up for grabs. I go on a case by case basis though, if it’s a personal problem (problems at home, substance abuse, etc.) then I won’t post it for everyone to see (nor will I share it). However, if it’s someone whining about how “m33n dis otha pers0n wuz 2 meh” then I’ll bloody well screencap the whole page and send it to everyone I know.
@Kimmie: someone gave me the e-book of the first series, and now I’m just really curious.
But I wouldn’t mind a nice chicklit either.
I find freedom of speech one of the important constitutional rights ever! Though I must say I don’t like bad reviews of my site
I always get violent in my head, but I (thankfully) have never started E-drama xD I have learned to control myself 
I don’t like negative reviews either, and am generally quite miffed with the “offender”, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have valid points.
I don’t start e-drama either (as I’m bad with starts), but I like to continue them