<http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/police.html>
Copyright © 1990-2005 by Prof. Timo Salmi
Last modified Sat 5-Nov-2005 19:35:05

Counting since 5.11.2005

Someone just broke the netiquette. Should I post/email advice?

Originally from
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/link/tsfaqn.zip
Questions from Usenet and Timo's answers

When you give advice, always bear in mind the netiquette's unwritten prime directive:

Act civilized.
(Don't abuse, don't disparage.)

When you have gained more experience on Usenet you may wish to help other users to find their way on the net. This requires diplomacy! Mistakes are not remedied by scolding the errant user. It just will get you enemies on the net. Learn to distinguish genuine, well-meaning ignorance from deliberate net abuse. Let's consider in this item the genuine mistakes. If you absolutely feel that you must write to the errant user, try to help by giving constructive advice. This is very important. If you are not constructive your advice will be wasted, or worse. Too many mistakes are made on the net in this respect.

If are in the habit of posting / emailing anonymously, and you have a notification about the netiquette to a fellow user, forget it. Even under normal circumstances anonymity is a significant put-off, and in a sensitive situation like giving guidance, you will have little or no credibility if you do not have even the minimal guts to appear under your true identity.

One controversial issue is whether one should use email or news postings for giving the advice.

The great disadvantage with posting the advice to the news is that if everyone starts doing it, things will get out of hand.
The great advantage with posting the advice to the news is that the advice has a much better propagation, and, if done right, is much more effective. In my own decisions this is a very important consideration in favor of posting.
The newsgroup at hand is a factor. What is its topic area, what are its established practices? A typical example of a newsgroups where the advice is posted regularly is news.newusers.questions where the moderation team does an exemplary job.
Especially when the errant behavior happens out of genuine ignorance, as is common for new users, and not as deliberate net abuse, if nothing is said in the newsgroup that could be misconstrued as tacit acceptance of the errant practice. The preventive aspect of judicious, friendly publicly given constructive advice is an important consideration.
Also the length of the advice is a consideration. Personally, I often (but not always) post just references to WWW material with a very brief preface, in order not to clog the newsgroup.
The evident danger in posting the advice to the newsgroup is are the potentially ensuing flame wars. If you post, please do bear the "prime directive" in mind.
Last, but not least, email has the following problems:
- Invalid addresses are very common. This is a major problem.
- Email exchanges can be very taxing on one's time, especially if one is involved with much net activities, as e.g. yours truly.
- Other, knowledgeable readers in the newsgroups will not know of the email and are thus not able to augment additional views or corrections.

If you send advice, be prepared for varying kinds of responses. Since I have myself managed to gain a reasonable amount of experience on the net on giving advice to fellow users, below are some of my observations. These are typically the kind of responses one tends to get when giving advice about matters like where one should put binary postings, what are the relevant newsgroup's topics and so on.

Cooperative. Quite common. The user understands the nature of the advice correctly, considers it useful, and that's normally the end of it. Or s/he may email me a brief (welcome) note acknowledging the information without further ado, sometimes complimenting on the fact that there was no "flame" involved.
- (A potential response in this case: It is a real pleasure to deal with users like you, and I look forward to meeting you again on the net.)
Apologetic. Perhaps the most usual reaction. This is not a necessary feeling since the information is genuinely meant to help the user to find his/her way on the newsgroups. There is no criticism involved in my sending the advice.
- (A potential response in this case: Please do not be discouraged by my note. We all make mistakes. Please go on and enjoy the net.)
Patronizing. Especially some experienced users feel embarrassed by their mistake, may agree, but wish save face by whatever rationalizations happen to become handy. A fairly common additional hallmark of this category is including suggestions that would cause an inordinate amount of extra work at my end.
- (A potential response in this case: We both seem know the true ropes. So just let's leave be without further parrying.)
- A special note: Beware! Some highly experienced users, who themselves are prone to giving advice on the net, can be ultrasensitive and very antagonistic to any advice coming to their direction.
Indignant. This reaction is fortunately not common. The user does not actually refute having misposted, but the user's ego is for some reason bruised from getting the unsolicited guidance. Consequently s/he throws some form of a tantrum. Typically the user also finds severe fault with the content of the advice. If the note is short, s/he'll complain that it is too curt, if the note is extensive, s/he'll complain that a couple of rows would have been enough. There is no satisfying a user in this frame of mind.
- (A potential response in this case: Please first try to properly calm down. Then reread the information which I sent you from a more detached and receptive perspective.)
Abusive. Fortunately this has happened very, very rarely. The user calls me names, tells me to f**k off, tells me to mind my own g*d d**n f**king business, and that he damn well posts whatever, wherever, and whenever he pleases. He also confuses my giving the information with trying to "police" the net.
- (A potential response in this rare case: I am afraid you seem to be beyond redemption, a forgery, or under the influence. Please try learn the some elementary manners if you intend to frequent the net.)
Imperial. The user wants all things handed to him/her on a silver platter. Goes something like in this spirit. "How dare you send me a prerecorded message. I do not have the time to read through long FAQ material (FAQ = Frequently Asked Questions). I want a good, brief and customized answer to my question and to my question only."
- (A potential response in this case: Sorry. While I try to help I am not everyone's obedient servant. If you wish to have commercial quality personal service, please turn to commercial providers.)

Timo, given the abuse by some users, I don't know why you are still so friendly to the people on the Usenet news and point them to the right directions.

Thank you. Truthfully, however, I do not always manage to moderate my tone, even if I should. However, when I do it is based on a long-time experience on the Usenet news. Given the great number of readers in the international newsgroups there are bound to also be abusive reactions to any advice one gives. Nothing is gained by getting excessively upset about such cases.

Furthermore, one has to bear in mind that the advice is in fact directed more to the others than the actual abuser. It is for the new readers who might find the tips useful and still benefit from the advice. The abuser is not who is the most relevant, often being beyond reason and redemption anyway. Responding and/or giving advice to confirmed, deliberate abusers is non-productive. Once a poster's disruptive intentions have become obvious, his/her postings are best just skipped.

I really can't understand why there are flames on you for giving common netiquette and other advice.

Because it sometimes is the best they can do, and it is in the human nature to try to have some visibility, even if in a twisted way. Furthermore, some individuals detest the existence of Usenet news netiquette and especially any unsolicited references to it. They have to demonstrate their defiance at least somehow. It is a special kind of a keyboard-rage. Bear in mind that abusive behavior is so easy, and if it is done anonymously to boot, it is an indication of a lack of character. It is so much more demanding to be constructive and informative. That is where the true challenge lies. Not in some cheap abuse.

Nettipoliisi-FAQ (in Finnish)
Re: Nyyssi-poliisit

[To Timo's FAQ materials index page ]

[ts(ät)uwasa.fi ] [Photo ] [Programs ] [FAQs ] [Research ] [Lectures ] [Acc&Fin links ] [Faculty ] [University ]

[Revalidate]