Request For Feedback: Bullying

LoLth

On behalf of the admins I'd like to request some feedback from the users of boards.ie. I'd like users to give us their thoughts on the issue of bullying.

Now, before everyone starts posting "Mod X is bullying me!" or "I saw mod Y bullying user Z" or "everyone is bullying me!" I just want to lay some ground rules for this discussion.

1. This is a request for feedback on the issue of bullying for several purposes:
a: so everyone can be made more aware of exactly what bullying actually is
b: so that if it is witnessed, users can properly report it to mods and cmods who can verify it using the same metric
c: so that the admins can gauge just how big an issue this actually is and review our current policy

2. This is a feedback thread, it is not a thread to report issues. As always, any issues should be reported using the appropriate channels (mods or cmods by PM or through reported posts and provide links to posts that illustrate your reason for believing that it is bullying. this isnt being finicky, its to make it easier for the mod or cmod to see what you are seeing)

3. In order to keep this thread on topic as much as possible it may be handy to frame your reponse along the lines of:

What do you define as bullying?
What do you feel is the best way to tackle it? Discussion? straight ban? warning then ban?
Is it actually an issue in your opinion or is it just the nature of semi-anonymous online discussion?
To what extent do you think Boards has a responsibility to respond to issues that occur outside of boards itself?


for reference here are the possibly relevant parts of the terms and conditions all registered users agree to when they sign up:

Boards users agree NOT to:

•treat others with disrespect
•defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the rights
•(such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others

is this, by itself, enough to counteract bullying?

Why do I want to hear your definition of bullying?
Because I think there may be a blurring of the meaning of the term taking place. As cyber bullying gets more airtime and gains credence as a real and serious issue that can have devestating effects on people of all ages, not just children, some people start to see it as a way to avoid responsibility for their own actions. We're seeing this more and more, the term "bully" and the claim of being bullied is becoming common place and in the vast majority of cases there is no evidence of actual bullying happening. There's users slagging the user in a thread, there's users disagreeing and there are mods applying the same rules that apply to everyone else to the individual but no actual organised bullying in the sense of the word as the admins define it. So, we need to understand what you, the users, perceive to be bullying so we can see if we need to make our definition clearer or if we maybe need to revise our definition completely.

To properly gauge any policy designed to tackle bullies, we first have to know exactly what it is we are trying to tackle. Additionally, policy alone is not enough, its never enough. We cant see everything so boards, as always, relies on the users to police themselves to catch the bits we mods may miss. To do this, we need all users to know what they are supposed to be looking out for and to recognise it when they see it. We also need users to know what it ISNT. Boards is a social site driven by communities. If the definition of bullying is unclear then any accusation of bullying can cause just as much damage to a posters reputation even if the accusation is proven untrue by the mods or admins. Not to mention the fact htat if the definition is nebulous, then how can anyone know whether or not they are actually guilty of it?

So, without getting into specific cases and without starting a witch hunt, please feel free to post your opinions here and help us make this site better for everyone, yourself included.

From time to time myself or another admin will be commenting on the feedback to ask questions and get more information. Some comments may be contradictory to arguments or observations expressed, please do not take this to mean an admin is overruling or ignoring an opinion. Sometimes we need to play devils advocate to tease out the details we most need to understand.

A final note: given the sensitive nature of the topic and the seriousness of the issue I would ask for all posters to try to stay on topic and avoid conflict. Any trolling, opportunistic dig-taking, abuse of users or mods will result in strict application of the forum charter (go read it if you havent already, its linked in my sig). We (the staff, admins, cmods and mods) take bullying very seriously and we would hope that our users do too.

5starpool

My 2c.

Most of the threads I've seen complaining about bullying by people are nothing of the sort, and those doing the complaining are generally expressing holders of controversial or religious beliefs who think they or the people who hold similar viewpoints are being oppressed or restricted in some way, when all that is happening is that they don't know how to engage properly with regard to the rules in place.

I'm sure there are instances of bullying, but as someone who has been around the block here a few times, I can not remember very many cases that have come to light in feedback or helpdesk where they usually end up. There are cases where moderators are clearly wrong imo, and these often go unrectified, or other cases where some of the rules in place are too stringent, but these shouldn'r necessarily be confused with bullying.

Tombi!

I think bullying in the real world sense is a tad different since more physical things can go on. Even simple things like hiding things a person needs at work. It can be a joke at first but at times it can really get to a person.

As for cyber bullying, I'd consider it the same as bullying in person: harassing someone to the point that said person is unhappy/uncomfortable with things. It doesn't literally need to be harassing but just simple "picking on" (whatever you want to call it) is bullying to me.

I think cyber bullying is a bit harder to witness. I mean the other week I made a joke to a mod in a thread about trolling or something (it was in a fairly obvious joking manner) and in the same post I mentioned I'm on the dole and the mod made a very obvious sarcastic post that could have been seen as bullying if you didn't see my previous post. I don't think anybody would have a problem with what she said.
There's a reason I'm mentioning this post.

Now if you didn't see my post she responded to, you might see it as a bit of bullying and you might think to report it.
But most people wouldn't. Most people would just ignore posts that *could* be bullying and opt to stay out of it.
At the end of the day to me, just either PM a mod or report the post and explain you think it feels that it's bullying a user.

It's just like in school or a workplace, if you think a person is unhappy over how they're being treated by other people or are being bullied, you'd report it (or at least I would).

As for how a mod should handle it, I suppose the same way it was dealt with for me when a teacher thought I was being bullied: just PM the person and ask. Assuming the person does feel like they're being bullied then the mod(s) should talk to the people who are "bullying" (in quotations since the person might not realize it's bullying) and explain that the first person is genuinely upset and that the second person should stop it.
So in other words, if someone is believed to be bullied, find out who's doing the bullying and warn them to stop.

There really is a fine line but I think the biggest problem everyone has is either "it's online so just let it go" or else they don't think it's worth reporting it because it's not ongoing.
But as 5starpool said, there really are a lot of people who do throw the "I'm being bullied by X/Y/Z" a lot and it's nothing of the sort. I think if you really feel victimized by a user, then you should take your time and word your complaint carefully to a Cmod or admin or whatever.
But there are far too many people that complain about mods abusing powers and whatnot but that's pretty much off topic.

As for Boards being responsible for things that happened outside... I'm not sure. I suppose at the end of the day all Boards can really do is remove posts that might have information about the victim that the bullies can use.

Penn

I think sometimes discussions can get quite heated, maybe it's very one-sided with a bunch of posters arguing against one or two people and just bombarding them with posts, but to me, even if there's some personal abuse in the posts, I wouldn't necessarily call it bullying.

To me, bullying is when one or more posters go out of their way to antagonise or harass another poster. Finding posts of theirs in forums they wouldn't normally post in and arguing with them. Mentioning their name in threads even if that poster hasn't even posted in it just because of whatever type of reputation they have or what side of an argument they usually take. Constantly bringing up stuff from much older posts to throw back at them. Making fun of them at every given opportunity, and just plain old arguing with them just for the sake of arguing, or being dismissive of their posts simply because of who posted it.

As for how to tackle it, I think it all depends on the extent of it. First course of action should probably be a profile infraction and stern PM to knock it off (which could be disputed as normal via the DRP or PMs with an Admin). After that or depending on how long it's been going on etc, perhaps a short siteban would be justified in cases of bullying. We siteban users for sending an abusive PM, as they're using PMs to abuse other posters in a way the mods can't see, but the aim is the same; bullying.

I think it is an issue, because the whole "Ah, it's the internet, every expects it" just doesn't really apply to a forum like this. If the relatively high standards of posting and behaviour are to be maintained, then personal abuse goes against that.

looksee

I think for someone to consider themselves being bullied they would have to find themselves unwilling to post in a forum because they felt they would not get a reasonable hearing and people would be making abusive remarks, regardless of the topic being discussed or the poster's own attitude.

I don't think this happens to any extent without being picked up by the mods, and it is always possible to report a post. Unless someone is pm-ing abuse it is all in the open and fairly easy to spot.

There is a tendency in some of the tecky forums for people to try and blind you with science and then get shirty if you ask for an explanation. That's just ignorance on their part, but if that is the way they want to run the forum and the mod approves, then so be it.

There are one or two forums that I don't very often - or never - post in because I know I am not on the same wavelength as the other posters, but I don't consider that bullying, its just the atmosphere of the forum and I have no real interest in the forum anyway.

I have seen some aggressive posting, but again that is not particularly bullying, just someone making a show of themselves and they generally get picked up on it.

I don't think there is anything remotely resembling the kind of carry-on that has been causing issues on other sites.

P. Breathnach

looksee wrote: »

I think for someone to consider themselves being bullied they would have to find themselves unwilling to post in a forum because they felt they would not get a reasonable hearing and people would be making abusive remarks, regardless of the topic being discussed or the poster's own attitude.

I don't think this happens to any extent without being picked up by the mods, and it is always possible to report a post....

Do mods check on people ceasing to post in a forum? Because that is how they can infer that somebody has become unwilling to post in a forum.

Overheal

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Do mods check on people ceasing to post in a forum? Because that is how they can infer that somebody has become unwilling to post in a forum.

Or they moved, or there pc has crashed, or it's out of season for them, maybe they only post in politics during the election cycle. maybe they work in retail and don't spend that much time on tech anymore reading 'what tablet should I buy' threads out of a proactive want for civility and not wanting to bate the **** out of people with a keyboard.

Of course, these are just examples.. But you can't really take a posters vacancy as evidence of much by itself.

MugMugs

Overheal wrote: »

Or they moved, or there pc has crashed, or it's out of season for them, maybe they only post in politics during the election cycle. maybe they work in retail and don't spend that much time on tech anymore reading 'what tablet should I buy' threads out of a proactive want for civility and not wanting to bate the **** out of people with a keyboard.

Of course, these are just examples.. But you can't really take a posters vacancy as evidence of much by itself.

I think the query was more along the lines of a poster leaves the forum but is active elsewhere.


In relation to the topic itself, I really can't see how it's a problem. I've got my degree of individuals whom either don't like me or my opinions and as such nit pick my every statement. I used to report them but it didn't work as it wasn't actually collated.... The mods had no idea that these people were always at it.... I merely took the opinion that they deserve nothing more than an ignore which I promptly did....

This is an Internet forum. We are all anonymous and if we are not then we chose to reveal who we are. Frankly if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen....

Tombi!

MugMugs wrote: »

In relation to the topic itself, I really can't see how it's a problem. I've got my degree of individuals whom either don't like me or my opinions and as such nit pick my every statement. I used to report them but it didn't work as it wasn't actually collated.... The mods had no idea that these people were always at it.... I merely took the opinion that they deserve nothing more than an ignore which I promptly did....

This is an Internet forum. We are all anonymous and if we are not then we chose to reveal who we are. Frankly if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen....

I disagree. If I post in 10 forums and you try to have digs at me in three of them but it's done sporadically, you're still trying to have digs at me. Ignoring should be a last option. Sure, it's nice that I can ignore you if you're bullying me but I shouldn't have to. The victim shouldn't change to suit the bully.
And it's a bit off topic but you could have just PM'ed a mod or admin or whatever.

We're not all anonymous; we go by account names and honestly, there's a big difference between having a few incidents of an argument getting heated and someone trying to ruin your experience, even if it's just an online forum.

Bloodwing

LoLth wrote: »

What do you define as bullying?

In my mind bullying is personal abuse towards an individual, done solely to (or even likely to) cause that individual pain or upset.

I haven't been around here that long but I'm yet to see it happening in any of the public forums. I've seen plenty of people claiming to be victims of bullying in the DRP and Feedback forums.

A lot of the time when someone claims to have been bullied it turns out to be a case where they have expressed an opinion that is the polar opposite to the opinion that the majority of regular posters in the chosen forum would hold. It would be similar to me walking into the George, standing up on the bar and shouting out that homosexuality is wrong, of course the response I'm going to get is going to be angry and and no doubt a large percentage of the people who hear my shouts won't be interested in hearing me debate my point of view, instead they'll tell me to shut up and feck right off and rightly so.

Calling someones opinion stupid is not bullying, calling someone stupid for holding a particular opinion is rude and unwanted but still not bullying, searching through someones post history and coming back with a comment like "hey fatty I see your GF left you, that's probably becuse of the stupid opinion you have" that is in my mind bullying and should be dealt with seriously.

LoLth wrote: »

What do you feel is the best way to tackle it? Discussion? straight ban? warning then ban?

If bullying becomes evident I would be of the opinion that the offender should receive an outright ban without even access to the prison forum.

LoLth wrote: »

Is it actually an issue in your opinion or is it just the nature of semi-anonymous online discussion?

Although I said above that I have not seen any of it on Boards and I doubt very much goes on, it's still an issue that needs to be addressed and people need to be made aware of the consequences they face if they are found to be perpetrators, and genuine victims need to feel comfortable in coming forwarded and asking for assistance in dealing with bullies.

LoLth wrote: »

To what extent do you think Boards has a responsibility to respond to issues that occur outside of boards itself?

Maybe you could elaborate on this a bit more? Are you referring to incidences where people use information about someone obtained through Boards to bully said person in RL?

P. Breathnach

MugMugs wrote: »

I think the query was more along the lines of a poster leaves the forum but is active elsewhere. ...

I am sure that happens, but my point was really that mods are not likely to notice when people leave a forum, and accordingly are unlikely to look into the reasons why they leave.

Some forums are more robust than others, and people might quit them because of the behaviour of a coterie of regulars. That might be a bad thing.

Micky Dolenz

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I am sure that happens, but my point was really that mods are not likely to notice when people leave a forum, and accordingly are unlikely to look into the reasons why they leave.

Some forums are more robust than others, and people might quit them because of the behaviour of a coterie of regulars. That might be a bad thing.

Many people leave for many different reasons. It would be unsual for a mod to speculate why a poster wasn't posting on boards or a certain forum.

The best thing about boards and bullying is, every word that is written can be read. If a poster is taking often and unnecessary pot shots at another poster but doing it in a low level manner, upon investigating a clear picture can be seen.Even with PM's. You receive an abusive PM and it can be reported like a post. It goes directly for Admin eyes only.

It's not like continuous sneaky digs behind the bike shed that no one sees or is hard to prove. Posters leave an electronic paper trial here that can be easily examined if an accusation is made.

What is bullying is another matter all together, the word does seem to be a catch all for some behavior. Posters constantly arguing over similar issues would not be bullying in my opinion. Digging up posts or cross forum following with the intent to harass would be more in line to what I think bullying and badgering is.

Steve

Interesting topic.

What about where the bullying does not directly occur on boards yet the individuals involved can be reasonably identified to accounts here?

In the cases I know about, this happened off boards via other social media platforms where disgruntled users, for example, found a user or mods FB page or twitter account or even just found out their real life identity and posted demeaning stuff about them on those other social media sites.

Should this be taken into account? What can we do about it, if anything?

MugMugs

Steve wrote: »

Interesting topic.

What about where the bullying does not directly occur on boards yet the individuals involved can be reasonably identified to accounts here?

In the cases I know about, this happened off boards via other social media platforms where disgruntled users, for example, found a user or mods FB page or twitter account or even just found out their real life identity and posted demeaning stuff about them on those other social media sites.

Should this be taken into account? What can we do about it, if anything?

Circumstances like that should merit an instant and permanent site ban. You don't know me and I don't know you and it will always remain like that. Nobody should have to suffer their personal life being broadcast here and especially not somebody who volunteers to mod a forum.

Steve

MugMugs wrote: »

Circumstances like that should merit an instant and permanent site ban. You don't know me and I don't know you and it will always remain like that. Nobody should have to suffer their personal life being broadcast here and especially not somebody who volunteers to mod a forum.

I agree.

Point is nobody 'here' did anything wrong so no action 'here' could be justified because of it if you see what I mean.

It still happened and number of people knew it happened and a number of people knew who was involved but there was no proof or paper-trail on boards so, at the time, there was "nothing we could do"..

Kids in school get bullied via their FB accounts and such - footballers in the UK get bullied (same thing really) via same and sanctions are brought against them in real life. The question here is should or could boards expand their virtual remit to these domains and what, if any, action could or would be appropriate for them to take?

Delirium

Steve wrote: »

I agree.

Point is nobody 'here' did anything wrong so no action 'here' could be justified because of it if you see what I mean.

It still happened and number of people knew it happened and a number of people knew who was involved but there was no proof or paper-trail on boards so, at the time, there was "nothing we could do"..

Kids in school get bullied via their FB accounts and such - footballers in the UK get bullied (same thing really) via same and sanctions are brought against them in real life. The question here is should or could boards expand their virtual remit to these domains and what, if any, action could or would be appropriate for them to take?

How would Boards HQ determine that the user on twitter/FB etc is the same person on boards? And even if they did, is it Boards job to police the internet for misbehaving boards users?

A user on here bullying another user, siteban if it's felt it's appropriate solution. But we'd need to get a pretty good definition of what falls under bullying on the site.

Some posters frequenly post in threads that is a subject of interest to them. And they probably run into a couple of the same posters in some threads. Is it bullying if PosterA frequently gets into a discussion with PosterB on a subject? I've seen that suggested as bullying a couple of times on the site.

Another scenario that some posters have suggested as bully is where it's clear that one side of the discussion outnumbers the posters on the other side. Are we to place some sort of artifical balancing act on threads to avoid that situation arising?

There are some times when it would be an obvious case of bullying, but there are also times where bullying is thrown around as an attempt to get mods/admins take punitive action against a poster someone doesn't like/agree with.

What do you define as bullying?

On boards? singling out a particular poster to pick on regularly. That can be done by one person, or by a group of people.

What do you feel is the best way to tackle it? Discussion? straight ban? warning then ban?

Well this depends on a number of things:

- The alleged bully's track record
- The level of personal attack
- The potential over-sensitivity of the alleged victim.

And other factors. Every case has to be treated individually to a point.

A zero tolerance policy is of course best, but in order to get to the point of zero tolerance, mods have to be very sure that what is happening is bullying.

Ideally, there should be some discussion, on thread warnings or perhaps a forum sticky, then infractions/bans.

Is it actually an issue in your opinion or is it just the nature of semi-anonymous online discussion?

Yes, it's an issue. It's not a huge issue, it's not happening all the time, but I see it happening in my forums and it can be downright nasty. However, I also see where posters are just oversensitive and accuse anyone of disagreeing with them, of bullying. Some posters need to understand what heated debate is, and as long as it doesn't turn personal, it's healthy and a big part of what discussion forums are all about.

To what extent do you think Boards has a responsibility to respond to issues that occur outside of boards itself?

This is a difficult one. It's easy to say "boards have no responsibility in these instances". But it's not that simple. I mean, if someone is getting hassled outside of boards, by someone who they've only met on this website (i.e. have only interacted with them through public threads etc), then boards should help in whatever way possible. Posters who use boards.ie as a starting point for stalking/harrassment/bullying, certainly shouldn't be given the privilege of posting here.

If posters are being bullied outside of boards, by another poster who they have entered a personal relationship with (be that friendship/sexual/professional), then I don't think boards has any obligation there.

Of course none of it as simple as what I've posted above, and I'm mostly thinking out loud, but that's my 2cents.

Princess Peach

Steve wrote: »

Interesting topic.

What about where the bullying does not directly occur on boards yet the individuals involved can be reasonably identified to accounts here?

In the cases I know about, this happened off boards via other social media platforms where disgruntled users, for example, found a user or mods FB page or twitter account or even just found out their real life identity and posted demeaning stuff about them on those other social media sites.

Should this be taken into account? What can we do about it, if anything?

This happened me before, the bullying was by a Boards users but not on Boards. I stopped posting in a forum to stop it. I should note it was done anonymously so there was no way for me to know who the user was to bring it to Boards attention, if I felt that was the way to go.

I think what the consequences of bullying also need to be addressed. I had another issue with a poster who would bully me across several forums. I reported a lot of the posts and said poster was warned on thread about it, but this happened several times. In the end their account was closed so I didn't bring it any further, but the continuous warnings didn't do a whole lot! If I remember correctly there was one day the poster got 2 or 3 warnings in the same forum! Although one of the posts did not directly address me, I knew from the information in the post it was about me.

That one I can't really talk about too much, since the poster left I didn't need to bring the matter any further! But I did sometimes feel the on thread warnings weren't enough.

Honey-ec

I'll post here pretty much what I posted in the Feedback thread in tLL.

The bullying thing is definitely a very tricky one and I don't envy the mods having to try to deal with it. Some people are definitely more sensitive to what they perceive as bullying than others - one person's personal attack is another person's "straight talking" post.

My own personal opinion is that if you can be so upset by something said to you by a complete stranger who you will never meet in real life that you would consider leaving Boards (I'm talking about over one or two isolated incidents), then perhaps internet message boards are not the best place for you in the first place, but I also accept that some people are just more easily upset than others, and again, that's what makes modding bullying accusations so hard, I'd imagine. It's just so subjective.

A sticky/charter on what does and does not constitute bullying might be helpful, but it's not possible for it ever to be definitive because so much of what can be seen as bullying is down to personal perception. If one poster is particularly sensitive and is constantly reporting posts from a wide selection of users, will they be told that they're being too sensitive by the mods, or do the mods have to be seen to act on every accusation of bullying, whether they agree with it or not? I do think it's a particularly senstive subject right now, because of the girl who killed herself in the North recently due to online bullying. (Her name escapes me right now, sorry.)

Earthhorse

In the world of ethics there is something called the "New York Times test" which states that if what you were doing was to be printed on the front page of the New York Times would you be happy for friends and family to know about it? It's a quick, acid-test to give you a feel for whether what you're doing is ethical or not. Similarly, there are certain key phrases or watchwords such as "everyone else does it" or "that's what we've always done" that can be taken as warning signs of a potential ethical breach.

Rather than pin ourselves down to a definition of bullying, which will either by so specific that it will include no one, or so vague that it will include everyone, I think it would be helpful to have a checklist of typical bullying behaviours by which admins, mods and users can identify bullies and their cohorts. To my mind, these are the hallmarks of a bully:

- bullies continually use aggressive language and attitudes when dealing with their victims and continually seek to escalate the tone of the debate and to personalise it.
- bullies continually seek to portray their victim as outsiders or "other". They do this through personalisation and by exaggerating the extremity of their victim's character or opinions.
- to disguise both of the above, and their general intent, bullies will seek to contribute properly to the debate i.e. contributing some valuable posts to a discussion does not rule you out as a bully.
- bullies seek to ingratiate themselves with popular members of the forum; they may not be popular themselves but they understand the power of popularity and seek to leverage it.
- to achieve this bullies adopt an entirely different tone when dealing with said popular members and their victims i.e. bullies should not be confused with people who are abrupt, abrasive and lacking in social etiquette.
- when called on their behaviour bullies often have "changes of mind". This usually happens when they realise their opinion is in the minority; at such a point they will try and reposition themselves and argue that that was their stance all along and they had merely been misunderstood.
- when called on their behaviour bullies often have "changes of heart". This usually takes the form of feigned innocence, claiming they were "only joking"
- when called on their behaviour bullies will readily have extenuating circumstances at hand e.g. "Sorry, I'm just a little stressed at work at the moment", in order to explain their outbursts. However, the aggressive tone will continue shortly after.
- bullies will continually push the boudaries of what's allowed whilst being careful not to overstep it.
- bullies will continually seek the letter of the law to be applied to their behaviour but the spirit of the law to be applied to their victim's. When it suits them they will reverse this position; they invest heavily in flexible and double standards to achieve their aims.
- bullies will seek to hide behind false defences: "It's only words", "It's just the internet".

The above list is not exhaustive and there is much overlap in these behaviours but it is worth casting the net wide if you wish to catch a coward. Once someone exhibits two or three of the above traits over time alarm bells should begin ringing with regards to their behaviour. This is especially true where this behaviour is directed consistently at the same person or people.

With regard to behaviour on other websites boards has, in my opinion, too often sought to do the correct rather than the right thing in the past. Whilst you can't fully investigate claims made about behaviour there it is often trivial to prove it. In circumstances such as those boards should not hesitate in censuring the bully; though I accept such instances will be rare and extreme.

As hard as it is to swallow those who have the power to censure and do not are ultimately little better than the bullies themselves.

Princess Peach

Earthhorse wrote: »

- bullies will seek to hide behind false defences: "It's only words", "It's just the internet".

That's a great list! This one stood out to me most! Yes it is the internet, but are we not all real people with feelings and emotions? Drives me crazy when people say calm down, its not real life!

I think what mostly quantifies as bullying here on Boards is when things get personal. If you post an opinion, there is more than likely someone with the opposite opinion of you. And you're entitled to be upset about it, but its usually not bullying!

I think bullying is personal attacks, on a person's life choices or personality. This is usually put in all charters, "Attack the post not the poster." Maybe this needs to be made clearer, give an example under the rule?

dr.bollocko

Earthhorse wrote: »

In the world of ethics there is something called the "New York Times test" which states that if what you were doing was to be printed on the front page of the New York Times would you be happy for friends and family to know about it? It's a quick, acid-test to give you a feel for whether what you're doing is ethical or not. Similarly, there are certain key phrases or watchwords such as "everyone else does it" or "that's what we've always done" that can be taken as warning signs of a potential ethical breach.
...

That's a great post earthy.

username123

Ive posted about this over in the Ladies Lounge.

I had an experience on boards where I disagreed with a poster on a thread. There were a couple of posts each and then a mod said on-thread to stay on topic and stop bickering (or something to that effect). The poster then sent me an aggressive pm. There was no bad language, but the tone was aggressive, tbh I felt it was the email equivalent of "cmon! lets get into it!!".

I felt very unsettled that a complete stranger who I disagreed with would pm me aggressively. I reported the pm. I heard nothing back. I asked in feedback what happens in these situations and was told I wouldnt hear of any mod decision. The poster continued to post in the thread. I felt very hard done by because it seemed they could just get away with being nasty in private and nice in public. Knowing that I risked an infraction I outed the poster on the thread and said that they had sent me a nasty pm when I last disagreed with them. I got red carded on the thread for it.

I felt the situation was unfairly handled. I was red carded after I received a nasty pm. Nothing happened to the other poster - that I was aware of. To send someone a nasty pm is an attempt to bully behind the scenes.

A kind mod mailed me yesterday after I posted about this in the Ladies Lounge and explained to me that a reported pm goes to admin, so the mod in the situation above may not have known about the nasty pm. Im not bothered about it now btw, but I just wanted to raise it on this thread as a specific incident where I felt that someone (unsuccessfully I might add) tried to bully me.

Trojan

username123 wrote: »

The poster then sent me an aggressive pm. There was no bad language, but the tone was aggressive, tbh I felt it was the email equivalent of "cmon! lets get into it!!".

I've just read that PM, and I can understand why it wasn't actioned. The language used by the sender was very mild, and it's very easy to interpret as non-abusive.

Please note that I am not saying it's not abusive to you - in bullying, the bullies often keep it subtle and low-key, where any single instance is difficult to pick up on. It's very hard for us to get that from a single, seemingly mild PM.

For discussion: What's the solution here? Should we clamp down more harshly on any unwanted PMs, be they abusive or not? We normally siteban users for a month if they send abusive PMs - what's the correct action for an unwanted but not obviously abusive PM?

P. Breathnach

Arising from username123's experience, there is a lesson to be learned by some mods: they should not deal with on-thread conflict with the advice "Guys, take it to email". That's coming close to inviting people to send abusive emails.

Wibbs

LoLth wrote: »

What do you define as bullying?

That's the million dollar question L. On Boards anyway. Obvious bullying is hoped on PDQ in my experience. Because Boards is so good at dealing with the obvious stuff the problem here comes with the low level bullying that isn't so obvious where it can come down to perceptions of the person feeling they're singled out. TBH I've certainly seen cases as a mod where I did think "maybe I'm missing something, but I'm just not seeing it". Luckily co-mods will jump in and correct/inform/agree with me[delete as applicable].

What do you feel is the best way to tackle it? Discussion? straight ban? warning then ban?

Discussion, warning then ban? Obvious stuff then straight out removal from the forum, inform cmods and admins so they can discuss whether a siteban is warranted.

Is it actually an issue in your opinion or is it just the nature of semi-anonymous online discussion?

Like others, I don't buy the "it's just the internet". That's a bit of a cop out IMHO. Some people have tougher skins so it doesn't bother them. They may then project that onto others and expect them to feel the same.

In some ways the internet is more open to bullying. The perception of anonymity can give nasty types the idea they won't get caught. Plus people may open up way more than they would dream of in "real life" which can leave them vulnerable to bullies. Bullies just love exploiting what they see as weakness.

There's one aspect I'm hesitant to discuss in case it's misconstrued, but I feel maybe a bit of discussion is warranted... Some people can enable what looks like bullying type behaviour in others who wouldn't ordinarily be that type at all. This "victim" type of person may even get emotional feedback(even if it's unhealthy) from this kinda thing and goad others. That can be a hard one to navigate if and when it comes up. Other folks may be too quick to call the "bully" card knowing it's a serious thing. That for me is when the nuanced stuff starts to get head scratchy.

To what extent do you think Boards has a responsibility to respond to issues that occur outside of boards itself?

Obviously little can be done on outside sources, but I reckon if it affects a member of this community then it's part of this community's deal to look at it and if required jump on it. I've seen Boards do so in the past, where shenanigans on facebook/chatrooms spilled over onto here in a negative way and the admins dealt with it. Good call I say.

Wibbs

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Arising from username123's experience, there is a lesson to be learned by some mods: they should not deal with on-thread conflict with the advice "Guys, take it to email". That's coming close to inviting people to send abusive emails.

Maybe P, but if they do -and it's entirely up to them as responsible adults to do so - send an obviously abusive PM and the person reports this then that'll get actioned.

Just something that popped into my head reading Wibbs' post.

I've gotten PMs from posters I've infracted/warned for personal abuse and the likes saying "oh I didn't realise X was so sensitive". Or, "I can't believe X reported my post" etc. It's certainly not the case that "victims" of personal abuse/bullying/harrassment are running to tell tales to the mods. More often than not, it's other posters who may have reported the post, or it has been seen directly by the mods.

username123

Trojan wrote: »

I've just read that PM, and I can understand why it wasn't actioned. The language used by the sender was very mild, and it's very easy to interpret as non-abusive.

Yes I agree that the language was mild, but given the context of the on thread disagreement it came across as unnecessarily aggressive. Its important that things are taken in context in such cases. Personally I thought someone must be a complete weirdo to send such a message at all.

I totally agree with P. Breathnach on the 'take it to pm' instruction from mods - in a million years I would have zero interest in engaging with a stranger and having a disagreement via pm - why would anyone do that?

Wibbs

username123 wrote: »

Yes I agree that the language was mild, but given the context of the on thread disagreement it came across as unnecessarily aggressive.

To you U. I'm most certainly not dismissing you or that it was or wasn't by saying that, but you see what we mean when sometimes it can be very hard to judge this stuff when it's low level?

Its important that things are taken in context in such cases.

Certainly, but there's a bit of a disconnect regarding PM's because as you discovered reported PM's go only to admins. The admin in question likely has no idea of context so just takes the PM on it's own merit. If they decided to look at context for every non obvious case they might have to sieve through 100's of post interactions and IMHO no way should they have to be doing that as volunteers like the rest of us. In more obvious cases they either ban the sender involved, or involve local mods to get their take as they'll have a better idea of context.

On the other side of this if mods/admins make the wrong call and someone ends up being accused of bullying wrongfully that could cause as much of an issue. I'd be very aware of that too.

I totally agree with P. Breathnach on the 'take it to pm' instruction from mods - in a million years I would have zero interest in engaging with a stranger and having a disagreement via pm - why would anyone do that?

Oh I have and others do, but I take your(and P's) point, maybe "take it to PM" should be looked at and discussed in light of this thread?

nompere

looksee wrote: »

There is a tendency in some of the tecky forums for people to try and blind you with science and then get shirty if you ask for an explanation. That's just ignorance on their part, but if that is the way they want to run the forum and the mod approves, then so be it.

I've taken this out of a longer post, because I think it's a very important point. The first part of the final sentence is fine - it is indeed ignorance - but I think the second part is plain wrong.

It might be a technical forum, but it is a public part of the site, and neither the posters who want to run a thing their way, nor the mods who condone it, have a right to exclude other posters. A mod who allows such behaviour needs censuring, and needs reminding that any poster is entitled to simple courtesy when asking a question.

username123

Wibbs wrote: »

To you U. I'm most certainly not dismissing you or that it was or wasn't by saying that, but you see what we mean when sometimes it can be very hard to judge this stuff when it's low level?

Absolutely. I never tried to follow it up in any official capacity because I can see exactly that point. But if we are having feedback about bullying in general I am glad of the opportunity to raise it in a non-official capacity.

I think it is clear that I felt treated unfairly in the particularly situation but not so much that I wanted more action - I just took my infraction and said nothing.

Wibbs wrote: »

Certainly, but there's a bit of a disconnect regarding PM's because as you discovered reported PM's go only to admins. The admin in question likely has no idea of context so just takes the PM on it's own merit. If they decided to look at context for every non obvious case they might have to sieve through 100's of post interactions and IMHO no way should they have to be doing that as volunteers like the rest of us. In more obvious cases they either ban the sender involved, or involve local mods to get their take as they'll have a better idea of context.

Yes, I never even thought about that disconnect before and when it was explained to me it made perfect sense.

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh I have and others do, but I take your(and P's) point, maybe "take it to PM" should be looked at and discussed in light of this thread?

I think that again its about context. Telling people to take disagreements to pm seems silly, but telling people to take off topic chats where there is no disagreement might be appropriate?

Micky Dolenz

I don't really see "take it to PM" very often and I always thought it was a polite way of telling arguing posters to shut up.

Benny_Cake

In a Boards context, I'd see bullying as behaviour which would tend to make the target feel uncomfortable about posting on a forum, or anywhere on Boards.That's pretty vague, but generally if it is bad behaviour on a thread or in a single forum, it should be possible for the mods to handle it within the context of the charter. Where it gets more serious is if someone gets abusive or threatening via PM, or starts following a particular poster from forum to forum simply to goad them, or, as I've witnessed unfortunately, where a user gets slagged off in a thread where they aren't even posting at the time. I'm inclined to think a ban of some description should follow in those instances, varying on the severity of the bullying.

As someone who (tries) to mod a forum in the religious subcategory, I'm all too aware of how wound up people can get during a long debate and it can quite quickly take on a personal tone.I'd imagine that the same applies to Politics and Soccer..but it may not always amount other bullying and can be usually resolved through the normal channels. It's helpful to have this debate though, there is enough nastiness that people face in the real world without having to deal with it here.

username123

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I don't really see "take it to PM" very often and I always thought it was a polite way of telling arguing posters to shut up.

Maybe it is. I have seen it alright. The problem if you receive an unwanted nasty pm is that you really dont know if this is just a harmless one off or someone weird that youd be best off not to engage with at all. As in real life, no one wants to draw weirdos onto themselves.

Micky Dolenz

username123 wrote: »

Maybe it is. I have seen it alright. The problem if you receive an unwanted nasty pm is that you really dont know if this is just a harmless one off or someone weird that youd be best off not to engage with at all. As in real life, no one wants to draw weirdos onto themselves.

One off digs can be hard to nail down but worth reporting all the same. If it's more then once, always worth keeping a track of the low level stuff so links can be looked at.

Harassment is something we take very seriously and in the past have spent a lot of time reviewing claims.

Logical_Bear

the ignore button is there for a reason.Use it!!

El Guapo!

I recently got a red card for a comment I made in AH. The comment was off the cuff and was really meant in a light-hearted, humorous way but it wasn't seen that way by a mod.
My first reaction was basically "wtf was the red card for?". But when I took a closer look at it, I realised that was I said could well have been construed as a "bullying" post.
I immediately sent a pm to the person and apologised for my post. They were totally cool with it and didn't seem to see it as bullying but I can see how a more sensitive poster may have been offended by it.
I'm normally careful about what I say as I'd never intentionally go out to hurt someones feelings or anything. I despise bullying in all forms and I've never bullied anyone in my life.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that sometimes a person may make a comment which they feel is perfectly innocent but could in fact be taken to heart by the person it's aimed at. They may not realise what they said is hurtful. And this is where the mod should step in and nip it in the bud.
In my situation, the mod stepped in and instantly gave me a red card and explained why I was getting it. It was only then that I saw it from a different point of view. The mod in question did a good job in my opinion. Maybe a quiet word first might have sufficed but I suppose an example has to be made, and a precedent must be set.

I don't think there can be any rules really set in stone. Each case must be looked at on an individual basis. The "bully" in question must be looked at in depth. Does their post history show a pattern of bullying towards a certain poster? Or could it be a one-off careless remark?
It's a tricky situation and could be tough to moderate effectively but I think common sense should prevail and everything taken case by case rather than a blanket, zero tolerance policy enforced.

Steve

Dean09 wrote: »

I recently got a red card for a comment I made in AH. The comment was off the cuff and was really meant in a light-hearted, humorous way but it wasn't seen that way by a mod.
My first reaction was basically "wtf was the red card for?". But when I took a closer look at it, I realised that was I said could well have been construed as a "bullying" post.
I immediately sent a pm to the person and apologised for my post. They were totally cool with it and didn't seem to see it as bullying but I can see how a more sensitive poster may have been offended by it.
I'm normally careful about what I say as I'd never intentionally go out to hurt someones feelings or anything. I despise bullying in all forms and I've never bullied anyone in my life.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that sometimes a person may make a comment which they feel is perfectly innocent but could in fact be taken to heart by the person it's aimed at. They may not realise what they said is hurtful. And this is where the mod should step in and nip it in the bud.
In my situation, the mod stepped in and instantly gave me a red card and explained why I was getting it. It was only then that I saw it from a different point of view. The mod in question did a good job in my opinion. Maybe a quiet word first might have sufficed but I suppose an example has to be made, and a precedent must be set.

I don't think there can be any rules really set in stone. Each case must be looked at on an individual basis. The "bully" in question must be looked at in depth. Does their post history show a pattern of bullying towards a certain poster? Or could it be a one-off careless remark?
It's a tricky situation and could be tough to moderate effectively but I think common sense should prevail and everything taken case by case rather than a blanket, zero tolerance policy enforced.

What you said there really defines this issue from a moderation standpoint.

There are a small percentage of people who get offended at the slightest thing - there are the opposite small percentage of people who will take any level of abuse like water off a ducks back. Then there are the normal people in the middle.

Being able to see if someone who calls bullying belongs to the group in the middle is not an easy call, just as hard as being able to spot those who are actually being bullied but don't have the confidence to make a complaint.

In general, there are some excellent points being raised in this thread - I hope we can all learn from them, I know I will.:)

username123

I know when I first started posting on any message boards on the internet I would have come across as far less articulate than I do now. I also may well have made unsubstantiated claims, generally aired opinion as fact and all the other naive things that noobies do when they start posting.

There is a learning process where you basically sharpen up and learn that you have to be able to debate properly, back up claims, articulate yourself properly, attack the post not the poster etc....

I think sometimes newer posters get scared away during that process because they find themselves on the end of a lot of intelligent people demanding that they talk sense.

Im sure a similar number get scared away from certain forums or message boards because they hold an unpopular opinion, feel ganged up upon, become emotionally involved and fail to remember that they are just having a debate with strangers.

I think it would pay us all heed to be mindful because either of the examples above could feel like bullying to someone.

Black Swan

Mods can help. When I was a newbie user about 6 years ago (2006), another user was bullying me. He was a low level troll that was posting unkind things about me, was subtle in his comments, and did not clearly break the guidelines. I PM'd mod Victor for help, and I don't know what he did, but the bullying stopped immediately. Thanks Victor. You are my hero.

Lazarus2.0

What do you define as bullying?
Behaviour intended to or likely to impact on real life . This can be as blatantly obvious as threats (declared or implied) of physical harm or more insiduous and emotionally damaging such as cross-forum stalking , visitor messages , PMs , etc .
Forums that come across as oppressive or cliquey , while no doubt unwelcome, are a very tame form of bullying in comparison and should be dealt with at mod or Cmod level as needs be . For sure nobody should feel unwelcome to post on boards but that can and should be fixed locally .

What do you feel is the best way to tackle it? Discussion? straight ban? warning then ban?
Straight ban where that line is deemed to have been crossed . Places a marker on the account if the ban is successfully appealed . Obviously any repetition should then be instant permban . T&C's No 5

Is it actually an issue in your opinion or is it just the nature of semi-anonymous online discussion?
Less of an issue on thread-based forums such as Boards where there is a 'moral compass' (users can report + mods and/or upwards can intervene) compared to personal pages (Facebook etc) but certainly is an issue .

To what extent do you think Boards has a responsibility to respond to issues that occur outside of boards itself?
If Boards is aware of an issue occurring outside it's scope or beyond it's abilities to manage the user should be contacted with best advice on how to deal with the situation .


I suppose a dropdown 'reason for reporting' isn't an option on the current platform ? If it were you'd at least see a tendency to report or be reported for the same offence and could probably nip things in the bud either way...

LoLth

so, is the difference between bullying and (perhaps unwittingly) deserved anger driven response a timeframe thing?

a single thread where a user has posted an unpopular opinion and gets a vocal negative reaction (not hitting a level that would constitute abuse) is just that, a community reacting.

if this happens repeatedly with the same parties on both sides hten its bullying?

what if its in the same forum every time and the unpopular opinion is the same or very similar each time? Is this bullying or expected behaviour?

If its a user being followed across forums and over time, how many crossings what length of time would be a good approximation before we can say "this looks like bullying we need to talk to the user(s) involved" ?

Tombi!

I think that repeatedly posting "unpopular" opinions would be trolling.
There's an unpopular opinions thread in AH now and the mod note states (paraphrased): "if your opinion is too unpopular then you shouldn't post it".

I suppose the community reacting the same way to the same person that's posting the same type of threads/opinions is more of a "you really shouldn't be posting these opinions" rather than "you should let this person express an opinion that'll annoy other people".

At the end of the day, if I'm going to come into the single parenting forum and start posting with the opinion that single parents are bad and two parents will always be better, then that's more of me lacking common sense. I could back up my opinions with hundreds of hundreds of links, articles, studies, etc but it's not going to be welcome in that forum.
If someone is being "bullied" by posting something that'll rile up the community, it's really that users fault if they keep on doing it.

As for being followed across threads, I suppose it's really just a "do these posters normally post in the forums they're now going to" and in either case, are the responses by them being aimed at the same person and it is escalating to flames or trolling quickly and if it is, who's more responsible. Of course, a case-by-case basis is a necessity I think.

Earthhorse

LoLth wrote: »

so, is the difference between bullying and (perhaps unwittingly) deserved anger driven response a timeframe thing?

Timeframe is an element but also it's about escalation and aggression. It's okay to be angry or to vehemently disagree with someone; but if you seek to get personal, to goad the other person or to otherwise engage in behaviours I, and others, outlined earlier then you're probably more interested in bullying that debating.

a single thread where a user has posted an unpopular opinion and gets a vocal negative reaction (not hitting a level that would constitute abuse) is just that, a community reacting.

Even if it's not you couldn't prove otherwise. One swallow doesn't make a summer. It may well be bullying but you have to be practical about what you can prove or make stick.

if this happens repeatedly with the same parties on both sides hten its bullying?

what if its in the same forum every time and the unpopular opinion is the same or very similar each time? Is this bullying or expected behaviour?

I don't think it should be about unpopular opinions or robust debate; both should be welcome on boards. It should be about personalisation, aggression (not the same as annoyance), disingenuity etc.

If its a user being followed across forums and over time, how many crossings what length of time would be a good approximation before we can say "this looks like bullying we need to talk to the user(s) involved" ?

It should really be about frequency in my opinion. Twice over ten years is nothing. Ten times in two years may indicate a problem. Don't pin yourself down to one measure or metric. Use guidelines and good judgement; if a user is consistently being harassed to the point where their ability to post is hampered by others it will be apparent in the paper trail.

Princess Peach

Wibbs wrote: »

There's one aspect I'm hesitant to discuss in case it's misconstrued, but I feel maybe a bit of discussion is warranted... Some people can enable what looks like bullying type behaviour in others who wouldn't ordinarily be that type at all. This "victim" type of person may even get emotional feedback(even if it's unhealthy) from this kinda thing and goad others. That can be a hard one to navigate if and when it comes up. Other folks may be too quick to call the "bully" card knowing it's a serious thing. That for me is when the nuanced stuff starts to get head scratchy.

I've seen this happen too. Some people seem to thrive on the attention, negative or otherwise, and probably more so then on the people who jump in in defense.

But the way I feel is that just because someone puts the bait out there, doesn't really excuse those who take the bait and jump on the opportunity to get that sly dig in. Ignoring it is always the best option in this case.

LoLth

@Earthhorse (sorry PrincessPeach posted - try saying that ten times fast - while I was responding and it looked like I was referring to her post)

maybe I'm picking up your point wrong so please feel free to correct me.

I agree (personally not necessarily adminally (yeah, I know) ) with the latter half of your post but the first bit raises a question:

when an attempt is made to personalise or goad is that not already covered under abuse? That shouldnt, imho, get to the stage where its a threat of bullying because perosnal abuse / threats should be reported straihgt away and if clear, acted upon by the mod team.

I dont think we can make a policy to deal with a potential bully or a propensity to engage in bullying behaviour, this being a text medium we cant hear the tone used when someone posts "I bet you're popular in real life" to know if its a compliment or threatening or just plain creepy.

Also, from the few cases that I have seen and agree are actually bullying on boards, its rarely openly aggressive or abusive. as I said, that gets caught very quickly and gets dealt with under the abuse rules. More often its repeated vague comments, or thanking any post that criticises a particular user or seagull posting threads to "remind" those arguing against the target of past mistakes they have made etc. To me, and this is not based on any boards behaviour that I have seen, its the power-behind-the-throne manipulative type of bullying that I find hardest to spot and also hardest to prove. Coincidentally I consider this to be the worst kind of bullying as its almost subliminal to the victim and I've seen it result in an almost paranoia where any comment is taken as a personal attack and even humour takes on a much darker cast.


I apologise to anyone wanting to post and thinking that their post is no longer relevant. I'm not trying to steer the discusion here, I'm just trying to pick up a bit on a point that particularly caught my attention. A quick thanks to all who have posted so far by the way, some very clear and salient points raised and already some food for thought amongst the mod team.

Earthhorse

LoLth wrote: »

I agree (personally not necessarily adminally (yeah, I know) ) with the latter half of your post but the first bit raises a question:

when an attempt is made to personalise or goad is that not already covered under abuse? That shouldnt, imho, get to the stage where its a threat of bullying because perosnal abuse / threats should be reported straihgt away and if clear, acted upon by the mod team.

Perhaps so, but some personalisation and goading isn't quite strong enough to count as abuse that will be actioned. This relates to your paragraph below so I'll address it there.

I dont think we can make a policy to deal with a potential bully or a propensity to engage in bullying behaviour, this being a text medium we cant hear the tone used when someone posts "I bet you're popular in real life" to know if its a compliment or threatening or just plain creepy.

I agree that tone is lacking in text but there is context and, again, over time, I think one can, with a fair degree of accuracy build a profile of the user's intent.

Also, from the few cases that I have seen and agree are actually bullying on boards, its rarely openly aggressive or abusive. as I said, that gets caught very quickly and gets dealt with under the abuse rules. More often its repeated vague comments, or thanking any post that criticises a particular user or seagull posting threads to "remind" those arguing against the target of past mistakes they have made etc. To me, and this is not based on any boards behaviour that I have seen, its the power-behind-the-throne manipulative type of bullying that I find hardest to spot and also hardest to prove. Coincidentally I consider this to be the worst kind of bullying as its almost subliminal to the victim and I've seen it result in an almost paranoia where any comment is taken as a personal attack and even humour takes on a much darker cast.

I agree, this is a tough one to detect, make stick and moderate. It's insipid and I've seen it myself. This is the kind of personalisation and goading I was talking about; that doesn't quite amount to enough to action on its own but, over time, should. It's hard to know whether thanking a post that attacks a user or saying things like "Well, once you move out you might gain a fuller perspective on life" is just the user expressing an opinion or taking a pot shot. Again, I think that if they are repeatedly taking these kinds of actions then the body of evidence can stand as something that can be sanctioned. The "bully" should be told to reign it in a little in such circumstances; if they don't, you then take stronger action.

I don't imagine this is something that will be used all that often but I don't think boards should be afraid to say to people "We don't appreciate that style of debating around here, take it elsewhere".

I hope that's answered your questions anyway.

PC CDROM

Bullying seems to be something that "other people" do. Never the perpetrators. Bullying is not something that people actually do. If that makes sense.

It is the perception of what has or is being done.

One mans long lolcat response if funny to some but seen as demeaning by others. It really depends on were the majority opinion lies.

In saying that some people are too sensitive. Be it what ever issues they have going on in their lives.

Some fat obese people are always going to have issues with a thread slagging off fat and obese people, even if the thread does have merits in its origins. But is slagging OK?

It will be hard call to know what is right and wrong but what is need is a consistency in what is done. Black versus white. Less "Grey". I.E. "shure I was only messing"

LeeHoffmann

I also like Earthorse´s list (well done btw )and most of what I have noted below comes from there. I think it would be more helpful to deal with bullying behaviour rather than bullies per se. That way you can side step the issue of whether poster X is really a nasty little monster who´s only out to ruin everyone´s fun, and just focus on whether or not the behaviour is acceptable. Rather than saying to somebody you´re a bully - you´re banned´, you could say ´your behaviour in examples 1, 2 and 3 is classed as bullying behaviour by boards policy. Please refrain from doing 1, 2 and 3 again´. If the poster continues to do these things, infract. If they continue, ban.

If you were to do this, a list of criteria for what constitutes bullying behaviour would be essential. IMO the following seems like a good start for such a list:
- constantly using very aggressive language and attitudes towards particular posters
- seeking to escalate and personalise arguments
- portraying their opponents as outsiders or "other"
- using an entirely different tone when dealing with other posters
- having double standards with regard to how their posts and their opponent´s posts should be interpreted etc.
- seeking to belittle the feelings of other posters
- seeking to minimise the extent of what took place (eg saying a heated argument was light-hearted and not seriously meant etc)
- encouraging others to gang up on one poster (I know this is a tough one to ascertain, but e.g. I know of one poster who frequently ´talks´ about his opponents opinions to his supporters in the third person on thread - basically disparaging his opponent´s point of view while ignoring him personally and at the same time encouraging other people to enter into debate with his opponent. In other words, he talks about posters on thread rather than talking to them. I find this...dodgy and unsettling).

^ I don´t mean that anytime anybody does even one of the above, they should be infracted. More that if somebody feels bullying is taking place, they can go to the list of criteria and see if any of those things (and how many of them) are taking place. It might also help with the issue of whether a poster is being overly-sensitive or not.

where this behaviour is directed consistently at the same person or people.

I would also add ´group of people´ to that. What I´m getting at here is if somebody constantly uses aggressive language and a derisory tone for anyone who holds a particular view (e.g. a pro-abortion standpoint, religious beliefs, etc) so that posters feel uncomfortable expressing their opinion on an issue in a particular forum. Particularly when this takes place in one forum it can become a bit like "opinion X is not welcome here :mad:". I don´t think that posters should feel like they have to avoid particular forums because they know they will be subject to unnecessary and immediate aggression.
Obviously trolling (e.g. saying all single parents are bad parents in a single parents forum) is an exception.

bullies should not be confused with people who are abrupt, abrasive and lacking in social etiquette.

I agree to some extent but again, I think people have to learn to behave themselves. And I think if we focus on behaviour (and whether or not it´s acceptable) rather than on the person, the issue becomes easier to manage.

Maybe this seems too nannyish for boards, but I think this kind of approach could possibly improve the general experience for most users, so maybe it should be considered.

TheFisherKing

Earthhorse's post was excellent and covered most of what needed to be said.

However, I would just like to add that I feel, were the following rule applied more often on Boards, then much of what constitutes as bullying would be prevented from ever occurring in the first place:

Attack the post, never the poster. In other words, don't make it personal. If you wish to debate a topic or rebut a statement, insulting any boards.ie user will only get you in trouble. You are free to have a go a their argument. You are not free to have a go at them.

I get that sometimes people drag their own personal lives onto threads by discussing details of their personal experiences and use their own experiences as examples and so a degree of moderator discretion is needed whenever posts are reported by users as being personal abusive in nature but in general users don't tend to do that and so feel the rule should be applied far more than it currently is.

Otherwise, the message is sent out that a certain amount of attacking the poster rather than the post is allowed and so sets the tone for a forum in which bullying will undoubtedly thrive. It of course also leaves the aggrieved poster feeling that they must retaliate on-thread as they are getting no justice via the channels that they are told they should whenever they find themselves on the end of what they feel is an unwarranted personal attack.

I recall one very young lad who used to have quite strong (and unpopular) political views posting on Boards. He also was about as sound a chap as you could wish to speak with. He debated in those political threads with great gusto and gave just as good as he got but quite often, users that took a dislike to him for those political views, would have a pop at him on other threads around Boards. "Oh, so says the guy who approves of x, y and z" etc. I reported a few of those posts, some of which were personally abusive but nothing was done that I could see and it continued until eventually he closed his account and moved on, which was a shame as he was no troll and every word his posted, he did so with passion and I say that as someone who didn't agree with his political views.

I think Boards.ie should be a place where someone should feel at ease with posting their opinions without fear of personal attack. It adds nothing to a debate and I don't care if someone supports suicide bombing or the dropping of the atomic bomb, abusing them achieves zero. I'm not saying that an aggressive reply isn't in order, but just that name calling, insults or comments implying personal inadequacies and/or personal issues in RL will only lead to the possibility of an equally personally abusive retort and tbh, to me the user that first resorts to that level of discussion is quite often the one with the least to say on the issue and is usually just in the debate for thanks whoring purposes (and unfortunately, it quite often pays off for them).