>A PRIMER FOR ONLINE ACTIVISTS
>
>INTRODUCTION:
>
>Although this document was conceived as a guide for
>new animal rights activists, the principles discussed can
>be generally applied to virtually any activist working
>online. It is not intended to be a list of absolute
>rules, nor is it meant to be a strict characterization
>of my own posting style. It IS meant to be used as a
>reference by people who have little or no experience
>with online activism.
>
>ONLINE DIALOG:
>
>The Internet has been around in one form or another
>for several decades. This, along with the somewhat
>parallel development of dialup Bulletin Board Services
>(BBS's), has resulted in the evolution of an Online
>Culture of sorts, with its own "nettiquette". For
>someone posting online for the first time, cyberculture
>can be confusing at best, and downright offensive at
>worst. Since the Internet isn't going to change for the
>sake of new people (known as "newbies"), it is important
>to be able to understand this medium, and to use it to
>communicate effectively. Since the cyberculture
>vocabulary extends to acronym-like abbreviations, and to
>punctuation-based indicators of tone called
>"emoticons", I have included a short list of the most
>common shorthand expressions, and a helpful link, at the
>end of this document. While it is very important to
>understand whether the post to which you are responding
>was intended to be serious, or just tongue-in-cheek, the
>most vital aspect of online activism is your own
>presentation; how you represent yourself and your cause,
>and how well you communicate.
>
>FIRST IMPRESSIONS:
>
>When you are posting online, people don't know what
>you are like, how nice you are to your family, or how
>intelligent you are at your job. They often don't even
>know your gender. Consequently, your online identity
>consists almost entirely of what you write. I say
>"almost", because many people adopt online aliases,
>either to help protect their identities or to make a
>statement about who they are and what they believe.
>This means that if you post under the name
>"MoltenDeath" or "AK-47", you have lost quite a
>bit of your audience's respect and empathy before you
>write a word. If you want to use an alias, it's a good
>idea to pick one that isn't instantly offensive.
>
>The first time that you post in a newsgroup or other
>online forum, it is important to think about what you
>want to say before you click the "send" button. If you
>are angry, take the time to calm down a bit before you
>respond. Your first post doesn't have to be profound,
>but it's a good idea to avoid being remembered as "that
>jerk". This is of course a good idea for all posts, not
>just your first one. Depending on the situation, you
>may want to indicate that you have been following the
>discussion, and perhaps explain why you have decided to
>participate. That doesn't mean that you are expected to
>tell the Story of Your Life in your first post, or that
>anyone will appreciate it if you do.
>
>It's generally better to slip into a discussion than
>to crash it. That means following a topic "thread", and
>reading a few older posts if necessary, before you
>participate. Try to get a sense of the topic, and of the
>positions and personalities of the people involved in it.
>This will help you to contribute something meaningful.
>
>CIVILITY:
>
>One of the worst things an activist can do in any
>discussion is to lose his or her temper. This may not
>be obvious to everyone; there are many people online
>who view personal insults and inflammatory rhetoric
>(known as "flames") as a perfectly acceptable everyday
>conversational style. Some people, often called Trolls,
>post not to advance the discussion but to provoke angry
>responses. Don't fall into the trap of fighting Fire
>with Fire; the only people who truly appreciate that
>sort of "debate" are those who will never change their
>minds, and those who make better opponents than allies.
>The better way to win a skirmish is to be the one who
>remains calm, not the one who comes up with the nastiest
>flame. If you do lose your temper, apologize. When
>dealing with people who just can't be civil, humor,
>used in an appropriate manner (not as a substitute for
>debate) can be effective. Avoid "baiting", or
>deliberately provoking anger.
>
>ARGUMENT 101:
>
>When debating matters of fact, avoid the pitfall of
>posting your own opinion as established reality. If you
>believe that something is true, but do not absolutely,
>positively know it to be true, it's a good idea to
>indicate that by writing something along the lines of
>"It's my understanding that..." or "I'm pretty sure
>that...". This can save you enormous grief if you turn
>out to be mistaken. On a similar note, remember the
>Monty Python "Argument Sketch": contradiction is not
>debate. Support what you say with reasoned arguments,
>facts, or both.
>
>When paraphrasing someone, never use double quotation
>marks. Use single quotation marks, or none at all. Never
>edit a quote to change the meaning, and if you do edit
>for length, indicate that you have done so. Always
>indicate whom you are quoting.
>
>There are a handful of descriptive terms that get
>bandied about in online discussion groups. They
>describe tactics that do not represent honest
>debate. Avoid stating that a person or source is
>completely untrustworthy because they have lied in the
>past ("poisoning the well"), appealing to emotion rather
>than intellect ("ad hominem"), excusing behavior on the
>grounds that the opposition engages in it (tu quoque),
>and avoid attributing a position to someone that they do
>not hold, and then rebutting it ("straw man fallacy").
>You may be accused of engaging in these tactics anyway;
>be prepared to defend your posts in a reasonable manner.
>Avoid using a double standard: judge your opponents and
>their organizations by the same ethical yardstick you use
>to judge yourself and the organizations that you support.
>
>Even when arguing passionately, try to refrain from
>using excessively dramatic language, and, especially,
>don't make sweeping generalizations. The latter can be
>used to dismiss your position out of hand, even if it is
>quite valid in a more limited sense. For example, the
>statement "Many animals in slaughterhouses die in a
>manner that isn't fast or free of extreme suffering."
>is a little dramatic, but defensible. The statement
>"All animals in slaughterhouses die a slow, horrible
>death!" is not accurate, and will, rest assured, be
>used to discredit you.
>
>LISTEN!:
>
>The most valuable asset that an activist can bring
>to a debate is an open mind. Listen to what your
>opponents are saying, and if it repels you, think about
>it anyway. Even Trolls can present valid arguments.
>Remember that no side is wrong (or right) about
>everything, and that you can learn valuable lessons
>from your opponents. What you learn can help you to
>grow as an activist and as a person. Try to give
>yourself some time away from the fray on a regular
>basis; it will help you to remain calm, sharp, and
>most importantly, sane.
>
>SOURCES:
>
>When looking for facts to support your argument, one
>of the absolute best places to look is in the material
>provided by partisan, biased organizations *who support
>the opposing position*. Quote a statement by PETA to
>support a pro- animal rights argument, and the
>opposition will laugh. Quote a statement from one of
>their own sources, like the NRA or AMPEF - one that
>presents facts that speak against their own interest in
>this case - and they will be hard pressed to refute it.
>Relatively neutral sources, of course, are also
>excellent. Remember that all sources are biased in one
>way or another, and don't treat any advocacy group, no
>matter how close to your heart they may be, as
>infallible. Above all, think for yourself!
>
>NETSPEAK:
>
>IMO - in my opinion
>BTW - by the way
>AFAIK - as far as I know
>LOL - laughing out loud
>ROTFL - rolling on the floor laughing
>
>EMOTICONS:
>
>:) happy, friendly, or joking
>;) winking or joking
>:( unhappy
>
>Many variations of these, and others, exist.
>They are used to indicate tone and mood in a medium
>where those things are not always readily apparent.
>
>The use of asterisks to indicate *emphasis* (as
>italics are used) may be desirable, because typing in
>all capital letters is often considered to be SHOUTING.
>
>More useful information for newbies can be found at:
>http://www.newbie.net/
>
>Copyright 1999 by Michael Cerkowski
>Distribute freely, but do not modify.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 10/13/00 EDT