A Question of Manners

[dewline]

For consideration: if you comment on a topic where I can see you and you don't state otherwise and/or actively prevent replies, I assume that there is an implied invitation to reply.

(Not sure whether to be angry with myself, certain other people, or both here.)

Comments

[thewayne]

*checks notes* Makes sense.

[armiphlage]

I agree completely.

Dreamwidth has the ability to restrict access to posts, and restrict commenting. If my post has a "Reply" link, then I'm inviting you to reply.

[kathleen_dailey]

Also agreeing. If a person doesn't want replies to a particular post, then the post should be restricted or kept private, or have the "reply" link disabled.

(Some of my friends have disabled a "reply" link when, for example, they're reporting a death or a serious illness and don't feel up to responding to people just yet.)

[bibliofile]

This.

Unless you're new to DW and haven't figured out the specifics yet, in which case, apologies all around and move on from there.

[arlie]

You must be old school internet.

I'm always amazed when people ask if it's OK to PM me, and similar.

But judging by the dramaz online, the younger generation has new rules for online interaction - probably several mutually contradictory sets of new rules.

Yes, it's possible to be second order rude responding to comments - e.g. the bore who keeps posting the same screed whenever there's anything posted that's vaguely relevant. But to my eyes, the purpose of posting publicly is the potential for response. If you don't want responses, don't make public posts. (And if someone does restrict responses, they increase my chances of unsubscribing.)

p.s. One example of newer-style internet - LinkedIn, where I found that if someone posted something and I responded to it, all my contacts would be shown my response, but not the original poster. Whether or not those contacts have ever shown any sign of interest in the topic. Apparently the purpose of LinkedIn's "social media" is public posturing. I responded exactly once, discovered how the system really worked, and turned off all notifications of such posts so I wouldn't waste my time reading them.

[dewline]

Very old-school. I remember Telidon as an early Canadian ancestor from the first half of the 1980's, but didn't become a full-timer until National Capital FreeNet started up.

Never got into LinkedIn, despite the advice of job-search counselors.

[arlie]

I got onto LinkedIn back when it was still good. My then-employer was circling the drain, but large enough that it took many layoffs, and a rump remained. Someone suggested that our whole extended team should all get on this new thing called LinkedIn, so as to keep in touch. It was some time in the early 2000s.

I pretty much missed the BBS world, but got onto the UUCP-based network of universities and companies that was using ARPANET and derivatives as its always-connected backbone. This would have been some time in the late 1980s. It was wonderful to get emailed responses from people on the other side of the world in a mere day and a half. And Usenet was still worth reading, in spite of the large numbers of junk postings.

[princessofgeeks]

I don't know the etiquette on several of the new platforms, but I can assure you that on Dreamwidth the idea has always been, if it's a public post and the reply button is shown, the assumption is that the poster wants interaction and replies.

However, as younger people from different parts of the internet come and go, mores do change.

(I came up in the fanfiction part of fandom and started out on Livejournal 20 years ago so that is where I'm coming from on this.)

[conuly]

Why would anybody prefer to shout into the void all the time?

[sabotabby]

It's highly contextual for me. Mostly, I'd say yes, especially on platforms like this. There are a couple exceptions (probably more if I think about it).

There are people who are determined to comment on every single one of my posts. If they don't know anything/aren't interested in a subject, they will sometimes comment to say "I don't care about this" or "please explain this thing to me that I am perfectly capable of Googling." This happens a lot in my book posts and posts around Canadian politics, where I am assuming a certain baseline level of knowledge and interest before someone engages.

There is someone who holds a very contrary political opinion on a certain Middle Eastern country, and frequently pops on my social media posts to say something disparaging regarding anyone who opposes its government's policies or attempts to help victims of said policies. While, yes, technically these posts are open for anyone to comment on or argue with, in practice his morality is so divorced from mine that engagement is pointless for either of us. This person is someone I've known for years, but has recently receive his final warning that he's going to be defriended if he continues to engage this way.

People who pop on old posts to say something controversial so they don't get dogpiled by my other friends, or, if they are heterosexual men, just to make a comment on an old post. Again, I haven't stated a policy around it, but there's a presumed cowardice to the former and familiarity with the latter that I don't like.

I generally prefer it if people consult with me before being rude/dogpiling someone on my page/blog. Sometimes that's not feasible and it's not the worst thing, especially if it's clear what my take would be if I were around to respond, but I've had some ugliness in the past that makes me wary.

I think otherwise, reply button = reply.

[batdina]

Of course. If I didn't want a convo, I'd keep my fingers off my keyboard.

(Also, HI. I've been lurking around here for a while now. Nice to meet you.)

[dewline]

Likewise!

[agoodwinsmith]

Um. In general, if public with a comments button, then I assume that comments are permitted, if not welcome.

I have wandered into areas where it is expected that if I do not know the originator, I need to briefly detail how they came to my attention and whose post made me aware of them. And I need to hang back.

Some people are happy in their little pond and are made uncomfortable by changes. Also, sometimes people are just making announcements and forget that limiting responses is an option.

Anyways. What this boils down to is that while my assumption has been yes, public with comments button, it should be open to response, but my experience is that this is not always the case, and I don't have a rule of thumb other than "some people are just really touchy." Not very helpful, sorry.

[madamoiselle_sambuca]

Who's doing that to you??