People have always been inclined to join mobs – most people have at least one story to tell about a time that they got swept up in or had to face a crowd demanding justice for one thing or another (both of my experiences were in college). The Internet has proven to be a frighteningly efficient tool to create virtual mobs. But we note two trends that suggest a bleak future: the increase in non-anonymous mob participation and the evolution of online services towards ever more efficient and real time communication platforms that facilitate mob creation and growth like never before. Things are changing online way too fast for society and culture to adapt. Something will eventually break.
I’m going to pick on FriendFeed in this post because I believe it is the nearest thing to Shangri-La for mob justice enthusiasts. I explain why below. But first I want to compare FriendFeed to Syphilis, which may have been the “perfect” disease when it first hit Europe in the 15th century. Today Syphilis takes years to kill its victims and is easily treated with antibiotics. But back in the early 1500’s it led to certain death within months.
Consider the surprising evolution of syphilis. Today, our two immediate associations to syphilis are genital sores and a very slowly developing disease, leading to the death of many untreated victims only after many years. However, when syphilis was first definitely recorded in Europe in 1495, its pustules often covered the body from the head to the knees, cause flesh to fall off people’s faces, and led to the death within a few months. By 1546, syphilis had evolved into a the disease with the symptoms so well known to us today. Apparently just as myxomatosis. those syphilis spirochetes that evolved so as to keep their victims alive for longer were thereby able to transmit their spirochete offspring into more victims. (Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond)
What changed? Syphilis killed people too quickly. And dead people can’t spread a sexually transmitted disease nearly as well as non-dead people. So the disease evolved to keep its victims alive.
FriendFeed today is like Syphilis in 1495. It will be forced to evolve to something less dangerous or it’ll destroy itself.
This really shouldn’t be happening because FriendFeed isn’t an anonymous service. Just a couple of years ago experts were saying that the rise of online mobs could be traced to sites that promote mass anonymous content creation. From a 2006 Time Magazine article:
Along with all the sites that encourage individual expression, we are seeing a flood of schemes that celebrate collective action by huge numbers of bland, anonymous people. A lot of folks love this stuff. My worry is that we’re playing with fire…There’s the Wikipedia, which has absorbed a lot of the energy that used to go into individual, expressive websites, into one bland, master description of reality. Another example is the automatic mass-content collecting schemes like DIGG. Yet another, which deserves special attention, is the unfortunate design feature in most blog software that practically encourages spontaneous pseudonym creation. That has led to the global flood of anonymous mob-like commentary.
But FriendFeed users tend to be easily identifiable as real people. The site’s original purpose was to let users link their blogs, photos, social networking, Twitter and other content streams in one place. The whole idea is that you know exactly who it is that’s posting content there. And suddenly these people are getting comfortable talking hate under their real name. TechCrunch writer MG Siegler wrote about this trend earlier this month on his personal blog. For whatever reason, people are becoming comfortable writing seriously threatening stuff under their real name. That boldness means people are becoming even more comfortable with mob mentality, and more willing to take direct action.
Real Time Content Can Easily Become Real Time Mobs
In the past for an online mob to get any real traction outside of anonymous chat rooms, lots of people had to write about their outrage on their blogs or other websites. That meant an issue had to be broadly interesting to a lot of people. There are lots of examples of these situations, particularly in Asia. One example: “In another well-known Chinese case, an angry husband who suspected his wife was having an affair with a college student she’d met in an online game asked for help tracking him down. The Associated Press reported that the student, who denied the accusation, was bombarded with harassing and threatening e-mails. This vigilante action might be prompted by understandable moral outrage, but some are concerned that the headline-grabbing witch-hunts have been vastly out of proportion with the original transgressions.”
In these examples outrage built over a number of days. Some actual facts were able to spread as well, which usually calmed the mob before real world threats could be carried out by vigilantes. But sites like FriendFeed allow the centralization of a conversation to occur, with real time updates appearing on screen without even the need for a refresh. Things can get out of control instantly.
I was on the receiving end of mob justice a few weeks ago when Leo Laporte exploded at me for asking rudely about a conflict of interest. People massed at FriendFeed and called for my head (a lot of the worst comments have now been deleted).
What the mob didn’t know is that it was largely a misunderstanding (I thought he was joking and egged him on, he was most definitely not joking). Leo and I quickly resolved the issue (and now it’s all just a joke). We both apologized and had a subsequent podcast and really talked things through. But most of the mob members had no idea that was happening. And in the meantime a number of death threats were posted in the comments on TechCrunch. Emails came in as well, including one from a non-anonymous account saying “Go TO FUCKING HELL YOU FUCKING TROLL, HOPE YOU FUCKING DIE”
These weren’t direct “I’m going to kill you” threats that I’ve gotten before. But they were serious enough that, like last year, I had to cancel a number of speaking engagements and generally worry about personal safety issues again.
This is the problem. The mobs get going, and even then most of them wouldn’t even consider physical violence as a real solution to the situation. But enough people are crazy enough that when they get fired up, they want to do something about it. And then, suddenly, I’m in a position of worrying about my personal safety because I asked someone to disclose a conflict of interest about a mobile phone. Seems crazy, right?
Some people say it’s not appropriate to pick on FriendFeed. Other services like Twitter, which are much bigger, have similar problems. But the conversations on Twitter aren’t centralized. It’s hard to see it when a mob forms unless it’s something massive like the almost-revolution in Iran. But on FriendFeed all the comments are aggregated on one page, and everyone participating sees it all. It’s much more likely to break out into a mob. And even niche topics, like mobile phones, can lead to death threats.
So what can we do to change this? In my opinion, nothing more than doctors could do to fight Syphilis before it changed itself. Things are going to get much worse before they get better. At some point an online mob, maybe one that begins at FriendFeed, is going to break out and seriously hurt someone. Perhaps it will be someone who’s being unfairly accused, like the student in China. And at that point society will demand change. Tools will emerge to temper mobs as they begin to form on mainstream sites. A lot of us, me included, will look back at today as a time of freedom on the Internet. But the system is breaking under it’s own weight. It is not sustainable.
Update: A very relevant post that I missed before from blogger and former FriendFeed user Aaron Brazell.
Seriously? Friendfeed over sites like Digg and Hacker News?
People amassed there also because thats where Leo was…half the people only come onto Friendfeed then because they know Leo is going to be there then. Most are never there any other time…and if they are – block them.
Admittedly I’m a big Friendfeed fan, but comparing FF to syphilis…
Mike and Zee: society already has tools to slow down mobs online. Both Iran and China have used them heavily over the past two weeks. I will take the mob anytime. As for “MobFeed” there is a long thread underway over there about your thesis: http://friendfe...b-read-his-anti
thank you, robert, for proving my point. and yes, when you’re the one leading a mob, the bloodlust is always fun.
Mobs are great if it is being used against evil. Of course evil for one man is good for another. So the nazi mob killing jews in WWII or skinheads attacking a jew today proves my point. So what exactly it evil?
Dawkins talked a bit about the definition of evil in his book the God Delusion. Based on his research, he says most people have a pretty uniform definition. meaning most of us agree on what is good and what is evil. http://www.amaz...ntt_at_ep_dpi_1
“Mobs are great if it is being used against evil.”
Mob is THE BIGGEST of evils out there, it’s just about time to realize that. You, personally, should be born in Germany in 1930-s, you would be gladly enrolled into the brown gang, – that’s exactly what they were saying if you don’t know it.
Robert,
In 2008, leading up to November presidential election, there was a Ron Paul Mob on Digg that would bury any criticism of Ron Paul and Digg up pro-Ron Paul posts. A Martian visiting our planet for the first time, and having read Digg only, might think Ron Paul is our next president.
The pro-democracy movement in Iran is genuine human behaviors, not prompted by Internet “mobs”; indeed, as N Y Times has pointed out, there are less than 40,000 Twitter users in Iran. Give the Iranians a little more credits.
Using Iran/China analogy to reach the “I will take the mob anytime” conclusion is inappropriate, in the nuanced context of what Mike is trying to say in this post.
Another example – on the day Bing debuted, there was a pro-Bing mob at TechCrunch, vehemently attacking any comments that criticized Bing and peppering the comment area with short bursts of pro-Bing slogans like: “Bing is great!” “I’ve set Bing as my default now!”
So much for wisdom of the crowd.
I havent yet created account in FF nor twitter. Though i searched few times in twitter, getting no value back.
Evolution of good old “forum”s or “group”s is better than twitter, with real time search etc.
Twitter search used to be much better, unfortunately scaling issues have led to a decrease in the number of returned results. This is one reason Friendfeed has become more attractive, because they have (so far) kept up with demand without sacrificing features.
I agree with a lot of this, except the “society will demand change” part. People and society are perfectly content with themselves more or less as is, and won’t decide en masse to change, IMHO.
when society doesn’t regulate itself, other forces emerge to fill the void before it destroys itself. There’s a reason why property rights are respected in most countries, as an example.
wasn’t the society who agreed on these rights? or were they god-sent? my point is, once again, you seem to think free speech should only be free when it’s painless
don’t think you read the post, particularly the last two sentences. I believe it’s inevitable that tools will evolve to slow the formation of mobs, otherwise the services will become useless hate filled messes. That’s very different from I don’t believe in free speech.
well, comparing them with syphilis is not exactly a compliment.
Maybe there is another angle here: The attention span a message gets has been shortened from ~days (internet forums) to ~hours (youtube) and now to seconds with services like FF. In the old days trolls would be visible for ~10% of the time a comment thread remains fresh (and thus gets attention). With real time streams, there is just not enough time to filter anything, and that gives them unfair exposure
Mike WTF were you really trying to say? The net could lead to virtual then real mobs? Or you worried that some crack head from the net will really do some harm to you? I ask as you brought up your personal safety.
Solution, do video conferencing for the next 5 years for all your public speeches.
Or just take a swig of some Johny Walker
From time to time we need such forces. In one country it is god sent, in another they call them terrorist, in another freedom fighters. Twisted sense of reality and entitlement is it not? Or better yet, let us join hands and promote same sex marriages and gay sex. I think not, thus forces will emerge not matter if we like it or not.
that’s great but it might be a good idea to just slow the mob down a little until actual facts can be introduced into the conversation.
Don’t get it twisted Mike. What you mean by that is great? Certainly not the line with lets hold hands and promote …etc. It was followed by “I think not”.
Why use this to make homophobic comments. Stay on point, tool.
Interesting post.
Infact, that’s true not only for a Virtual mob but also for a real mob.
Also interesting to see what FriendFeed has to say now..:)
BTW, I didn’t know you and Leo gotten along together now….coool
It think the author had way too much time on his hands. Worrying about cyber mobs as inane as getting worked up over cyber bullies. It is all ultimately plays into the hands of those forces that want to rigidly control the flow of information on the internet.
Freedom come with a price. Sometimes the price is the discomfort of others. There are no perfect worlds. I’m not sure I want to live in one.
Isn’t it kind of ironic to take time to tell someone they have too much time on their hands?
I like the angle of this post but hasn’t it always been like this?
I mean you always got this kind of Mobs arising when a certain “idol” opposes to a certain idea or person, the mob automatically will follow without even fully understanding the situation.
It’s pretty pathetic though that people react so extreme.
“but hasn’t it always been like this?”
no, mobs forming this quickly and this violently over niche topics is definitely a new thing.
True. With today’s social technology, it’s easier to communicate with hundreds or thousands of people who are either “friends” or are directly related to my friends. Compare that with several years ago, when you had to go through IM clients, e-mail, and phone.
It is not a new thing. maybe new to the net, but people are simply expressing their true inner desires.
I don’t think it’s new either. Back in the day, such a conversation as would happen online now would happen in a bar, cafe or public square.
http://www.yout...h?v=zrzMhU_4m-g
That being said, globalization, media and technology are mainly to blame for modern mob/borg mentality. Everyone and their mother pigeon-hole themselves all day, everyday because they are unaware of the fact they can be a free-thinker, free from choosing sides. No one can truly choose a side AND see the whole picture.
mobs usually fight other mobs – or what they perceive to be other mobs – like some terrorist groups used to attack tv stations. it’s history repeating itself
no, you’re thinking of the political blogs where mobs fight mobs, it’s all directed. The examples I link to above are mobs going after individuals. Sometimes those individuals are innocent. But in every case the “justice” extracted by the mob waaaaay outweighs the original transgression.
I’ve been thinking about this a little recently – wondering if game mechanics like those used by Wikipedia to reward desired behavior could be helpful.
Also reputation systems that span silos would be nice.
People putting their real identities at risk with this sort of behavior is astounding to me though. Not sure how they justify it to themselves.
One issue with reward systems is that they impose artificial goals on the service. It is better to empower the user by letting them choose their own methods for determining friendship and trust.
Interesting article Michael. I’ve been paying attention to this meme. With ubiquitous instance communication there is real danger in mob “justice”.
This kind of stuff has been going on the social web since web 1.0, unfortunately. There have been invite only/private communities that develop out of larger communities just for the purpose of members talking about other members they don’t like, etc.
generally those communities have members using pseudonyms. And they certainly didn’t have public, real time scrolling updates. Things are changing rapidly.
I’m going to disagree with you about public, real time scrolling updates. We had message boards on CNN that were exactly what you see on Friendfeed now. The only difference was that I and others worked behind the scenes to limit the damage. Often this meant being glued to a computer screen hiding posts as fast as they were spamming hate. I thought I’d lose my mind during Clinton’s impeachment.
It’s a problem, but it’s one that’s been around for a long, long time.
I have noted the same phenomenon. An ugly aspect of human nature unveiled by the safety of ranting via keyboard. Let’s hope we can aspire to greater levels of tolerance and respect for one another.
You might be the only person in the world who was able to link Syphilis to FriendFeed.
I’m inclined ot agree – Michael used a colourful analogy,, but reading behind the words there’s a lot of truth in the analogy.
Fake accounts, and organsied mob behaviour is prevalent and it will break some sites and communities. It is evolving too, so I can see that things will change.
What I also see happening is large groups fragmenting into smaller groups so that the mobs can’t hold as much sway – Twitter and others can become organising hubs when things cross those small groups into larger communities, but ultimately people remain at the core of this and people will find ways to deal with it.
mike…
you’re voicing a concern that’s been around for quite sometime… people only really care when the mob/person turns agains them, or a person they care about…
foxnews continually rails against their “targets” be they people or issues. in the case of the doctor in kansas who was killed, o’rielly sat back and claimed that he had nothing to do with it…of course he did. not directly, but if you spout enough venom, at some point, someone might/will act on what you preach.
sa,e with martlin luther king.. he kept preaching, and people acted on it. the difference in these situations.. some people act for what the common group considers to be good, and some act in a way that’s abhorent.
and yeah.. it’s only going to get worse…
with the advent of databases, and the ease with which you can find detailed information on who your ‘target’ is.. i suspect that some will ge violently attacked, and/or killed before some serious steps are taken to reign in this issue…
peace
Talking about finding everything about everybody for a bunch of change, have you ever tried http://people.yahoo.com/ ? It’s been there FOREVER (at least 5 years). I was really terrified when I first saw it.
How do you respond to comments by Scoble on friendfeed just now that YOU are the mob leader. And comments from Leo that you are the biggest troll in the world?
Robert wants you to come to Friendfeed to talk x
i see a lot of personal attacks from people who can’t engage in dispassionate dialog. feeding on itself.
Funny, Mike, I just read through the 286+ comments on Friendfeed and very few, maybe 2% were were personal attacks. And the personal attacks that I read were very tame. I’m pretty sure Scoble is not deleting any comment on the thread either. I guess the ‘mod’ is being very civil today…
Mike Arrington, you are a douche. srsly. Your only example quoted in this article of this “mob mentality” is when you were targeted for being an ass to Leo Laporte? Leo, who most ppl online see as one of the nicest guys on the planet? Mike, now I think you are even more of a douche. STFU.
non-anonymous and proving my point. deleted scores of these, left a representative sample intact.
For those of us keeping score at home and trying to figure out how bad this really is, do you mind sharing some stats?
When you say you’ve “deleted scores of these” are you referring to in general or this post specifically? Either way, I think it’d help to start quantifying and analyzing this (sorry you’re the guinea pig) to better understand it.
Michael
Did you really just remove the post where I actually disagree with Sean? So in your self serving way you are only keeping around the posts that make you look like a victim….
Nice going…
no idea what your comment said or why it was deleted. we were deleting about 10 comments every minute or two for a while there, someone may have made a judgment call on it quickly.
Damn I did what I’ve been trying to fight. I put intentions in your actions.
Sorry bout that.
Yeah it was a crazy night of “discussion”
My post was basically for him to stop with the name calling. I’d noticed he’d done the same over on FF also, so I got tired of looking at it.
People disagreeing with you, calling you names, and treating you rudely does NOT constitute a mob! I believe that people are reacting to what you say and write *individually* and you are confusing the fact that there happen to be a lot of them who disagree with you with a mob. A mob is when I see people bashing you and go, “hmm, I think I’ll bash him too. Bashing is fun. He must be a bad man because everyone else thinks so.” What you are experiencing is not a mob, believe me.
arrgh, sorry, that threaded wrong. meant to be in reply to Mike, not Rasmus!
I am personally quite alarmed at the extreme rise in the use of the words douche and douchebag in popular culture. I have never seen a real douchebag myself, and suspect it will be a sad day if I ever do.
this is the stuff that makes me cringe. Not only did you just spew crap all over my screen, you did Leo no service by your behavior either. People will not be compelled to think highly of Leo when his fans name-call and flame with absolutely no point to their screed.
The only thing to do is distance yourself from these people. Block people you see making those comments, even if the comments aren’t directed at you or a friend is posting the rubbish. Let people know this behavior is unacceptable.
one person can’t block 1,000 comments being thrown at them from potentially hundreds of different people… just like one person can’t stop a mob.
yeah i don’t think you understand that a certain percentage of these people, riled from the mob, go real world.
You might want to ask the Secret Service about that. Rush Limbaugh and his ilk have raised the danger level by a factor of zillions.
Exactly. The Tiller murder, anyone?
The community may start to regulate itself, but to point out that the current system is “out of control” presumes there are controls to be had. I’m loathe to say that anything on the web “needs” control, though am fully willing to allow an evolving set of expectations.
It’s quite evident that you’ve been on the ass-end of several shitstorms that, by your opinionated nature, you’ve had a part in creating. That you generally propagate your opinions in an educated manner should not set a standard by which to exclude other opinion, however mundane, or at times hurtful, they may be. That input of any opinion from a well-crafted essay to an “F off and die!” statement is permitted via social media services is what helped to advance your online career in the first place.
That these statements are allowed is necessary. That they happen to be threaded in a way you find inconvenient is, I suppose, regrettable. That you think the community should, and maybe will, self-regulate is a valid opinion, although one that is beyond any individual’s scope or control.
I generally loathe anonymity and pseudonyms, but recognize their right to exist. Mob rule on the web is no different than mob rule on the streets except everyone has a voice if they wish to express it. I will not sacrifice the 1000 idiots who post for the 10 or 100 who have something intelligent to say. My fear of controls stems far more from the cessation or frustration of the intelligent contributors than the excising of the idiotic. To presume we can create and elite class of “commenters” is folly and smacks of a regressive tendency that does more potential damage than good.
A very intelligent comment and a response would have been interesting to see.
I’ve been posting native living links as well as warnings of loving technology too much [ http://bit.ly/sgfiA ] to friendfeed. Mob mentality. You means like the reason we have the Electoral College to make sure individual liberty is protected by self appointed experts who know more than wethepeople? This is the other trend overtaking Internet, the idea that there is too much of a good thing on Internet. Experts at newspapers and magazines and on TV are losing audience and (gasp) the people are talking amongst themselves !!
My wife and I have adopted a Downshifting lifestyle yet we know that controlling Internet by Experts to protect us from ourselves is in fact a Fascist Police State.
I rather view it all as wethepeople having been overly overtly and covertly controlled for so long are rather a little giddy with our new access to p2p communication. It’s a phase that will fad away with the trend for our overcoming to more responsible Adults.
The phase we are in now Regarding Internet Communication will be seized upon by the Dominionist to again control our communication. Hopefully the anal people will fail to control the greatest tool humanity has ever invented.
~ naturalbornsovereignindividual Whoru?
Totally agree with this. Seen it before though, on Usenet years ago people would gang up behind well known flamers/leading personalities and roast newbies and people who asked “awkward” questions alive. The threaded conversations would drag on for weeks, with the person trying to defend themself in an ever decreasing spiral of ineffectiveness. In they end they were either blocked by the majority or just dropped out. Deja vu.
I am frightened to post anything more than links to pages on Friendfeed these days, for fear of getting attacked by the mob. I saw someone announce they were going to stop using Friendfeed, and he got absolutely backed into a corner by the mob until he retaliated with an inappropriate response, earning himself a troll rating. Like I said, Deja Vu.
Mike,
Analogies like these make me want to read Techcrunch less and less. Please either grow up or take a course in journalism. Real news sources/real journalist would never write something so amateurish. Please focus on reporting news and save your readers your quirky commentary.
Thank you,
RF
a phenomenon that comes to mind when reading this is what’s emerged in China’s internet. theirs is anonymous. but it even has a disturbing sounding name. anyone heard of Human Flesh Search Engine?
http://technolo...icle4213681.ece
http://www.forb...1121obrien.html
I read Mike all the time but won’t as much now. I’m an occasional FriendFeed user but this is just a poorly written article that rambles and doesn’t make much sense in the end…
On your points, FriendFeed is no different than YouTube where if you allow comments people will post nothing but hateful things. It’s like attacking the telephone for what might be said over it…
i didn’t attack friendfeed.
You didn’t?
This formulation might need a bit of changing then.
“FriendFeed today is like Syphilis in 1495. It will be forced to evolve to something less dangerous or it’ll destroy itself.”
You are doing a nice Mr. Smith in that sentence “Humans are the cancer of this planet……”
As I mentioned in my little comment, maybe you should think about your execution, because you are definitely on to a very important subject, just a shame it drowns in poor execution.
thanks. condescension always brightens my day.
Michael
Why do you take things so personally? I wasn’t trying to be condescending. If I came off like that then I apologize.
I just think you could have done better.
You normally do.
Michael, the Torah stated a long time ago, that “if not for fear of government, people would swallow each other alive”.
Maybe jewish people would do just that (they follow Torah, or don’t they?), I’m not sure about other breeds of humans though.
Look what happened in Iraq after the US invaded and there was no rule of law? This has nothing to do with Jews, it has to do with human nature.
And it obviously not does not apply to everyone, but rather to those humans who are more aggressively inclined. The types the spew hatred online all day, and the types that go looting during hurricane katrina etc. http://en.wikip...ng_and_violence
Dan, you must not use Friendfeed much are are following the wrong people. I have found FF to be a very civil place compared to Dig, YouTube, etc.
While FriendFeed isn’t the worst offender by a long shot – there’s a good point here. Realtime communities overall could use more tools (more powerful or community-focused than a block) to manage hateful mobs and the like. If the tools were actionable against a real identity – affecting ones reputation – then maybe we’d some traction against the behavior…
I think you’re absolutely right, but I don’t think it’s necessarily FriendFeed’s fault.
People tend to feel ‘removed’ from reality when they’re online. Even if they’re posting under their real names, they somehow feel it’s “Ok” to say and do the kind of things they would never think about doing in real life.
I think it’s got more to do with being shielded from reality by a computer screen than it has to do with any one site/service.
Of course sites need to take responsibility for what’s posted on them (vis Facebook/Holocaust), but what’s really needed is education. People need to have it drummed into them that what they say and do online affects real people.
And netiquette should be taught in schools.
People react badly too often in real life as well, snapping at a friend and colleague, or becoming argumentative and abusive with a stranger.
This is a moot point, the power of the instant physical mob being created from existing communication platforms was demonstrated most recently two days ago in London when some guy sent out 1 tweet to maybe a 100 people and 5000+ people showed up to moon walk for Michael Jackson in Piccadilly Square. A crowd so large that the police were overwhelmed.
How many examples are out there now both large and small? When one of these mobs/crowds assembles with a more hostile intent you are going to see some radical changes in the communication platforms.
Good or bad, free speech or not; mob mentality has never been accepted by society. Allowing a hostile mob to rampage has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech. It is ridiculous to equate the two.
Good article MA! Keep them coming.
dang thats a sick picture
Friend Feed is sort of a non zero sum game-in game theory and economic theory, zero-sum describes a situation in which a participant’s gain or loss is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the other participant(s). If the total gains of the participants are added up, and the total losses are subtracted, they will sum to zero. Zero-sum can be thought of more generally as constant sum where the benefits and losses to all players sum to the same value of money and pride and dignity. Cutting a cake is zero- or constant-sum, because taking a larger piece reduces the amount of cake available for others. In contrast, non-zero-sum describes a situation in which the interacting parties’ aggregate gains and losses is either less than or more than zero. Zero sum games are also called strictly competitive. And A very boring one !
Hi Mike
I must say I don’t like your post much. Your choice of scapegoat is questionable and the means you use are in my opinion less than honorable.
Are you trying to incite another run with the pitchforks, from the good folks of the community you seem to not like? Are you trying to make a self-fulfilling prophecy? When you start comparing a community to syphilis you will most likely get those people you seem to not like to go for you personally. People take critique of a community of which they are members very personally.. And guess what you just compared a whole community to syphilis.
You raise some valid points, especially the point concerning “the non anonymous mob” I like. I do think though that you would have gotten more respect if you had chosen to do it without bashing on a specific group of people.
Someone over at the butt of your latest mud sling pointed out that you seem to like to throw mud, but don’t like to get dirty yourself. Don’t you think that your style, could somehow play a part in the mobs that seem to gather against you?
I am a bit worried for you, you don’t seem to have an especially thick skin, but you like to stir up peoples emotions.
Maybe take another trip to Hawaii lean back and relax a bit. Take some time to consider maybe a little style change away from Mr. Confrontation.
I love reading your stuff normally, but this post was waaay below standard, and is a good example of one of those that could have needed an editor with a cool mind. Worthy subject bad execution in my mind.
* Oh yes by the way, I do use FF and enjoy my time there. Sorry you don’t
Ok I just read through my post again a couple of times.
Mike I apologize for the worried about you part. Not my place to speculate on you like that since all I see is what you decide to put up here. I was wrong I am sorry.
The rest I still think are valid points, so I will stand by those
This discussion reminds me of Konrad Lorenz’s book “On Aggression” that addresses the relationship of animal behavior to modern human society.
I guess referencing a book is a bit old school, but I am including a link to its page in Google Books.
http://preview....yurl.com/lgmznz
So is the HBSTech event still on for this week?
yeah but its in and out for me, not attending the reception.
Like others have said, some kind of reputation system (ideally cross-platform) would go a long ways towards cutting down on this awful behavior. Every day I’m amazed by the horrible things that people say in their own name. Just last night I saw this incredibly insensitive tweet (death threat?) against a guy who was threatening to commit suicide on Twitter. http://img.skit...3cpnpgdik9e.jpg
I once thought reputation systems were the answer, but they really just reinforce the current group think. If you step outside the current party-line, you get your reputation knocked down.
I think one of the interesting things about twitter is that the conversation so desired in friendfeed is not formalized. Most forums require you to take the the time to disassociate yourself from comments made by trolls in the thread (block / delete message / ban user). If you don’t, you give trolls some legitimacy by association. In twitter, the association is really transient and I can just ignore it, unless it upsets me so much that I just block the user.
Similar capabilities exist in Friendfeed, because only your friends posts and comments will be highlighted. All other posts and comments can be read or ignored, at the user’s discretion.
That is fine for my own viewing, but I still have to actively work to remove the trolls because they are part of the discussion. This is a problem with blog comments and message boards in general.
That also depends on user comfort and practices, because if everyone finds it similarly easy to ignore comments by non-friends, then pruning these posts becomes less essential. Perhaps all comments from blocked users could be rejected?
As a long-time TC reader but infrequent commenter (and never before using FB Connect) I am both happy and impressed with the new direction of your personal posts, Mike. Your perspectives on the social ramifications of these new social technologies is much appreciated. Too often the tech community forgets or ignores the fact that its innovations exist within the greater social context and can have profound impact on it.
We will have to adapt ourselves or we will kill the host.
Not meaning to be annoying, but did you get permission from Wizards of the Coast to use their image? http://gatherer...iverseid=158695
I’m sure you know Fair Use is a complicated defence, and even though you are online media you also make profit from this page.
I’ve noticed lately a lot of large blogs just use images like they own them and I’m fed up with it. At the very least you could credit the image.
Please, set an example for the other blogs, especially the tech blog I saw use photobucket as an image source last week (lol).
first, thanks for the link. i found the image randomly and didn’t know who to credit. Second, take it easy with the assumptions of evilness, k?
I know you guys aren’t evil
Sorry, I did sound a little angry in that post ^^; It’s just something I feel strongly about 
STFUB
, Evil is the Sister of her brother Good.
Every time you post an image in your article that isn’t properly sourced and cited, you are single-handedly ruining journalism for everyone.
Fact check first before you write you post your articles, please.
i’ll just throw it out there that your first paragraph may be a bit of an exaggeration.
If we can’t find an image owner, we generally post it and generally the owner comes out of the woodwork, like this time. We are clearly not hurting the value of the image by posting it, so i think everyone’s going to be fine.
I found the image source in 2 minutes by using tineye.com
Maybe worth a try next time?
never heard of tineye before. thanks. hopefully you’ve managed to save us from singlehandedly destroying journalism for everyone.
That’s weird… because I had only heard of TinEye because of TechCrunch!
http://www.tech...to-500-invites/
Dam who showed up Mike just now http://www.tech...to-500-invites/
This is messed up. Mike are u drinking when you were replying. Of course I would not expect Mike to know every single post every single day. or should I?
Mobs happen, online and offline, because people are sheep. They think they are smart, independent thinkers when in reality, most people are reduced to the lowest common denominator when they don’t think they will be held accountable for their selfishness.
Wisdom of Crowds = fascism
Actually some dude said Fascist around me , so I checked up the meaning since I never did before. When I saw the meaning I was amazed. It was not that bad after all, except that most of its meaning have been practiced way before Europeans knew how to read. http://en.wikip...rg/wiki/Fascism
Hey there,
don’t you think that you provoke theses reactions with the style of writing and arguing you’re using for quite some time now? Maybe it’s more like the the spirits that were alled by the the sorcerer’s apprentice (not Disney, it’s Goethe). Don’t you have to take into account that a provoking style will provoke at least some reactions like this when talking to a mass audience?
Cheers,
Nils
i’ve found over the years that any opinion at all gets people who don’t share that opinion upset, and the general response is personal attacks. Enough of those lead to physical threats. I’m not going to stop writing what I think. But again, just because I know people are going to attack me personally just because i express an opinion on a product doesn’t mean the right thing to do is not express that opinion. I’d rather force things to change by pushing back at the system.
I disagree. I’m quite sure that even though content should be king – delivery is everything.
Interesting topic. I’m optimistic about the problem you present, as I feel we’ve already seen how it will play out.
Think back to corporate email in the early 1990’s. There was a several year long learning curve before employees learned that anything and everything they say can and will be used against them. Some learned the hard way.
And that movement now encompasses any website they surf, any image they view, any file on their computer, etc…
The online world will one day operate like a gigantic decentralized corporation, and those who engage in it will eventually learn accountability, it will just take time for repercussion systems to emerge.
Mob mentality is it’s own beast. Whether online or offline, it’s driven by the same psychology. The barrier of entry is just much lower for the online version. Ultimately, what quells it in the offline world, digital fingerprinting and accountability in the form of video footage, will keep it to a minimum in the online world.
Yes, it will get worse before it becomes contained. Just like syphilis? eh, I think that’s a needless analogy.
Good post. Scary that you’re getting so many threats. After all, this is a tech news blog.
Dudes:
I have had a running battle with “Mind Control USA” AKA “Dream Police” for 9 years now, Lately people have been firing guns across the street and you should see the people driving by
My beef has been with “Mind Control USA” who happen to be very narrow minded is would seem. But ALL narrow minded people have been taking offense at my battling posts.
I think you are a good bit right about mob mentality, we seem to have more of that than we need, directed rather aimlessly two
All Yall have a nice life and Lighten Up Dudes, – Enjoy life, listen to comforting music, Smile at you neighbor without wanting to kill them, Use your mind instead of your heart when facing something new,
Later Dudes B Cool
The online landscape is really changing. Even though people are becoming more and more “non-anonymous” on the net they still have the feeling their safe sitting behind their computer behaving like a troglodyte.
I bet 99% of the people who have the guts to send you a death threat trough e-mail wouldn’t even dare to look you in the eye if you were standing in front of them.
“There can be no such thing, in law or in morality, as actions forbidden to an individual, but permitted to a mob”
If you are seriously interested in why people behave differently online and say/write things they never would IRL, take a look at Suler and the “online disinhibition effect”.
http://www-usr....disinhibit.html
On a lighter note, sorry your post url got messed up – friendfeeed?
I see two issues here being debated here, one explicit and one implicit. Regarding Friendfeed and social media, information spreads and becomes personally engaging to people who wouldn’t care enough to interact if it wasn’t as easy as a click of a button to add their two cents. To that point, yes the hyper-interactivity of social media in general (not just Friendfeed) leads to flashmob/shitstorms that flare up and quickly fade.
To the second more implicit and “meta” issue, is Mike Arrington’s personal engagement with his readers and the nature of celebrity. Mike is a judge of others and may or not be as impartial, fair or informed as we hoped. But then again he has the burden of accountability. No matter where he goes, we will remember what he said and how he said it. Rather than a mob, I would call us paparazzi, eager to catch Mike or the other notables in what we consider a compromising position and consume it as entertainment.
A very interesting perspective on the cost of internet celebrity.
You know, I don’t agree with everything that comes out of here (see: my comments earlier today about Erik’s comparison between a bar and people sharing news and a blog and sharing news.)
But Mike, you’re right. And the Josh Chandler hoax on Twitter last night and some of the comments that came out of there back everything you said up.
Good call.
Compared to something like Digg or YouTube – FriendFeed is tame!
I have had nothing but a positive experience on FF. Not once have I ever even seen a “you’re gay” type of comment on their.
Okay, tried posting this earlier – my comments got eaten – but here it is again:
I think that this even more dangerous because in addition to being realtime, the networks and services such as FF are becoming increasingly local. So, it may be much easier to convert a virtual mob to a physical one.
Michael, While Robert Scoble is doing an excellent job of proving your point on FF, might I ask why you are deleting comments on your site? Isn’t that a form of censorship? I can see deleting off-topic comments or spam but people deserve a voice and the ability to respond. If you’re only going to delete the negative comments, maybe you should remove the ability for anyone to comment. And if you are going to post an article about this, why not show a real world example? let the comments fly…
if we didn’t moderate comments there is no way i’d be able to continue blogging. you’re not going to understand that, and i’m ok with that.
Don’t take my post as being pissy as I was merely asking a question. I want to understand why deleting negative posting is helping you to continue blogging? Sponsers don’t want flame wars associated with them and I’m sure you don’t want vulgarity on your site. I haven’t read your TOS and maybe having a policy regarding vulgarities would make sense IDK.
Explain it to me, privately if needed, you have access to my email. I’m not against you Michael and I’m also not against FF, FB or Scoble. I really do just want to understand your policy
Sean it’s Michael’s blog and he is absolutely within his right to delete any comment he wishes.
I don’t get where this whole idea of “bloggers need to allow anyone and everyone to post anything they want without moderation or it’s not a real conversation.”
Since when? I’m glad he does delete posts so I don’t have to wade through all the rubbish to get to the real debate. And as the site owner, I trust him to make those decisions. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t continue reading.
Get over the censorship nonsense. And by the way, doesn’t need to explain JACK to you. It’s his site and he can do whatever he wants with it.
I wouldn’t be so concerned about Richard’s comment.
Richard Frias and his partner Daniel Spizer of Digital Content Partners are the embodiment of amateurish. Since they started their talent management business two years ago, they have burnt more bridges than they have even tried to cross. Quite the feat!
And that’s what we can never escape: uneducated, unqualified people vocalizing their opinions on issues they don’t understand.
What’s the best way to deal with them? Just ignore them.
The first rule about online mobs is…
Aaron’s not a former FriendFeed user – he’s still using the service. http://friendfe...om/technosailor – I hope he stays, too.
Jesse, you’re so protectionist…
Aaron, I like FriendFeed – in fact it was the Twitter mob that occurred after I threatened to leave Twitter that drove me there. FriendFeed is how I get your updates.
Yes but if we all (and I think we do) agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and what one belives is not necessarily going to be right (or even appropriate) for another in matters of politics, religion, sexual preference, etc… then why is it so freaking evangelical when it’ds Friendfeed.
I don’t F***ing like Friendfeed. Period. End of story. End of day. Stat.
That should be the end of it because we’re all inherently libertarian about our lives The fact that it has caused such a disturbance in the force bothers me.
what’s mildly scary is that the FF community is attacking you (I use the word loosely) for deciding to not use the service any more. This notion of not allowing dissent and attacking former friends is human nature, and tends to end badly.
People keep saying I’m attacking FriendFeed. In my opinion, I’m trying to guide it to something sustainable.
Great article! This is similar to things I have read about Road Rage. One guy here suggested putting everyone’s home phone number on a bumper sticker on their car. One way to stop people from acting like jerks on the road I guess.
Keep up the good work. Ignore the ignorant. They have been with us since the dawn of civilization!
But nobody HAS a home phone anymore!