miss internet manners

We <3 Virginia Shea. Back in 1994 - yes, that 1994, when the internet was made of text, she picked up and wrote the best guide we can find to Netiquette. Called, well, Netiquette, this very nice book lays out some basic rules for online engagement at a moment in time where the internet was just starting to open to the public in a big way.

Parts of this feel old - this book is over 20 years old now! - with regards to suggestions about signature files, Usenet etiquette, and conserving bandwidth from a time when most people were on the internet at 9600bps - a speed at which it would take you 18 minutes to load this this:

But a lot of the book holds up. Notably, she lays out 10 Core Rules of Netiquette:

1) Remember the human. 2) Adhere to the same standards of behavior online that you follow in real life. 3) Know where you are in cyberspace. 4) Respect other people’s time and bandwidth. 5) Make yourself look good online. 6) Share expert knowledge. 7) Help keep flame wars under control. 8) Respect other people’s privacy. 9) Don’t abuse your power. 10) Be forgiving of other people’s mistakes.

On Tuesdays over the next 10 weeks, we are going to be doing some talking about the rules, what she writes, and The Internet Of The Now. Of course, it should go without saying - this is going to apply for the slices of the internet we see. There are so many internets - so many different communities, languages, spaces, etc - it is hard to generalize. But we’ll see what we can do.

A reader writes:

I work with a bunch of folks who are, on average, around 5 years younger than I am. We use IMs for work communication all the time, and when I was very new here I had to ask people for help or to point me in the direction of some piece of information or another many times a day.  I would often start these IM conversations with "Hey [person's name], can I ask you a question about [xyz topic]?"  To which, I not infrequently got a reply like 'lol.  sure.'  or  'haha. yeah, what's up?'  My question is: did I do something funny?  Or is it a 'haha' because it's awkward that I communicated in a way that was too formal for the medium?  Or is 'lol' just like a space-filler?

Oh dear reader! Don’t fret!

There are two issues here: is what you did ok, and then, was it actually funny?

First of all: Miss Internet Manners is of the opinion that when in doubt, more formal is better. Especially at work, especially when you’re new, it makes sense to err on the side of politeness. It’s always easier to relax than it is to smooth over insulted feelings, and it’s always nicer to check and see what someone is up to before asking them a question...so don’t fret in that regard.

You hit the nail on the head with your final guess. Imagine you did this in person - you can imagine a “oh! hey” or some other conversational opener in place of the “lol” or “haha.” They’re not laughing at you - they’re opening the conversation. It’s a throat-clear.

does responding "no worries" to an apology over email or text when you really mean "no worries" "all good" "no harm done"  still come off as passive aggressive? how do you tell people that it's OK so that they know you mean it?

Ohhhh, the world of text-based etiquette! Dear reader, you are not the only one.

This is unfortunately one of those where the lack of non-verbal cues such as tone and posture requires that we communicate extra clearly. Miss Internet Manners can’t speak as to how “no worries” will be taken because everyone feels differently about these things. Could it be misconstrued? Certainly. As could everything else.

I think all you need to do is elaborate slightly: “No worries. I don’t mind.” “No worries. No harm, no foul” or even “Don’t worry about it.” While “no worries” on its own certainly gets the point across, in matters of forgiveness it is good to be clear.

A reader writes:

bcc-ing and party invitations. it drives me crazy! in this tiny queer world i want to know who is coming to that dinner party, ya know. but i get why people do it. but i think they should not. but does it depend on the size of the party?

Luckily that’s what we’re here to do: help!

Funny you should ask, dear reader. This is enough of an issue that even Debrett’s - the official guide to British etiquette - has weighed in, amidst its discussions of high tea spoon selection. The guiding principles across etiquette sources seem to say that BCCs are allowed when the recipients are plentiful (30+ seems to be the lowest number) and not important to the message itself.

One might say, dear reader, that the recipients of a small or limited dinner invitation are in fact important to the message. One should know who is being invited, if only to rectify that awkward moment where you’re not sure if a mutual friend also got invited. It’s also nice to know with whom you will be dining. 

hyperbole! or instead, Godwin’s Law: 

“Godwin's Law (or Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"[2][3]—​ that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism. Despite being described as universal, regardless of the subject of the discussion, Godwin's law is more likely to be applicable to social topics (including politics, law, religion, etc.).“ (thanks Wikipedia!)

I appreciate that this law exists in large part because internet fighting so quickly takes on such hyperbole after some critical size is reached (the size, I imagine, having a lot to do with the personal accountability people do or don’t feel to other members.) At a certain point, it all goes out the window - the critical mass of trolly anger will trump any kind of reasoned disagreement.