It's been my experience in several different groups that this argument comes up cyclically. Every so often admins explain that the group (this one or another one, doesn't matter- i'll call it "generic group") is not a place for all people. There are groups where interaction between those who believe like us (in generic group) and the opposition can engage in whatever dialogue they choose to. Generic group is not one of those places. Generic group is a place for somewhat like minded individuals to talk about their beliefs and wrestle with the implications of those beliefs within a particular structure. It is not church - it is not required to accept everyone - it should not be expected to accept abusive language as "just another viewpoint". If you choose to engage "troll of the day", please friend them or find another place to have those conversations.
The argument that I was talking about is one that is familiar to folks who have been in a religiously affiliated group. A new person had joined the group and began to tell everyone in it that they were doomed to hell for their heresies. In this case, the person in question had been particularly vitriolic. As a result the administrators at first deleted the more offensive comments and ultimately found it necessary to ban him from the group.
This created a problem with many in the group. There were those who felt like we should accept everyone so that we can learn from them and after all - we're Christians, right? We proclaim a radical love so shouldn't we show it by not banning anyone from the group? Perhaps our expressions of appropriate behavior would rub off on this individual. Which is a bit like saying "Isn't it a shame that they won't be able to fully realize the love of Christ without being around us?"
Now there are emotionally charged statements about how "If your position is strong enough, it can weather the onslaught of hateful comments." Others question how "inclusive" the group is. The big question that isn't always asked in these situations is where do we draw the line? Yes we all want to love our neighbors with abandon but how do we navigate the tension when one neighbor's actions oppress or marginalize another?
It's easier to do in an online forum. Administrators can delete comments and threads and even take away someone's right to participate. It's not so easy in a community of people. The key is defining acceptable standards of behavior and enforcing them. No need to micro-manage but be consistent. This is how community works offline. Can we find ways to make this work online? I hope so. I've seen cases where it works beautifully. I've seen far more cases where the forum or group falls apart from infighting as a result of this conflict.
How do you navigate the tension when one neighbor's actions oppress or marginalize another? Do you use different methods online vs. offline?
No comments:
Post a Comment