The Art of War on the Online Forums

Everyone who has spent any time on the kingsnake.com forum has their own horror stories to tell. Here are some of mine.

I once got involved in a verbal fracas that started when someone asked what kind of snake it was that he just caught, which turned out to be a scarlet snake (Cemophora coccinea). Some of us argued that, since scarlet snakes are obscenely difficult to keep, it should be released at once; but others thought there was nothing wrong with keeping it, and gave a grand total of two sentences’ worth of care advice. The ensuing fight went on long after the person who found the snake announced that he had already released it.

Or how about the snotty e-mail I received from someone who had asked where he could catch black rat snakes; I had suggested that they could be bought very cheaply (for the record, he wasn’t in Ontario), so why collect from the wild? His comments, dripping with bitter sarcasm, went along these lines: well, why don’t you buy me one, then.

And then there was the time I got into a positively ugly argument on the garter snake forum over whether or not garter snakes are rear-fanged. I said they weren’t; others said they were, and I asked them to back up their assertions. When someone argued that garter snakes were rear-fanged because all colubrids were rear-fanged, I pointed out that she had misread the evidence she was using to back up her argument. Things went downhill from there; I was called a liar, and several regulars swore off the forum.

If you’ve spent any time on the forums, you’re sure to have similar stories, and I know for a fact that some stories are much more horrific than mine. What’s going on here? Why does a discussion about animals turn into a gladitorial free-for-all?

Here is my best guess as to why these things happen on the forums.

1. Some herpers weren’t on their high-school debating team — which is to say that they don’t know how to have a polite argument. The most important lesson that can be learned from a debating team or a model parliament is to take seriously, and respect, the opposing viewpoint. After all, in some debate competitions, you’re not sure which side of the topic you’re going to take until the last minute! This forces you to consider both sides — a skill that would be useful on the forums.

2. Some herpers like being experts, and hate being told they’re wrong. Steve Marks has a saying about being an expert that reminds us not to take the label too seriously. It’s advice worth taking, because too many herpers put too much of their ego into their perceived herpetocultural expertise. When you invest that much ego, being corrected is not taken as a learning experience, but as an affront to an all-important reputation. No wonder it leads to all sorts of hostile responses to innocently phrased statements.

3. Disagreements get mistaken for personal attacks. For example, the person who misread the material and thought that all colubrids were rear-fanged was personally insulted when I disagreed with her. All I did was take her evidence and show, point by point, how she had misread it. A perfectly valid (if forceful) debating strategy, but one which she found a bit hard to take. Thus the response that I was being personally vindictive, or lying, or both.

On arguments that hinge on opinion rather than fact, too many people think there’s only one way to see a given issue, and if you disagree you’re not only wrong, but also obviously biased, stupid, ignorant, a pathological liar, or all of the above.

Either way, when ego and expertise are inseparable, and the rules of debate are not widely known, it’s not hard for some people to feel “bashed” when someone doesn’t agree with them, and to respond in kind.

4. Some people don’t like being told “no”. It’s not just that people don’t like being told that they’re wrong — they also don’t like being told that they can’t do what they want. Usually this happens when they come to the forum for advice, but don’t like the advice they receive. Two situations come to mind where this comes into play: when people want to catch reptiles (usually small snakes) that are readily available captive-bred, far beyond their ability to care for them, or illegal to collect, or when people want to keep venomous reptiles when they are obviously not ready.

But the biggest problem is not specific to herpers, but common to all Internet users. How many of us have gotten really mad about a posting and replied to it before we had a chance to calm down? How many of us regretted it afterwards? The problem with the Internet is that it is both instant and permanent — a nasty combination.

This newsletter, on the other hand, is a much more hospitable venue to discuss controversial issues. Let’s say we publish an opinion piece here. The writer has taken the time to think and reflect before writing the piece, making for a more careful argument. Readers can respond to the argument — maybe even get a good discussion going — through letters to the editor, but because of the publication schedule and the fact that a letter (or e-mail) takes more effort than a one-line blast, there’s a good chance that the responses would be more thoughtful, too.

That’s one of the reasons I’m glad Susan Hunter has written an opinion piece on the next page. You may agree or disagree with what she argues, but either way I hope she makes you think. And maybe you’ll send in your two cents’ worth. Let’s give it a try.