Talk:Scale of conduct

From Blogging

[edit] Universal Code Vs Grey Scale

Modern humans habitually attempt to set rules. No problem there because it is the structure upon which society is/must built - else it be anarchy. However, please keep in your mind that each society is different from the next, precisely because those rules/structures have evolved in different environments. They have adopted different memeplexes. Thus, do not be supprised when some "Universal Blogger Code" cannot be neatly married to a diverse blogsphere. Codification of any process - in this case, blogging - is logically impossible when that process has an effectively infinite number of elements.

You need only look at the attempts to codify societal behaviour to witness how "universal codes"always fail to achieve their stated goals: excluding regious sects; football; gay pride; corporate governance, et cetera. In every case, each group becomes riven with schisms as one subsetafter another attempts to modify (or flout) some part of a "universal code."

However, longer lived societies/groups are characterised by some level of tolerant flexability and set behavioural boundries that are wide - wide enough, that few people ever cross them. Note that those boundies may or may not bw codified. Boundies can be, in practise, both known and adhered to without codification.

If the blogging society wishes to become a longlived facet of human interaction, it should *not* adopt a "universal code." It should strive to embrace the majority without excluding the minority. I suggest that the blogsphere mimic the real world and allow each blog to float to its own level of acceptable civility. Unfortunately, unlike the real world, blogs currently do not have obvious telltale signs of what is inside - in the manner shops and bars. Which brings me to my suggestion:

1. No universal code. 2. A highly visable grey scale for civility on each blog and board.

The scale could/should be simple, for example: 1. No Holds Barred - anything goes at the risk of legal intervention. 2. Raw Meat - no explicite death threats, but ad hominae permitted. 3. Robust - no ad hominae, but mild abuse permitted. 4. Civil - no abuse, but vigous debate permitted. 5. Text Book - only proven facts, with scholarly opinion permited.

Comments welcome.

6. Semi-homogenous - disagreeing with the majority must be done carefully, and not as one's first post

7. Supportive - nothing that would distract the blog owner from the thoughts she's sharing

-- anon

[edit] Instead of a single code

Why not levels of codes. So this becomes a rating system, more than a single moral guide. As a rating system, it gives people some idea of what to expect, It helps outside observers to decide how to take the contents.

You could have levels on a number of scales.

Yes. Frex, some blogs allow very rough language and personal attacks -- as long as you're agreeing with the majority

-- anon