For this week’s assignment, I joined the online community called Maoli World. The purpose of this site is to connect Native Hawaiians around the world. It allows you to create a profile page with pictures and personal information, similar to social networking sites such as MySpace. However, the reason I chose to join Maoli World was because of the discussion forum. The possible categories for discussion on this site include things such as the Hawaiian culture, politics, and even your family genealogy. One of the discussion forums that I participated in was the political forum. In this forum, people mainly discuss their feelings about politics in Hawaii or political issues that affect Hawaii, including the Native Hawaiian Recognition Bill that will be reintroduced in Congress this year.
To assimilate in to the group, I started by posting on the discussion forum. I voiced my opinion regarding the issue of the Native Hawaiian Recognition Bill. Because I was new to the group, I didn’t want to seem to abrasive, so although I was sharing my opinion, I tried to be as respectful as possible. I knew that I had been accepted into the group when other group members replied to my postings and engaged in dialogue. I found that once this happened and I felt accepted by members of the group, I had an easier time opening up and expressing myself freely. Of course, I still tried to be respectful, but I was less worried with offending other people and instead was more concerned with sharing my knowledge and opinions on the topic.
Some people replied to my postings because they agreed with my opinions, and it was nice to know that there were other people who felt the same way I did. There were also people who disagreed with my opinion, and they also responded to my postings. Those people who disagreed tried to explain their reasoning, and some people even tried to persuade me to see things their way. This is generally how agreements and disagreements are expressed on Maoli World, through the use of discussion. Because people tend to be pretty set in their ways regarding politics, disagreements on this issue are never really resolved, but if group members disagree on other issues, they are able to “talk” it out by posting in the discussion forum. Sometimes people were able to reach an agreement through discussion, and sometimes people just agree to disagree.
In almost every online community, you will find a few members who have really abrasive personalities and are just really rude. I had one of these people respond to my post by saying “how stupid can you be” and other insults. I chose to just ignore this person and let it go, but this week’s reading in Wood and Smith discusses the option of silencing group participants who act in this manner and don’t engage in proper netiquette. Although I think that silencing dissenters is probably the easiest way to get rid of people who don’t quite fit in with the group, I don’t think this is the best option, because while it is possible in CMC, it is not possible in “real life”. If you are communicating with someone face-to-face, you don’t have the option of silencing them simply because they say something you don’t want to hear, so why should things be any different online? I think that this just goes to show that people need to be more aware of how they conduct themselves in online communications. Just because the face-to-face factor is taken away, it doesn’t mean that people should conduct themselves in an inappropriate manner, such as being disrespectful or insulting towards others. I feel that a person’s behavior in an online group should be the same as it would be in person.
