Forcing Members to "Play Nice"

Well when I think of the bullying post, I see it more leaned towards the listeners rather than members. You're right, we can't control how members feel towards one another and that is just life. But I think bullying is a big issue on the listener side. Listeners dont have to like each other either but there does need to be respect. The rumor mill should stop because that does affect other listeners and make people feel uncomfortable being in the middle. Also the way things are worded can come across as offensive even if you dont mean it that way. I would just rather people are more aware of what they say to each other and ask the question "Will my actions hurt another listener?". At the end of the day, I really don't care if another listener dislikes me but I would still appreciate respect from that listener.

Interesting thought.

I don't tell people to "play nice". I know some people will be a little blunt or negligent about their actions if they're not feeling happy themselves - something I'm guilty of so I wouldn't tell them to "play nice" or act differently. I would put it down to their character.

If they're not happy but they're acting out, like rubbing others up the wrong way hoping to get a reaction or attention whether negative or positive, then I wouldn't accept it.

People clash as well, you just have to continue the civil behaviour until you leave but you're technically meant to make sure a room has a mod in before you leave, especially if there's a bit of rivalry going on.

i think one of our core principles is being supportive of each other. if you can do that without being nice, i guess that's cool?

That's a very good point to bring up.

There are shades of grey in every situation, so it's not right to outright ban a single action. Allow members to interact with one another in a positive and supportive manner, however they should not be forced to interact with those they do not feel comfortable around. We shouldn't be looking to create a Utopia where everyone is always positive and perfect - I mean how dull would that be? Instead we should encourage the expression of various ideas and opinions as long as it is presented in a civil manner. For example your statement here may be controversial, however it brings up a necessary point and allows us to have a discussion. You successfully presented an idea without causing a stormy comment war.

So perhaps we don't always have to play nice - we simple have to behave. We need to understand how to clash with each other without outright making it a personal matter. It's all about maintaining a civil environment. There's a difference between aggression and not playing nice.

Not playing nice simply means we don't have to be overly sensitive about one another, tread on eggshells or give each other special treatment. Be human. You don't have to grit your teeth and smile at every jerk that walks into the chat room, simply don't engage in an aggressive manner, don't attack others and don't harass others. If there is an issue, take the steps necessary to confront that issue.

Playing nice has its time and place.

I think this is a very interesting thread ♥ thanks for the tag ^-^ !

I definitely think that it is the duty of all moderators and also listeners to try their best to keep the chat civil and to engage everyone as much as possible . Also they shouldn't show any preference or dislike to other listeners or members . Even when they do prefer someone over another person , they should keep it to themselves as much as possible so that no one will feel excluded favoured or bullied . As for members though , I completely agree that they will have their own likes and dislikes and nothing can or should really be done to stop that , as long as the member doesn't take their feelings out on anyone

Ideally not everyone should have to agree with everything or approve of one one another but they should still be able to keep the chat civil and accepting of everyone involved , while also being able to state different opinions and ideas without causing an argument or engaging in conflict

The problem really comes in when the bullying starts . I believe it would be wrong for any moderator or listener to try forcefully to make all the members interact with one another against their own will . It would also no doubt stir up more problems and bullying etc afterwards when the members are left to themselves in the chatroom . As for ignoring though , I'm also not sure if it is a good thing . If a member really doesn't get along with another member in the chatroom and decides to ignore them instead , that's ok and there's little that can be done about it . If on the other hand , a member is disliked by a number of others in the chatroom and they all decide to ignore that member , this can turn into a form of bullying . It can become a very unpleasant and hurtful experience for the targeted member , especially if they aren't even sure why they are being excluded and ignored by others . This is where I'm in doubt personally , although it isn't right to force people to interact with one another against their own will , what would one do in this kind of situation ? One member ignoring another isn't so much of a problem but when the ignoring is on a larger scale … ?

A really great post and wonderful input! I'm glad this is discussed, as I've been thinking about similar topics myself. I would like to add - to all that's been said already - that silence is communication, too - in a possibly positive and negative way.

I agree that taking an individual's right not to interact with somebody for any subjective reason not only doesn't solve the problem, put potentially adds to the underlying resentment, intensifying the issue. I'm no-one to blame somebody for preferring to engage in conversations with some chatroom participants rather than others. After all, it's something completely natural.

But then again, deliberately ignoring a person can be a form of bullying as well, be it from an individual or a group (so, mobbing). Purposefully excluding a person from interaction, be it actively/verbally or passively/through ignoring, shunning, spreading rumors, simply equals social/interpersonal rejection. I don't think elaborating the destructive effects social rejection can have on somebody who already is struggling with their emotional and, often, social situation, is necessary. Especially in a social setting they have entrusted the role of a safe haven.

So - I really think it's about the fine line of purpose that matters. Passive bullying via ignoring is not okay. Having the freedom not to talk to somebody is fine. But in the end, I would say that "forcing to act nice" is more the opposite of "allowing to act mean" than "allowing healthy personal boundaries". And those healthy boundaries should be able to provide enough space between "utopia-nice" and "bully-mean" for various degrees of social interaction and constructive discussion, or else they are not healthy - and if they are not healthy, we might intervene. Imho.

Perhaps (besides Moderators/Mentors, but I think that's self-explanatory) Listeners could be the links between different Members and streams of conversation. Welcoming and universally engaging Members would be the ideal, but not always obtainable situation. Welcoming and inclusive Listeners aren't really debatable, though. I know this already is the role of Listeners in support rooms, but I think encouraging (and, if necessary, enforcing) these guidelines more could positively contribute to the situation. Talking to myself here, too.

And, as always: Everyone here chose to be a participant of this community, and the community comes with certain guidelines. Somebody's personal freedom of expressing their opinions isn't always adding to the supportive morale of the room - and I think we should always try to stick to the more emphatic and supportive path, when in doubt. There's a time and place for opinions - and the Internet provides plenty of such places. The compassionate and inclusive kind - like the mission of 7Cups - is a rarity, though.