Community Discussion: Negativity & The Vampire Community

[Merticus]

Negativity & The Vampire Community

During the past several years how would you rate the overall "negativity" level within the Vampire Community?  This includes, but is not limited to, distribution of news, articles, discussion sentiment, and actions by participants themselves; online or offline.

Log Into Forum To Vote In The Poll Above
*Poll and discussion is also available via the Vampire Community News (VCN) Facebook Group:  http://www.facebook.com/groups/vampirecommunitynews

Consider These Questions:

Review The Following Article Before Commenting:  http://www.realvampirenews.com/2012/01/crossroads-all-the-news-thats-fit-to-print/

1.) Please feel free to discuss your own perceptions in terms of generalities and if you believe it's important to be notified of positive, neutral, and negative actions/discussions/projects of others - whether they be either direct participants, tangentially connected, or otherwise publicly labeled as "vampires". 

2.) Should an artificial balance be enacted to ensure equal focus to both positive and negative issues or should only neutral or positive information be distributed and/or discussed? 

3.) In your opinion, are discussions and distribution of information currently commensurate with vampire community desire to have as much transparency as reasonably possible regarding matters?  Why, or why not?

[SangSavvy]

1.) Please feel free to discuss your own perceptions in terms of generalities and if you believe it's important to be notified of positive, neutral, and negative actions/discussions/projects of others - whether they be either direct participants, tangentially connected, or otherwise publicly labeled as "vampires".

I think it's important to be notified of as much news as possible.  I don't want to hear something that's doctored up or altered to suit "my needs".  I want to hear the truth.  I think dissemination of information is important, and the way it been done over the last year or so has been, in my opinion, really amazing.  I am interested to see how many crazies out there are claiming to be vampires while they run around hurting people, because I think even if the news is negative, it's important to be informed.  That's how you can most effectively handle the state of perception of the community.  If there has been a lack of reporting more "positive" stories about our community, then sure, that should be talked about more.  I think we definitely need a positive push, because over the last year, it seems the rate of conflict between participants in the OVC/VC has been exponentially higher.   More and more people seem to be on the defense, ready to fight.  I feel this is a direct symptom of conflicts going unresolved for long periods of time, if ever.  This is bound to happen when people are fearful of conflict and so do not speak up, or do not feel heard even after speaking up. 


2.) Should an artificial balance be enacted to ensure equal focus to both positive and negative issues or should only neutral or positive information be distributed and/or discussed?

I do not prefer artificial anything.  I would like the truth. 


3.) In your opinion, are discussions and distribution of information currently commensurate with vampire community desire to have as much transparency as reasonably possible regarding matters?  Why, or why not?

There is no way for me to know if things are truly transparent.  There's no way for anyone to know that.  That's fine - that's how the world works.  However, I think it is *IMPERATIVE* for people to sort out their issues and come to some sort of compromise like adults, or things *WILL CONTINUE* the way they have been.  Please note: I am not suggesting anyone should just start yelling at one another in public forums.  It matters *how* you say things.  It's important to be civil and curious of one-anothor's feelings and emotions.  But I think it matters that we communicate more effectively, and feel encouraged, including helping one another when things get ugly.  Right now, all I have seen when someone says *anything* is a lot of scowls and a jump to win the argument just to be right.  I've learned over the last year that it tends to drive a lot of people away.  I know some might say to that "Oh well"... but I think that's part of the reason we have this issue being brought up now. 

[Drusiana]

This post -- saying that the truth must be told, that we shouldn't have "artificial balances" (or "artificial anything"), and that we should be courteous and considerate of each other's feelings -- is spot on. I have little to add, except that this is all pretty good common sense.

I am one of those who hasn't had enough time to judge whether or not there is an increase in "negativity" within the vampire community. I do believe, as a writer, that there are times when criticism of certain ideas, and self-examination within any community, have their place. Certainly, if a particular individual, group or ideology is dangerous, we cannot hide our heads in the sand; the danger must be faced and exposed. At the same time, though, I have gotten tired of bickering and petty quarreling (my experience, to date, is more within the Pagan community), and think that all communities -- vampire, Pagan, whatever -- occasionally need to "brush up" on the art of respectful disagreement.

An important key, as I see it, is humility. None of us knows everything; we all have a lot to learn; we also need to recognize that there are some things we will probably never know for certain, and which will always be controversial. The willingness to "observe, observe, observe" (as Krishnamurti has been quoted as saying), and revise our views, paves the way toward mutual understanding and wisdom.

[legardored]

1. I believe the reader should always be informed of positive and negative forms of news. The reader should be more than capable to judge what they do want to read or skip. Besides that positive and negative is not always as clear to distinguish from a editorial perspective. Imagine someone writes a very critical item towards the vampire community that could look negative but also positive depending on the readers his view. Would you place it or not as editor of a blog/news service? I do not believe a written article can hold any truth just a poor or well written opinion/view on a situation. Truth is to me something subjective and personal. Truth will never look the same for more than one person.

2. There will always be a artificial balance, even for those that just want to deliver their truth. We can't expect that every little situation gets the attention it deserves. There will have to be made choices such us life. Just keep the artificial part to a minium without it interfering with the overall quality of the news service.

3. Can't honestly say it is or it is not. Lets just say its adequate.

[the pink lady]

1.) Please feel free to discuss your own perceptions in terms of generalities and if you believe it's important to be notified of positive, neutral, and negative actions/discussions/projects of others - whether they be either direct participants, tangentially connected, or otherwise publicly labeled as "vampires".

How does the community at-large define "vampire news?" I define it as "information of interest to the vampire community." I think if we had a news network akin to a newspaper or blog hub, I would like to break it down by areas of interest: current events, science, history, media, literature, opinion, etc. I'm interested in vampire news of an academic nature; I read everything else to keep on top of things, the word on the street as it were, and I think it's everyone's responsibility to know what's happening in their own bailiwick, virtual or otherwise.

However, I think the negativity people see in the community comes from reactions to controversial and/or dramatastic news items. There are certain people in the vampire community who are guaranteed to go apeshit in public when they read certain news items and can't refrain from commenting on them, plus there are certain people who flock to community news sites in order to push said people's buttons in order to cause a freakout. You don't see the same level of wankery on blog or Facebook discussions about, say, new research on synthetic blood supplies or a book review of a vampire nonfiction author's latest work.

2.) Should an artificial balance be enacted to ensure equal focus to both positive and negative issues or should only neutral or positive information be distributed and/or discussed?

We're not Fox News. We don't need to follow up every drama- or rage-inducing story with fluff piece about a vampire rescuing a kitten from a tree.

Jewish tradition tells of the mitzvah, or good works that one does without needing or expecting gratitude or even notice. It's great that community members run animal rescues, homeless shelters, depression hotlines, and anti-bullying websites, and the community should be aware of their good works. But injecting their good works into the community consciousness specifically to counterbalance perceived "negative news" defeats the purpose of their selfless actions.

3.) In your opinion, are discussions and distribution of information currently commensurate with vampire community desire to have as much transparency as reasonably possible regarding matters?  Why, or why not?

Not really. I think the people clamoring the loudest for transparency are also the ones who don't bother looking beyond established frameworks (blogs, social networking groups, etc.) for their information and judge how open and welcoming or closed and reserved the community is by a select number of news articles and commentaries.

There ARE gatekeepers in the community, and it's not just the infamous dark cabals: at some level, every group leader and moderator serves as a gatekeeper, determining not only who knows what but also how information should flow between one access point and another. (And before anyone breaks out their tinfoil hat, there are groups and think tanks who get paid to do such things for governments, corporations, etc.)

I find it interesting that the people whining about the apparent lack of transparency have few (if any) responsibilities in the community and choose to keep ignorant of activities happening in their local area, both on and off the Internet. (Note that leadership, power, and responsibility are three separate traits. Responsibility in this community falls on the ones who are capable and willing to fix problems.) I think people are going to flame and nitpick because they can, especially in a semi-anonymous atmosphere where they believe they can say whatever they want and fuss about free speech and transparency when someone tells them otherwise.

I would like to read more research and less drama, but I have less free time now to look for such things for everyone's enjoyment, so it seems hypocritical to ask others to do it.

[the pink lady]

Imagine someone writes a very critical item towards the vampire community that could look negative but also positive depending on the readers his view. Would you place it or not as editor of a blog/news service?

I think what brings the negativity to strongly worded and opinionated writing is the community buzz: people leading others to the article, publicly voicing their opinions on the writing where others can see, etc.