How To Handle Someone Being Horrible To You Online (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
How To Handle Someone Being Horrible To You Online
3:34am Wednesday 29th September 2010
By Julia Chanteray - business advice »
Some of you will know already that a few weeks ago I got severely panned on an online group in response to an article I wrote about networking. It was in a closed LinkedIn group of about 200 people, so I can’t show you what this person said, but it was pretty vitriolic. So I thought I’d talk about what it felt like and how I handled it.
My initial response
At first I was really upset about it. I knew that I’d written an article with some strong views about how to network but I didn’t think that it was really any more contentious than any of my other blog posts. I really didn’t understand why this person had got so upset, and why he was saying such bad things about me. When I put the article out on Twitter (a couple of days before) it had got a good response, and lots of people liked it. And, as I first heard about it at 09:30 on a Monday morning (not my best time, I have to admit), with people emailing and phoning me, it felt like a complete disaster. In particular, it felt like a disaster that I’d caused.
How I checked it out
The first thing I did was to check what I’d actually written. Maybe I had written something completely awful, and I’d said something I shouldn’t have. But no - when I looked at it again, I thought, well, that is quite full on, but that’s what I’m like - I’m someone who feels passionate about business, and that passion comes through in what I write. I haven’t bitched about anyone, and even though I talked about someone (who I didn’t name) whose opinion I disagreed with, I didn’t say anything bad about that person.
Other people’s reactions
Throughout the week, people kept adding comments, and emailing me about what this person had said. So, the whole thing kept going - once it’s online, it has some momentum. What’s interesting is that although lots of people said that they thought I’d been misinterpreted, no one actually stood up and said "Oi! Leave Julia alone". As all this had been said in a LinkedIn group for a pretty small community and (I’ve been told) this was the gossip of the week in the Brighton business community. Nice and juicy, unless you’re at the middle of it.
How my feelings changed
I went very quickly from upset, to thinking it must have been my fault, to being angry. All in about the first hour of seeing it. I then got a little bit scared. By Monday night I was checking that I’d locked the doors of my house. I knew this was silly, but I checked. Twice. I got out of that one pretty quickly by laughing at myself, and then getting on with what I needed to do on Tuesday. There’s nothing like a complex spreadsheet to take your mind off things. By the end of the week, my feelings had changed to feeling sorry for the person who had said these things about me. Saying this risks him getting upset again, but he’d been so over the top in trying to damage my reputation, that he’s probably done himself much more damage than he’s done to me.
Facing everyone
On the Friday morning, I was due to go to the Brighton Chamber breakfast, where I knew a lot of people would know about what had happened. I was a bit nervous, but knew I had to be there. The weird thing was that no one mentioned it, and breakfast was just like any other networking event.
Lessons learned
If you don’t like something online, don’t respond straight away, while you’re still angry. Have a cup of tea and calm down first. My detractor didn’t do this, and I guess this is what caused all the trouble.
If you’re angry with someone, email them or phone them. Don’t have your fights in front of everyone else. This is more honest and more likely to help you to stop being angry, especially if you’ve got completely the wrong end of the stick.
If someone says something bad about you online, do respond, but do that just once. Don’t get drawn into the debate. One of the least pleasant things about this episode was that it carried on all week, but if I had responded to all the comments, this would have made it last even longer.
Don’t be surprised if people enjoy seeing a fight. 8 million people watch EastEnders, because people love a bit of drama.
Don’t expect people to take your side - while people love to watch conflict, they don’t want to be involved in it or take sides because this would make them feel vulnerable. Remember that if this happens to you, it’s going to be a much bigger deal to you than to anyone else, so you have to work on it not being a big deal.
If you liked this, why not get to know more about Julia at The Joy of Business or follow her musings on Twitter.
Comments(7)
anubis
says...
3:16pm Wed 29 Sep 10
You mention a small contribution you posted online that evoked a vitriolic response – someone was ‘being horrible’ to you. We must accept your reportage ‘at face value’; exactly what was said cannot be disclosed as the conversation took place in a restricted forum. We cannot assess for ourselves whether the ‘attack’ was directed at the CONTENT of your message or was a PERSONAL attack on you. Apparently, the onslaught came from one person only, whom you claim to be “trying to damage your reputation”.
Your article and the ‘horrible response’ initiated a momentum of its own; a number of subscribers believed your newly found enemy had ‘misinterpreted’ what you had written (you offer no indication as to whether or not you agree with this). You do not tell us whether any members agreed with your opponent – but within a day or so, the ‘debate’(?) was the “gossip of the week” within the closed community. And, forgive my repetition, the reader of the Argus still has no idea whether you are the victim of a personal attack – or just that your ideas relating to ‘working the net’ were being challenged.
Finally comes the grand anti-climax. With great trepidation, you join the Brighton Chamber breakfast, convinced all eyes will be focused on you and the sole topic of conversation will inevitably be this great public/private debate between you and your adversary. But no, NO COMMENT FROM ANYONE, “the weird thing was that nobody mentioned it”! Perhaps the uninvolved reader of your post could be forgiven for sensing a mild paranoia and/or megalomania oozing from your material?
Hardly surprisingly, the ‘lessons to be learned’ that follow in your post, must remain rootless for those (like me) in the dark regarding the ‘horribleness’ itself. For example, lesson 2 (email the guy first) would indeed be valid if it’s the ideas themselves under attack; if it really was a ‘personal’ attack, frankly better to ignore it. Surely the people who know you well, would not need to be told it was an untrue and unfair remark?! Or take lesson 5. Would any ‘ordinary’ person (other than a supreme egoist) assume ‘people must take your side’? Surely the whole point of any discussion is to invite OPPOSING points of view?
The true objective (self publicity) of this very contrived little exercise shines crystal clear in your final sentence: “If you liked this, get to know more about Julia” !!??
fulcrum
says...
5:03pm Wed 29 Sep 10
anubis wrote:seconded.
Julia! I read your blog with an open mind, expecting an example of an unexpected and unjustified insulting remarks, directed at your goodself -- together with how you handled a specific situation, complete with recommendations as to how others (like Anubis, for example?) might benefit from the lessons you learned. What a disappointment was in store for the reader, as your essay turned out to be a rather poor exercise in self-publicity. You mention a small contribution you posted online that evoked a vitriolic response – someone was ‘being horrible’ to you. We must accept your reportage ‘at face value’; exactly what was said cannot be disclosed as the conversation took place in a restricted forum. We cannot assess for ourselves whether the ‘attack’ was directed at the CONTENT of your message or was a PERSONAL attack on you. Apparently, the onslaught came from one person only, whom you claim to be “trying to damage your reputation”. Your article and the ‘horrible response’ initiated a momentum of its own; a number of subscribers believed your newly found enemy had ‘misinterpreted’ what you had written (you offer no indication as to whether or not you agree with this). You do not tell us whether any members agreed with your opponent – but within a day or so, the ‘debate’(?) was the “gossip of the week” within the closed community. And, forgive my repetition, the reader of the Argus still has no idea whether you are the victim of a personal attack – or just that your ideas relating to ‘working the net’ were being challenged. Finally comes the grand anti-climax. With great trepidation, you join the Brighton Chamber breakfast, convinced all eyes will be focused on you and the sole topic of conversation will inevitably be this great public/private debate between you and your adversary. But no, NO COMMENT FROM ANYONE, “the weird thing was that nobody mentioned it”! Perhaps the uninvolved reader of your post could be forgiven for sensing a mild paranoia and/or megalomania oozing from your material? Hardly surprisingly, the ‘lessons to be learned’ that follow in your post, must remain rootless for those (like me) in the dark regarding the ‘horribleness’ itself. For example, lesson 2 (email the guy first) would indeed be valid if it’s the ideas themselves under attack; if it really was a ‘personal’ attack, frankly better to ignore it. Surely the people who know you well, would not need to be told it was an untrue and unfair remark?! Or take lesson 5. Would any ‘ordinary’ person (other than a supreme egoist) assume ‘people must take your side’? Surely the whole point of any discussion is to invite OPPOSING points of view? The true objective (self publicity) of this very contrived little exercise shines crystal clear in your final sentence: “If you liked this, get to know more about Julia” !!??
Tinfoil
says...
8:55pm Wed 29 Sep 10
dunderheads
says...
2:17pm Thu 30 Sep 10
Lulu Devine
says...
11:45am Sat 9 Oct 10
sodium-lit-suburb
says...
4:31am Sun 10 Oct 10
Burgess901 says...
12:29pm Wed 29 Sep 10
Someone once quoted that arguing on the internet is like taking part in the special Olympics, even if you win you are still a retard (not very PC, but true).
Unfortunately I frequently forget this and pursue altercations via the medium of forums, doh!