#oneaday Day 74: Flashbacks

Yesterday, we updated the rules on a Discord server I help run. The rules did not change from what they were before; they were simply expanded and clarified in a way that allows any of us on the moderation team to easily step in if things look like getting out of hand.

And you know, people absolutely lost their shit over it to a frankly baffling degree. We had people claiming that the server had been “destroyed”, that they were no longer able to express themselves fully, that mods were “power hungry”… if you’ve been on the Internet any length of time all this will be familiar, I’m sure, particularly if you were ever part of forum culture.

I have found the whole experience baffling and extremely frustrating. The new rules amount to “don’t be a hateful bigot”, “don’t be mean to other people” and “please use the channels as they are designed to be used”. Bizarrely, it’s that last one that got people most upset, because apparently asking people to keep off-topic discussions to the off-topic channel is something approaching a fascist dictatorship.

All this gave me exceedingly unpleasant flashbacks of “behaviour management” when I was working as a teacher. A classroom full of screaming children and a Discord server full of crying adults who are very much old enough to know better are remarkably similar. And it all comes down to people, regardless of age, having a great amount of difficulty with someone who isn’t them laying down boundaries.

In both cases, kids and adults, they feel they’re not able to behave as they please. In both cases, the rules are in place to help keep things somewhat more orderly: so that lessons can be taught in the classroom, and so that people who came to the Discord server to get specific information can find that information in the latter case.

No-one has quite gone as far as throwing out the “but my free speech!” card as yet but some people came remarkably close earlier. And I suspect we will continue to have some unrest for a few days.

I don’t get it. I’ve always been quite happy to follow the rules when I’ve been invited into someone’s house, be it real or virtual. I’m still mortified about one time, aged 12, when I used the word “bog” to refer to the toilet at a friend’s house, only to be admonished that “we don’t use that word in this house” (or at least not in front of his mother anyway). If someone asks me to behave myself online, I behave myself. It’s really not all that difficult.

I suspect much of it stems from the people in question never having had those boundaries set in the past, and not knowing what to do when they are set — even if they were already following the rules anyway. I suppose it’s easy to feel a weird sort of guilt when you’re involved in a community and that community feels the need to lay down the law, even if you know you had nothing to do with it.

But honestly, come on now. If you have difficulty with rules that amount to “don’t be a dick” and “use this server for its stated purpose”, that’s an issue with you, not the rules.


Want to read my thoughts on various video games, visual novels and other popular culture things? Stop by MoeGamer.net, my site for all things fun where I am generally a lot more cheerful. And if you fancy watching some vids on classic games, drop by my YouTube channel.

1123: Assholes with Nothing Better to Do

Page_1I don’t know if any of you reading this have ever been properly trolled by someone who really knows what they’re doing, but I have. Twice.

The first was during my GamePro days, and I believe I’ve mentioned it on this blog before. Basically there was this dude who frequented the GamePro Facebook page and was a bit of a nutcase, to put it mildly. He’d often come along and comment on updates, talking about how debit cards were somehow evil and various other ravings. He seemed mostly harmless, however, so he was tolerated, left alone and largely ignored by other members of the community.

That is, until I posted a news story about Singapore-MIT Gambit Game Lab’s interactive JRPG-style exploration of queer issues, A Closed World. Suddenly, nutjob went on the offensive, posting raving comment after raving comment and directly attacking me, accusing me of being a paedophile and all manner of other slurs. Apparently he was a big fat homophobe as well as a crazy person, it seems, so he got summarily blocked from the GamePro Facebook page, reported to Facebook and also blocked from the main GamePro site despite his best efforts to continue harassing me. This rapid response (largely from me, I might add, without engaging with him) meant that he went away pretty quickly, thankfully, but it was still a somewhat unpleasant experience to go through, even though I knew that none of the things he was saying were true.

Something very similar happened today. Yesterday, I received a bizarre tweet from a complete stranger that wasn’t a reply to anything which I had said, but which simply called me a “sick, sick man.” I took a brief look at this person’s profile and they appeared to be… not the sort of person you’d really want to associate yourselves with, let’s say, so I immediately blocked them and thought nothing more of it.

Today I received an email from Rob, the owner of Games Are Evil, informing me that he’d received a voicemail from someone — someone who neither he or I knew, I might add. Apparently they’d made some rather unpleasant allegations about me and had supposedly contacted the authorities. Much like the previous time I was attacked without provocation, my heart almost stopped, even though I knew there was absolutely no truth to these allegations whatsoever. It took me quite some time to calm myself down.

Calm myself down I did, though, and I did a little digging, as I was suspicious about a few things. So firstly I went back and looked at the Twitter account that had sent me the strange message last night. The location on it matched the location the caller was supposedly from, and the first name on the account also matched the Twitter account. Things were starting to fall into place.

I checked the WHOIS records for Games Are Evil and discovered that, as I suspected, Rob’s phone number and contact details were recorded alongside the site’s other information, which explained how this person was able to contact him by phone when the only information on the site itself is a selection of email addresses. The only question left was why someone would do all this.

And the best answer I can come up with is “because they had nothing better to do.” My attacker is, according to his Twitter profile, a member of an anti-blogger group with a spectacularly offensive name whom I’d never heard of prior to today, and it seems they have something of a habit of attacking people in this manner for reasons best known unto themselves. It seems that today, I was just unlucky enough to be the one in the firing line. I’m now not all that worried about this ridiculous turn of events, because frankly I don’t really see the “authorities” — if they were contacted at all, which I seriously doubt — trusting the word of someone who voluntarily chooses to associate themselves with a group called… well, this. (Wikipedia link, offensive name. You have been warned.)

Still, it sucks that there are people out there malicious enough to pull shit like this against complete strangers. May they all fall off a cliff and land arse-first on a sharp spike. Cunts.

So yeah. Happy Valentine’s Day and all that.

1115: Twittertwat

Page_1Quite a few people I know have quit Twitter in the last year or so. A few of them have also come back again, and some have gone through this process more than once, but a few have gone, never to return, either. Fortunately, in the cases of people I’m actually interested in staying in touch with, I have alternative means of contacting them, and Twitter was only ever a way of easily sending short messages to them — a global texting service, if you will.

I use Twitter a lot, for engaging in conversations, posting links to my work and just generally being part of the global community. But over the past few weeks, I’m starting to understand why increasing numbers of people are jumping ship.

The experience is, of course, as with so much else on the Internet, exactly what you make of it, and I’ve taken fairly ruthless control of my experience by simply blocking people I find objectionable and/or annoying. Not necessarily people who are being abusive — I appear to be a relatively inoffensive tweeter that doesn’t attract trolls compared to some — but people whom I just don’t want to hear from. (If only real life were that simple.)

Even with doing this, though, it’s still increasingly frustrating when the entirety of my timeline is taken up by some sort of snark on one subject or another. Today, there were several subjects — a report by Edge about the next-generation Microsoft console which framed a bunch of rumours as if they were confirmed facts; the ECA announcing that HipHopGamer was going to be their new ambassador; and something about J. J. Abrams and Valve. I’ve only really dipped in and out of Twitter today, and the snark in relation to all of these things was unbearable then, so I can’t imagine how irritating it would have been had I had a client open all day.

This is the thing, though. There’s nothing really fundamentally wrong with having strong opinions on matters such as those mentioned above — which will, of course, mean nothing to people who don’t follow the games industry — but Twitter is not a particularly good place in which to have discussions about those opinions. It’s fine for raising awareness of something — perhaps posting a link to a relevant story — but when people start trying to have “debates” about these things, it all sort of starts to fall apart a bit, really. Any pretext of rational discussion is inclined to quickly go out of the window in favour of short, snappy arguments, and the ease with which a tweet can be posted means that things are often spoken in haste without any real thought. To me, the very benefit of arguing a point using the written word is that you can take your time over it and consider it carefully; not so if you’re in a Twitter argument.

I haven’t been involved in any of these discussions/debates/arguments as I know how they inevitably go. I also know the people to avoid engaging with by now — those who seem to take offense at everything it’s even slightly possible to take offense to. Even though I don’t engage with them, though — and in many cases, as mentioned above, have blocked them — it’s still exhausting to feel that there are certain subjects which just can’t be broached; certain turns of phrase which can’t be used; certain words which are off-limits. (And I’m not talking about anything explicitly offensive like racial epithets or anything like that; I’m talking about words which these people specifically choose to interpret using the worst possible meaning rather than the tone and context in which they were intended.)

I’m rambling a bit, I know, but the gist of the matter is that this week I’ve come closer to quitting Twitter altogether than I have ever done. Twitter has been an important part of my life for a long time, a key way in which I stay in touch with a lot of my international friends and the means through which I first met Andie, but I’m beginning to feel that “honeymoon” period is over. It doesn’t feel like the warm, welcoming, positive community it used to be. Perhaps that’s just the people I follow, and I’m long overdue for a ruthless unfollow-and-block session — or perhaps people really are being more snarky than they were. Either way, the negativity is starting to get to me a bit.

It’s doubtful that I will quit Twitter at any point in the near future — I still have too many friends who use it as their primary means of communication, and it’s still the best way to quickly and easily share things that probably don’t really need to be shared with the world — but I just found it mildly interesting that this is the closest I’ve ever come to actually ditching it.

1050: I Said A-Snark, Snark, A-Snarkitty Snark, A Snark-Snark-Snarkitty-Snark

Page_1Another day, another day of snark on the Internet. This time the sources were twofold: firstly, the Pope joined Twitter (and, apparently, his first tweet will be on December 12, begging the question why the account has been set up and announced now) and secondly, it emerged that Kate Middleton (or whatever we’re supposed to call her now) is pregnant and suffering from “acute morning sickness”, apparently.

Neither of these things are of particularly earth-shattering importance, and both of them can be easily ignored. I have spent most of the day ignoring them both completely, and am only mentioning them now out of frustration — not at the things themselves, of course, but rather at the reaction to them.

The Pope’s presence on Twitter was, of course, greeted by numerous sarcastic replies and fake retweets; the news of the “royal baby” (as it is now known) was greeted by general disdain and constant repetition of “THIS ISN’T NEWS”. Well, whether or not it is is a matter of opinion, of course, but if you don’t think it’s news and have no wish to contribute to making it news, you could always, you know, stop talking about it.

I don’t know if my weariness with this sort of thing is just a symptom of getting older or general fatigue at having seen so much snark over the past couple of years in particular, but either way… yes, I am tired of it. Because it doesn’t let up, either. You can unfollow and block the people who are being a pain, but they’ll get retweeted and quoted; you can close your social media windows altogether, but then you can’t talk to your friends. (And when you are, at least for the next couple of weeks, a long way away from your nearest friends, yes this is a big deal.)

It is probably related to my general fatigue with the Internet-based slacktivists (previously discussed here) who rant and rave about a particular issue (usually, at the time of writing, sexism) until they’re blue in the face but then don’t appear to actually do anything beyond declare certain blog posts and articles “mandatory reading” and then ignore any attempts to actually engage in discussion or education.

The ironic thing with this behaviour is that it drowns out the actual message they’re trying to convey. In the case of the fervent anti-sexism brigade, who are quick to splatter anyone who disagrees with them with the “privileged white male” brush — perhaps fairly in some cases, perhaps not in others — it means that the underlying message of tolerance, acceptance and equality gets lost in all the noise of people shouting and screaming and demanding that everyone unfollow a particular person on Twitter because they said something they don’t agree with. (It wasn’t me.)

Not only does it drown out the message they’re trying to convey, it makes me care less, which is the complete opposite of what they’re trying to do, surely. I don’t know if anyone else feels this way, but I certainly do. The more these people froth at the mouth and shout and bellow and point fingers and demand that people read this article by their friend, the less of a shit I give — because I don’t want to be associated with them. Not because I disagree with their ideals — as I’ve mentioned a number of times previously, I agree with what they’re arguing for in most cases! — but because the confrontational, aggressive way in which they try to get their points across is just so completely loathsome to me that I don’t want anything to do with it.

So I block them. I literally silence them. Which is exactly one of the things that they complain about, usually without any sense of irony that their own furious, righteous anger is itself intimidating and silencing people who genuinely want to discuss, engage and understand these complex, non-binary issues in greater depth.

I didn’t take the decision to block a bunch of these people lightly, and I occasionally feel guilty that I have done so. Many of them are supposedly “respected” figures, and some are friends with people that consider to be friends. But I haven’t unblocked them.

Why? Because I have tried to engage them in discussion. I have tried to see these complex issues from a variety of different perspectives and talk about them accordingly. I have tried to have a rational, reasoned debate. And yet the last time I attempted to do this — I forget the exact topic now, as I unfollowed the Facebook comment thread shortly afterwards feeling genuinely upset — I was shouted down with the words “get a grip”. No attempt to engage. No attempt to discuss or debate. No attempt to help me understand their points of view. A simple shutdown.

I gave up at that point. That is when I wrote this post. That is when I simply decided to avoid confrontation altogether and “stay out of trouble”, as it were.

This isn’t how it should be, surely. People should be aware of these issues and feel able to discuss them openly without fear. Fighting hate with hate is counter-productive and achieves nothing except alienating people like me while causing both “sides” of the debate to dig their heels in and argue ever-more aggressively.

#oneaday Day 902: Follow the Rules (That Haven’t Been Written Yet)

I’ve been playing a bunch more of The Secret World today and I stand by my initial impressions that it’s a significant step, nay, leap forward for the MMORPG genre. My only slight criticism would be that so far I’ve had very little incentive to actually play alongside other people, but 1) this is nothing unusual for modern MMOs and 2) I haven’t tried any “dungeon” missions yet.

It’s in the Investigation missions that I mentioned yesterday where the game truly distinguishes itself. I shall try and resist spoiling specifics at this point, but completing one today involved searching for something in the game world, finding a laptop (password-protected, natch) and then having to break into it. The clue on the computer was vague at best, and there was nothing in the immediate vicinity to help. A little exploration was required, and then some actual honest-to-goodness deduction and lateral thinking on the part of the player. It was a true case of “I wonder if this works… holy crap, it does.” As I say, spoiler-free, but it involved the sort of shenanigans normally reserved for “alternate reality games”. Which is impressive stuff.

What all this clever puzzle-solving leads to, though, is something of a dilemma for the community. In other MMOs, the General chat channel is the home for people asking how to do things — when it’s not the home of teenage boys soliciting sex from hot female Night Elf avatars, of course. It’s sort of expected that if you ask a question such as “where is quest objective x?” that you’ll get a straight answer. And that’s fine — a lot of MMOs are still a bit clunky on the whole “user-friendliness” part and thus often forget to point the player in the right direction, necessitating either a lot of tedious searching the game world or simply asking other players.

In The Secret World, however, the confusion inherent in these Investigation missions is part of the appeal. The sense of satisfaction when you unravel one of the game’s cryptic clues is unprecedented in the usually rather predictable MMO genre. Assuming you worked it out yourself, of course — and herein lies the problem.

Players coming to The Secret World straight from titles like World of Warcraft and Star Wars: The Old Republic will come to General chat or the dedicated Help channel and pose the usual sorts of questions. One of two things then almost inevitably happens — 1) someone posts the answer and everyone then yells at them for spoilers. 2) someone posts a vague clue and the new player then gets annoyed at not being able to get a straight answer.

Actually, this is an exaggeration — so far, from what I’ve seen, the vast majority of the community is on the side of “give hints, not answers” and only a few people ruin that. The trouble is, if you happen to glance at General chat when one of these people is spoiling a quest solution — perhaps unintentionally — then you can’t unsee it. You’ll know forever that Dr Bannerman’s computer password is — wait, hang on, you won’t get it out of me that easily!

Funcom’s GMs are apparently being pretty strict about those they catch posting spoilers in the chat channels, so hopefully the community will be “trained” out of that particular practice sooner rather than later. The trouble is, tempers often run unchecked online, meaning that some people will fly off the handle to a disproportionate degree at these spoiling types — who, in many cases, simply hadn’t yet got a handle on the game etiquette. Sure, it’s common sense that in a game with a heavy puzzle-solving component that people might not want to just hear the answers blurted out, but it’s entirely possible for the reasons I mentioned above that people may not have considered this. Getting yelled at and verbally abused by people isn’t going to help them change their behaviour — it’s simply going to make them defensive and often lash out back at their “aggressors”, thereby perpetuating a cycle of people bitching and complaining at each other unnecessarily.

In many ways, it’s the same as in teaching. In the classroom, if you spot someone misbehaving — or if another child comes up and “tells on” the miscreant, the worst possible thing you can do is yell, shout, scream and otherwise draw attention to their inappropriate behaviour. In many cases, the child was simply seeking attention, so to succeed so completely — even if it’s with negative attention — will not train them to behave more appropriately in the future. Instead, a more assertive approach is the way to play it — take the child aside and discuss quietly and discreetly with them why what they did was wrong rather than encouraging them to get upset and strike back.

Now, obviously most of the players of The Secret World are a little older than primary school children (hopefully), but this approach is still a sound one. If someone behaves inappropriately — such as by posting spoilers — it may be easy to simply publicly shame them in General chat with an “FFS” and a few choice expletives, but all that will do is make them call you a “moron” (or worse) and ensure that you both end up on each other’s Ignore lists. Instead, a simple, polite private message explaining why what they did was inappropriate or unacceptable is the way forward. No malice, a simple — but assertive — desire to help them out and make the experience more pleasant for everyone involved. Easy, right? Well, it should be. In practice it doesn’t always work that way, but people will settle down over time as the “norms” of the game community are established.

The way online communities interact with one another is something that’s always been fascinating to me, and the fact that The Secret World is even running into this issue at all shows what a big shift away from conventional, predictable MMO thinking it really is. The community is going to have tom come up with established conventions and ground rules — perhaps policed by GMs in the early stages — and those used to a different set of norms will have to adjust and adapt appropriately.

Anyhow. That’s that. If you haven’t figured it out already, The Secret World is most definitely worth your time and money, particularly if you have the slightest interest in Lovecraftian horror, or if you enjoyed Funcom’s adventure titles The Longest Journey and Dreamfall. While it has its flaws and its bugs, it’s certainly a far more interesting experience than the vast majority of other online titles out there, and I recommend you give it a shot — even if you’re not normally into MMOs.

#oneaday Day 853: Friend Collecting

20120521-013731.jpg

I didn’t understand it back in the MySpace days, and I still don’t understand it now.

Friend collecting. Why? Just… why?

I am, of course, referring to the phenomenon seen in the comments thread of this Facebook post here:

(with apologies to Kalam, who is nothing to do with this.)

“Who wants 2,000+ friend requests?” asks Ahmed Hamoui, only with poorer use of punctuation and a seeming inability to use the number keys on his keyboard.

To his question, I answer “Not me. Fuck off.”

Facebook is noisy enough at the best of times. Can you imagine how chaotic and useless it would be if you 1) got 2,000 friend requests and 2) accepted all of them? It would completely negate the core concept of Facebook (or what it used to be, at least) which is to be a “social tool” that helps you to connect with family and friends. The very nature of the way Facebook works pretty much encourages you to limit the friends you add to being people you actually know, otherwise there’s that horrid risk of people seeing photos they shouldn’t. Because despite the fact that everyone knows you shouldn’t post embarrassing photos online, everyone still does. (Not to mention the fact that you have no control over what other people post.)

This sort of thing happens on Twitter, too, with the whole “#TeamFollowBack” thing, whereby certain tweeters promise to follow back if you follow them. At heart, this sounds like a relatively admirable thing to do, promoting mutual, equal discussions and– oh wait, most of them are just collecting followers for no apparent reason then filling their entire timeline alternating between bragging about how many followers they have and bleating about how close to the next “milestone” they are. (Please RT.)

I trimmed my Twitter list massively a month or two back because it was just getting too much to deal with. I flip-flopped between two equally annoying problems: things moving too fast for me to be able to keep up with, and everyone posting the exact same thing at the exact same time either due to press embargoes or the death of a celebrity. So rather than complain about it, I cut the people who were irritating me or whom I hadn’t “spoken” to for a while, and now enjoy a much more pleasurable life online. Sure, my timeline still gets flooded every time a celebrity (usually one I’ve never heard of) dies, but at least I can keep up with the conversations for the most part.

Which makes me wonder why on Earth you would want to put yourself in a position on Facebook or Twitter where it is literally impossible to follow and engage with that many people. Surely at that point social media ceases being at all “social” and simply becomes white noise?

Or perhaps I’m just getting old. It seems to be mostly young kids (particularly Justin Bieber fans for some reason) engaging in this behaviour. Perhaps they have a much greater tolerance for being bombarded with crap than I do. Perhaps they’re numb to it. Perhaps they don’t really want to “socialise” at all online, simply grow a bigger e-peen than their friends and/or strangers they don’t know.

Whatever. I don’t really care. I have cultivated a relatively small but close-knit circle of friends online, much as in “real life”, and I’m happy with it that way. It’s nice to have occasional new people trickle into the mix through, say, this blog or Twitter or what have you, but I certainly don’t feel any need to bellow at the top of my lungs about how close I am to 1,500 Twitter followers, and I have no idea how many friends I have on Facebook — nor do I care.

If you’d like 2,000 friend requests on Facebook, simply “Like” this post then go fuck yourself.

#oneaday Day 821: There are Bigger Problems in the World, Like Your Face

20120419-014338.jpg

Second only to the patented “Everyone Is So Entitled These Days And Should Just Shut Up” argument-defuser is the ever-faithful “Everyone Should Realise That There Are Bigger Problems In The World And Should Just Shut Up” conversation-closer.

I shan’t get into the former here — everyone has talked it to death and should just shut up — but I feel I should address the latter, since I saw it come up on Twitter earlier today. (And, if you’re reading this and you know that you used it, fear not — this isn’t a personal attack on you by any means, just my own thoughts on that particular argument.)

The trouble with the “Everyone Should Realise That There Are Bigger Problems In The World And Should Just Shut Up” argument (hereafter referred to as ESRTTABPITWASJSU) is that it assumes that people who are commenting on or complaining about something are equating their personal reaction to something that is “close” or “important” to them with something that is unquestionably a Big Problem For The World.

This is not the case at all. Recent examples where the ESRTTABPITWASJSU argument has been applied include independent game developer Phil Fish‘s ill-advised admonishment of the entire Japanese game development community in a very public place (and subsequent beratement of those who criticised him on Twitter, culminating with him leaving the social network altogether); and public reaction to the Mass Effect 3 ending. I have no desire to beat those particular drums in any great detail for now, so let’s put the specifics aside for a moment.

Yes. There are bigger problems in the world than both of those things. There are people losing their homes and livelihoods to the economic crisis. There are people in the world with not enough food or water. There are places in the world where diseases go unchecked. There are countries that are ruled by people with only their own interests at heart, not those of their people. There are wars being fought in the name of… what? And there are people who get so passionate about their religious beliefs that they blow themselves up in the name of their god, usually killing many other people in the process.

These are big problems. They are fucked up, massive, humongous problems that we, as individuals, can do very little about. Sure, we can throw our money at charities and, if we’re feeling particularly activist-y, attempt to take some sort of action against. But realistically (or pessimistically, if you prefer) there is very little that Josephine McAveragepants can do about these things since she does not run a government and/or army and/or bank. The problems become so massive that they take on an unreal quality — they often feel like they take place in a parallel reality distant from our own.

This is why people prefer to turn their attentions to problems they feel they can solve, or that they feel they can at least have an impact on. They have every right to do that. They may often have selfish interests at heart, but recent examples of organised action aimed at these relatively minor issues have proven that it’s far from being isolated individuals shouting and screaming about Games for Windows Live in Dark Souls or whether the Mass Effect 3 ending constituted false advertising (apparently, according to one Better Business Bureau blogger anyway, it does, believe it or not) — these are groups of people who are prepared to stand up and be counted in order to tackle problems they feel like they can face.

It’s an idealistic, utopian vision to believe that people (read: the Internet) will rise up together and do something about the bigger problems in the world than the ones they have successfully tackled to date. Maybe it will happen one day. Maybe these small “victories” will give some people the confidence to try something bigger, a little piece at a time. Protesting, say, a war is a bigger deal than signing a petition against the ending for a video game. Some people may be scared to jump in at the deep end, particularly with the apparent risk to life and limb frequently presented by the media, so they take the “safe option”. They feel like their voice is being heard, but relating to an issue which is smaller, closer, more relatable.

The key thing, though, is that none of these people who are sweating the small stuff are saying that the issues they feel strongly about are more important than the Bad Shit Happening Everywhere Else In The World.

No-one is equating those things except, ironically, in many cases, those people making use of the ESRTTABPITWASJSU argument.

#oneaday Day 818: “So Fed Up With SOMEBODY…”

20120415-222839.jpg

Passive aggression. It’s an ugly business, for sure, but never has it been easier to participate in than in this age of social media. While the phenomenon has been around for many years in the form of bickering couples saying things like “SOMEBODY didn’t do the washing up” or making other such pointed remarks either directly at each other or to other people within earshot of their partner, it wasn’t until people gained the ability to broadcast their every waking thought to the entire world that it became the worldwide craze that it is today.

I’m not sure exactly what it achieves. I’ve indulged in it in the past — in my defence, there were extenuating circumstances at the time — and it didn’t really make me feel any better, though it did have the effect I desired at the time: to get some validation and reassurance from friends, and to piss off, upset or otherwise get the attention of a specific person. I wasn’t particularly proud of the result. I ended up feeling worse about the thing I was trying to get out of my system than before the passive-aggressive incident. So I try and avoid it in most cases these days. (Note: most. No-one is infallible. And I’m aware that not sharing the details of said incident above could be construed as a form of passive aggressiveness. But, well, shut up.)

Why has social media been a catalyst for the growth of passive-aggressiveness, though? Quite simply, it’s because it gives people the ability to feel like they’re being heard even when no-one is really listening. Post something along the lines of “SO PISSED OFF WITH SOMEONE RIGHT NOW!!!” on Facebook and within a matter of minutes you’ll have at least one “Like” and one comment saying something along the lines of “u ok hun?”. Since you’re being passive-aggressive, though, you couldn’t possibly say exactly what’s up with you at the time, and as such you drop vague hints as to what is bothering you without actually saying it. Or, worse, you leave a comment to the “u ok hun?” commenter saying “I texted you”, letting everyone else reading the comment thread know that you’re telling someone all about what/who has pissed you off this week, encouraging a flurry of private messages and texts to said person asking “Do you know what’s up with so-and-so?”

Eventually, of course, the whole sordid saga comes out because statistically, someone in your group of friends is likely to have loose lips. We know this from sitcoms where one member of a group of friends is forced to keep someone’s secret but finds themselves increasingly tempted to reveal everything to someone else, whom it transpires actually knew it anyway. Or, to base ourselves back in reality, some people like telling others secrets because it gives them a feeling of power — “I know something you don’t, but I’ll tell you if you buy me a drink/buy me a pony/sleep with me” — and thus said secret gradually spreads and spreads until, inevitably, it gets back to the person it originated from, who traces it back to the person who they told in confidence and then posts another passive-aggressive status update about how they’re, like, totally so pissed off with people who can’t keep secrets.

You get the idea, anyway.

As human beings, we have a variety of means of communication at our disposal, and it’s pretty clear to most of us that being upfront and honest about things often makes life a lot easier in the long run, even if it might be a bit like tearing off a plaster in the short term. But in the heat of the moment, it’s all too easy to focus on that “short term” bit and take the easy option, which is to bottle up the things we’re really feeling and simply spout vague bullshit into the ether in the hopes that someone — anyone — will reach out to us and give us someone to talk to.

We never learn our lesson, though — at least not if my Facebook news feed and Twitter timeline are anything to go by.