I know part of the reason is because we were both debaters. How I know is because of the way she "says" things. I get it. I can actually hear it.
I was with her one hundred percent until she got here:
When you talk with someone online, you're implying to some degree that you think they're alright. If you take that further and retweet their blog post, share their contest, or promote their event, you're telling your network that you approve of this person. It's essentially vouching for them. The reputation you've established may sway people to participate, enroll, or otherwise support the person in question. Your reputation is at stake with every bit of information you share.This is PROBABLY nitpicking- we could hash this out over comments I assume, but I don't like waiting to make a point. I think the words chosen are important (and think Amber would agree).
"Talking to someone online" does not equate to "you're cool with me buddy." Or I'd take you out for a beer or whatever analog you think of when you take this stuff offline. Just because I saw something tweeted and responded to it or RT is NOT an endorsement of any kind of a blogger, website, or otherwise.
Heck, I would dare say plenty of folks have exchanges that don't indicate anything resembling a kumbayah-fest. I've only encountered one blogger that I just DROPPED. But not because of tweets, but rather how I was treated on their blog. I was engaging with that person specifically because I disagreed with them. Heck, @WordsDoneWrite and I have had our own disagreements (which seem to go her way). I don't expect everyone to agree with me, think my jokes are funny, or even get my sarcasm.
I've learned this lesson the hard way with "Who Gives a Tweet." Man, people REALLY did not like what I tweeted, but they weren't my friends or followers either (Sorry, A).
See, I am an "action's speak louder than words" kinda person. Which is ironic considering the value I place in words, but the point is speaking is such an interpretable activity whether it is written online or spoken. What you DO will prove the character much more than the words spoken. Intent and ultimately execution are so much easier to illustrate than verbalize.
Unfortunately, for online "relationships" and interchanges, we don't have enough actions to counteract poorly chosen words.
I said this after that interchange I mentioned earlier in that link:
I said it before and I'll say it again: "I'm not right and neither are you."
Until you "know" someone on the internet, you can't really be sure of how they might take ANYTHING you write. You could be trying to compliment and it's misinterpreted. You could just be saying you don't agree with them and they think you are a hideous, hateful troll spewing bile all over the place.
Amber closes with: "Your reputation is at stake with every bit of information you share."
Online, it is very easy to quickly share a link, like joke, or retweet something that others may find offense with and you not knowing it. I would certainly hope if something I've done in any category doesn't offend but I can't control it- you have the choice to see what I say and interact with it or not.
As I said, you can't be sure of how people will take things because you don't REALLY know them.
Just because I've shared something from a person or place online that you have issue with doesn't mean I give that credence. Do we need disclaimers: "Not every RT is my opinion?"
PS A wrote one of the funniest things I've read in while about the Ted Williams, Golden Voice dude:
"It's a sad state of affairs when you have to be homeless to get a job in this economy!"