Rules of Engagement

I follow the SQL Server community pretty closely on Twitter. That sounds dorky, I know, but it’s an incredibly intelligent, passionate, and friendly/funny group of people (mostly IT and database administrators, or developers). I’m primarily an observer, but I’ve noticed very specific patterns in how this community responds to outsiders, requests for help, and breaches of protocol. And the lessons I’ve learned from this online community and others have influenced the way I think about relationships, both on and offline.

Like all communities, the SQL Server community has established social norms and best practices for itself. If you’re a DBA with a question, tweet about it using the #sqlhelp hashtag and someone in the community will probably respond to your request with help (either the answer itself, or a link where you can find the answer). I’ve seen extreme kindness around this hashtag, where the community will band together and spend an afternoon helping someone fix a bug or a piece of faulty coding, all in public, all on Twitter. Anyone that can jump in with a suggestion is encouraged to do so.

But there was a major kerfuffle last week around another social norm.

A SQL consultant who goes by the handle @SQLTech2 was called out on Twitter for plagiarizing a Microsoft white paper on his blog without attribution. The white paper was written by @PaulRandal, a SQL community heavyweight, and the plagiarism was called out by @MrDenny, another heavyweight. @SQLTech2 defended himself, then got a bit testy, and it spiraled into a big argument with all the SQL Server heavy hitters on Twitter against this one guy. Blog posts were written, lessons were learned, and a funny “Downfall of Hitler” parody video was posted on YouTube about the incident. And the next day they were showing that YouTube video in Microsoft Certified Master classes and chuckling about it.

This all happened within 24 hours, the community rising up to defend itself against plagiarism by someone outside the circle.

Anyway, these two examples demonstrate that communities, even (or especially) niche communities, have rules of engagement and initiation. I occasionally contribute to a blog that’s very high-profile in the world of mormon blogging (or “The Bloggernacle”). The bloggers and readers have a tight-knit community that interacts in the comment section, and the blog has a huge readership of non-commenters because it can be daunting to enter the conversation. There are lots of inside jokes and personal references, and the moderators keep a sharp eye out for arguments and trolls–and take pleasure in humiliating and then banning any newcomers who appear to be picking a fight. The moderators can appear harsh, but they treat their web site like a conversation. If a group of people who all know each other are having an interesting conversation and you butt in to say something obnoxious, they’re going to ask you to leave, usually in the same spirit in which your obnoxious comment was made. Rudeness begets rudeness, snark begets snark. And I get that–it’s a religious blog, after all, so all kinds of strangers are stopping by to say obnoxious things without first observing the discussion and learning the rules of engagement.

At this point, I was planning on sharing my notes from a SXSWi panel featuring Chris Brogan–which was the purpose of this post–but it’s late, this post is already long, and I’m boring myself (I can’t imagine why you’re still reading). To recap: be polite, be friendly, help people out, and people on the World Wide Web will like you. The End!