Perhaps we should be more concerned about the company that forces everyone onto the web for profiteering and then uses it against us, rather than the ones who post on said internet of things.

I've never seen much tolerance of other people on the Internet, to be frank.

Sure, there are some commentors in these hallowed pages who are generally an example of how everyone should behave, but they are not enough to hide the ugly selfishness of many.

Still, El Reg is the only place I go read the comments, so that's saying something.

Yor momma

I mean, if you are the kinda fuckwad that deletes any negative opinions off your platform, its going to seem that way.

I used to comment on a number of UK news sites, but gave up years ago because even cosy places like the Graun could get a bit nasty (relatively - nothing like some of the sewers out there). The Reg is the only place who's comments I regularly read and actively comment in because, on the whole, it's a fairly polite and informed place. The best thing about the Reg forums for me is that when I read an article on the Reg that I either don't understand or is outside my area of knowledge or experience then I can just tag the RSS feed and get educated.

El Reg was not immune from bad people. Eadon, although now almost forgotten did provide some entertainment as long as you were not on the end of it. An extreme example, to be sure, but the line is sometimes hard to draw, and will be in the future....

As pointed out in the article, many will be tapping up the local teens for some advice before handing over credit cards just to access social media. Also age verification doesn't prevent anyone saying bad things, only moderation can do that which is a thankless task when done manually.

Pints all round, especially the staff on here.

Things must be improving. I've just had a response from a Visual Studio UI developer agreeing that I've found a bug and saying they are going to fix it . If they could just fix the other dozen I've reported to them over the last couple of decades even I might become more civil.

It would be interesting to see what Microsoft remarked after having a little browse through that Sh**Storm known as Twitter...

People literally threaten to kill each other, send bombs or a multitude of other threats etc. The Internet has never been so violent..

Sorry to disagree, but the Internet has been violent ever since the plebs have had a connection.

Remeber [1]Swatting ? That didn't happen last month.

When it was only academia that had access, sure, it was a lot more civil, but then the hoi-polloi got on the bandwagon and ever since the first XBox we've has 12-year-olds threatening everyone else's mothers.

Violence on the Internet is hardly a new thing.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting

"Since the plebs have had a connection." or since the Plebs had access to Social-Media?

I don't remember it being such a bad place in the times of Bulletin Boards and the various Forums ( Usenet, Fidonet, moving on to CompuServe etc)...

I would put it around the time of the Web 2.0 when the storm erupted...

Twitter, 4Chan, Reddit, Wikki edit wars, et al should be enough to skew any such survey right off a cliff.

Toss Rule34 into the mix & the survey vanishes down a blackhole of sparkly vampire Hentai furry stomping FanFic SpaceGoat porn...

Well I'd buy that last one.

and an [1]XKCD inspired site

linky to xkcd/305

[1] https://xkcd.com/305/

Internet is lovely for big corporations controlling communication and spying for governments.

They have basically killed interest focused forums and other forms of information exchange independent of corporate control.

Now that most of communication is consolidated within a few services, they can control and censor whatever governments or other corporations need to shape the narrative that benefits them.

I've never found the Internet to be in least bit offensive, violent or corrosive. After all, its just a network. The World Wide Web on the other hand, well that has some pretty spiky corners to be sure.

Fuck them then.

I don't know why we mock Tay. They wanted a simulated teenager, they succeeded beyond their wildest imaginings.

Somewhat like a playground the internet would seem overly full of shouty, immature individuals who have determined for themselves and themselves alone, that the internet is a forum where everyone must pay attention to them and to the bile that they very often espouse. Much to the detriment of more considered thought and expression, which is sadly often drowned out my the former. Imho, this is all the proof that is needed to see that mankind, as a whole, is nowhere near intelligent enough for such technology and hasn't been for about 100,000 years.

> "I see more people taking out their frustrations online"

Could it simply be there are more frustrations to be taken out during the pandemic?...

.

> "we're all in this together."

Come on, this is what everyone tries to avoid at all cost: Being in the same crappy situation as everyone else... When you say that you're either trying to placate somebody*, or you're desperately calling for help**.

* "Be reasonable, hand me the lifeboat, after all we're all in this together."

** "I want some too, aren't we all in this together?"

Have you listened to any politicians? "We're in this together" means, "my luxury lifeboat is exactly the same thing as you treading water."

> "We're in this together" means, "my luxury lifeboat is exactly the same thing as you treading water."

Yes, that was my point, you just said it much better...

Still wondering what my downvoter had to complain about.

I quite like reg comments. They have the right level of snark and sarcasm and everyone gets it. I'm guessing that's cause it's a tech website and we (maybe not me) aren't idiots. I use Reddit but I have severely limited the subs I subscribe to because some of them are now really full of arseholes. There was a post on r/funny earlier where a two year old shit himself (not literally) when a toy went off twice, the parent laughed, I found it hilarious, the kid got upset from being laughed at. Incoming loads of posts how it's cruel and the kid will be scarred for life. How can people be so dumb? Welcome to the new age of internet.

Hypersensitive millennials congratulating themselves on policing content via big tech monopolies to make the Internet safe for puppies & kittens.

Thankfully El Reg remains largely a bastion of sanity in terms of ability to debate something. I've had some heated debates here where I feel like I make a point; even if disagreeing with others in the debate. As opposed to exploding with rage.

I am still particularly bemused by the excellent episode of The Orville with it's government and policing by like/dislike button... And just how warped that concept is.

There are other areas of the internet where I would not even remotely contemplate saying what I think or know. Which says an awful lot about the standards here.

Some sites and channels have generally well behaved commenters even when we get snarky and sarcastic. The difference is the target; I have a low opinion of corporate manglement and their shills and government goons where ever they are. But sites like Twatter, Reddit, etc. get very nasty and personal fast. So how vicious the Internet appears to be is probably more dependent on where you hang out on it. I do not see that much but I do not hang out in the most notorious cesspools.

For this 'research' I would like to know how the Rejects of Redmond selected and rated the sites in more detail. I suspect they have serious methodology problems which I think points to an underlying design problem. The Rejects want to show specific outcome for their own purposes which might at variance with most people's experience. Given the popularity of Twatter and Reddit amongst some and the notorious vileness on both sites and the probably strong overlap between the 'researchers' and the users I could see the data being skewed badly. There is strong tendency among Twatter users in particular to think it is more popular than it actually is.