1. Correcting a fellow member must be done politely and for the benefit of all the community:

I believe that observing this may create a totally peaceful environment for all of us. I believe there are two ways we can have difference of opinion with a fellow member. I will talk here in first person:

A. If I have given a statement that is not true and it has been done because of ignorance on my part or as an involuntary mistake. That will automatically bring many members that really know the matter and they will obviously not agree with me.

B. If I have a position and a fellow member has another one on a certain subject. Each one of us knows both side but believes his side is correct.

Considering scenario A: the fellow member could publicly and very politely tell me: “Your statement is not true”. Or he could send me a private message (PM) telling me: “Hey, URGENT, your statement is not correct”.

There might be occasions when the inaccurate statement is so wrong that it must be corrected immediately and this must be done in public. But I believe that every time we have this scenario we must consider: “Is it really necessary to do this publicly or it could be solved with a PM?”

If you choose a PM, you cannot wait forever for an answer. A prudential window of 24 hours might be good. And if you receive no response, proceed to point out the correction on a comment for all to see.

Naturally, it is a very sensible action and I believe we must be very patient and polite. Because we don’t know how the member that receives may react, we might want to have special care when we are taking this step. Being careful benefits both sides.

We might be tempted to leave things as they are and not correct the statement, but that is even worse. Between correcting a mater using hash language, or not correcting it, none of them should be done, but I personally prefer to receive the former rather then the later.

But I still believe, there is never justification to be rude, and if it’s the first time the issue is addressed, it will naturally be pointed out in a very polite manner.

On the other hand, you and I know that even though we may try to be as careful as we can, some people will still be offended. But, in that case we can have peace of mind knowing that the problem is not on our side. If we follow this, and once in a while a person still gets offended, we may be quite sure that this reaction will hardly ever be repeated but the offended person will be constantly having this type of trouble.

Now, considering scenario B: the discussions that follow when two members defend there point of view on a certain topic, often benefit all the community. But the discussion must be held with deference and respect. So, I believe it would not be wise to go for a PM on these occasions. I believe the purpose when this type of discussion is initiated must be to let the community know that there is also another side to the matter that’s being addressed. Discussions with ulterior motives must be avoided. Usually, the intention of who shares the other point of view is just to deliver additional information, but if it’s done without being careful with the words that are used, there is a high probability that the part that receives the comment will be offended. If we ever are going to initiate this type of discussion we must be aware that we may offend the receiver without having the least intention to do so. Again, the chances of encountering this type of reaction may be drastically reduced if we bear in mind what we have been discussing in this post each time we are going to share an opposite point of view.