Page 190 - Culture Technology Communication

Diversity in On-Line Discussions 173

makes me sick and for an entire people to be dog-leashed by
tradition and parental/government/religious control is equally
sickening. The Internet is mental anarchy. No authority has
the right to impose on my thinking—nor anyone elses.
What I’m trying to say is you as an individual should have
the right, no matter where your heritage or national bound-
ries lie, to choose your own heaven or hell.

F2 replies:

M1, first of all, stay off the emotions and stick to a decent,
polite academic discussion . . . This is not a conflict that
needs to be resolved. So I’ll end the discussion here.

M1 responds:

F2, My opinions are quite polite, extreme, I admit but tact-
fully conveyed.

M5, a Latin American male, comments:

Hey guys, . . . Culture is an extremely complex issue . . . dif-
ferent opinions will always reign . . .

M1 closes the discussion with:
M5 . . . I ask that the class agree that there is good and bad
in all cultures.

In this exchange, M1 places a strong emphasis on individualism and
self-determination, while the others are comfortable with that cul-
tures will differ in this respect. M1 also seems to welcome conflict
and needs a final, clear-cut resolution, with everyone in agreement.
He uses a dominating style as described by Ting-Toomey (1991),
while M5 is seeking compromise, and F2 is avoiding conflict which is
also consistent with Ting-Toomey’s theoretical framework.

SEGMENT 2

In this conversation, the instructor posts a message from “New
Thinking,” a free weekly e-mail “contributing to a philosophy for The
Digital Age,” by Gerry McGovern, in which McGovern states that: