Egroup Wars: The Time Factor (Part II)

Last week, I posted a blog regarding what I call egroup wars. I defined it as the heated exchange of emails by various people over an egroup that was not intended to become a venue to such conflict. I discussed how the absence of anonymity in egroups somehow adds fuel to a conflict. This week I will address another aspect that makes an egroup rather unique compared to messageboards and chatrooms: the time factor.

Responses sent via the egroup are not made in real time. They are sent whenever the person concerned happens to login, stumbling upon the last email that was sent thus causing such person to reply. This is the reason why egroups, in the context of an egroup war, is worse than chat in my opinion. Whereas in chat, you can respond to a potentially destructive post immediately, in an egroup, you will have to wait. It can take days before a person can reply so as soon as you are able to send your email, for example, you have no choice but to forget about it temporarily. You have to hold the point of conflict in abeyance while you live your life, unfortunately in paranoia, constantly thinking if a reply has already been sent to your message. This problem is worsened by the potentially bad timing of a reply. Say when the other person replies the night you are about to take the bar exam. Now that’s really bad timing. Other times, it is not as bad, but still inconvenient nonetheless, especially in cases where you feel you have no choice but to reply.

Finally, I think conflicts in an egroup are unique because of the fact that egroup wars cause great inconvenience to people who are not involved in the conflict. It is funny that observers in an egroup war end up as stakeholders as far as the conflicting parties are concerned. They are perceived as judges, with both sides usually arguing to gain their favour. However, the fact is that some observers do not seem to care at all about a conflict. People like my brother for example simply feel amused watching people trade blows in an egroup war. The inconvenience comes in when you find your mailbox with 20 messages from just two people. And while it is easy to delete messages, it can be a bit bothersome if it goes on for several days.

In writing this particular post, I have been contemplating as to how the law should come into the picture. Is it considered private or public sphere if a defamatory speech is made in an egroup? Where do we draw the line?

Or perhaps it shouldn’t interfere. After all, we have that thing called freedom of expression right? A term that may perhaps be the most used (or abused, depending on your position) legal shield in human history. But still, maybe egroup wars are a natural phenomenon, a result of the technology melding with an imperfect human society.

Leaving it alone is the easy thing to do. Now, whether it is the right thing is harder to say. It is easy to let it be because most of us are mere observers if not totally innocent to the phenomenon. But I know people who have been seriously hurt in egroup wars, and for them, the answer is not as simple.

- Elgene L. C. Feliciano