ÌìÃÀÊÓƵ

In my first few weeks as engagement editor for Civil Beat, I’ve noticed a number of rather uncivil comments posted from even long-time, loyal readers.

Our Terms of Service are basic. We simply ask that you “be civil,” and that threatening, harassing, intimidating or abusing others is not what we would call civil. We keep the language flexible, because context matters. But let me ask you this: Would you consider calling attention to another person’s ethnicity a civil way to continue a discussion? I’d venture to say that, in most cases, it doesn’t when race has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Yet it happened here, in our little civic square, just earlier this week. We posted a Community Voices column from Sandra Eru called “Geothermal: The Maori Experience.” One reader, Sherrie Moore of Pahoa, posited that you can’t compare New Zealand’s fracking experience to how it would impact Hawaii County.

This follow comment directly addressed Moore’s comment:

It doesn’t make sense to ask Moore if she’s from Puna, and then immediately assume that she prescribes to a “NIMBY mantra.” This is more than just an assumption. This was an attack that contributed nothing to the overall discussion. As you can see, all it did was prompt more racially charged responses from others, none of which had anything to do with geothermal energy.

By comparison, Kevin Johnson of Honolulu also responded directly to Moore. He said things like, “The fracking process is the same in name only with respect to shale formation hydrocarbon extraction.” That line was in direct support of the column above, and made no mention of ethnicity, or questioning how long Moore has lived in Puna.

I’m not saying race has no place in any discussion. Earlier this week we had a story on Mexicans in Hawaii, and obviously the comments will revolve around Mexicans. But let’s bring up racial issues when it’s relevant to the subject at hand. Geothermal energy isn’t likely to be one of them.

Here’s another example of casting generalizations upon an ethnicity, another situation somewhat unique to Hawaii. This was posted on Chad Blair’s story about a Chuukese man’s dying wish to detail the plight of Micronesians in the Pacific.

Manning followed up by claiming that “80% plus crimes” are committed by Chuukese residents.

I corrected Manning by saying that he is wrong in his assertion. According to the state’s “” report, many of the crimes are committed by whites and Hawaiians.

Popular Science recently . They explain that, “even a fractious minority wields enough power to skew a reader’s perception of a story.”

At Civil Beat, we believe the same. There is danger in allowing incorrect comments to color reader perception, particularly when it comes to race. While readers have kuleana over their comments, we also feel some level of responsibility for them. We do not want to risk a reader takeaway to be that “Chuukese commit 80 percent of crimes” when it’s not true. There shouldn’t be a democratization of facts. Just because a group of people believe in something false doesn’t make it right. All it does is tear communities apart.

We don’t want our story comments to be merely just a “comments section.” New York Times contributor Michael Erard recently described comments sections as dangling “.” We’re vigorously trying to create an online community that can discuss problems and find solutions. Erard’s piece is well worth a read, if you haven’t read it already.

Finally, I need to point out another recent comment that led others in the community to alert us.

Rick Tubania, despite having no face to the name, has been a long-time reader and contributor to many story comments. Despite that, he still crossed the line when calling out Choon James’ Chinese background, which has nothing to do with Mayor Kirk Caldwell’s property tax proposals.

Still, I’m proud to see that the community stepped up and called out Tubania on his comments. What I see is a community determined to keep Civil Beat civil, even when it comes to other loyal readers.

This is merely a friendly reminder of our goals here, because I believe Civil Beat already has the healthiest and most tight-knit online community in news today.

It isn’t just Civil Beat that’s trying to change online culture. YouTube recently had a to its comment structure, as did The Huffington Post by , and as well.

The only rule that really matters is to be civil. Respect decorum and respect each other, especially when you disagree. Think of your comments as representative of and an extension of your real-world behavior. Let’s meet the standards of in-person discourse.

Breathe first, then comment. Just think of how Anthony Weiner’s life would be different today if he hadn’t been so hasty in giving in to his impulses.

And as always, let me know what you think. Comment below.