Interrogating Self Representation

I wanted to carry on the discussion of how people create themselves online. There have been several fine blog entries on the subject, and I think it's been fairly well established that people self-consciously create a persona in their interactions with online social networks.

What I find interesting about this is that people often react to this self creation with skepticism. In reading forums for my final project, I have often run across people reacting to others' stories in an interrogative way, looking for holes in the information provided, and going so far as to check the details of the story in real life. For example, in one story that I read (which was admittedly somewhat outlandish), the teller claimed that it had been raining at the time, and provided information on the general area that the events took place in. One skeptical user actually looked up the weather reports for the area and found that it had been clear. However, other less incredulous users pointed out that the skeptic had not gotten the reports for exactly the right area. The whole discussion basically degenerated into an argument about the veracity of the story itself. Some people took the story at face value, and others acted on their doubts with a somewhat creepy zeal.

It seems to me that while we may in fact manipulate the way that we represent ourselves online in the manner that marmalade describes in her post "perhaps this is silly," there is not much tolerance in the online community for outright fabrication and self-creation. It's almost as if there's an implied social contract or something at work here. "The people have a right for truthful testimonials" or somethinng like that. If the "Internet Detectives" (to appropriate a bit of forum slang) manage to "prove" that someone is lying, the reacting is usually derisive.