Community Direction, Rules & Privacy
Oct. 12th, 2010 04:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
flourish posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
laughing_medusaFirst off: since I'm bumping it off the top of the page, everyone take a second and go share some links at the Resource Roundup post that elf kindly made for us! We're hoping to develop those resources into linkspams about various topics, so that in future, we can point to other people's words and not just rely on our own.
As we've had the first couple posts in the community,laughingmedusa and I have been talking a lot (and talking with some of you) about what direction the community ought to go. As some of you may know, the community was started based on several incidents in the feminist blogosphere, wherein it seemed like all possibility of constructive discussion was destroyed because of the huge numbers of people getting involved - people who didn't know each other at all, and therefore didn't share anything or feel any accountability to each other about their actions.
That was the rationale behind creating a small community, really more of a discussion group: the idea that, if everybody has a chance to get to know each other, civil discourse will be easier, even when we are angry and frustrated and ready to snap. But almost immediately, the comm got much bigger than we had expected. We should have known better - in retrospect, we should have realized how many people from our flists and drolls would be interested, how few friends we actually shared in common, and how quickly things were going to snowball. Most of all, we should have workshopped the rules and profile info more carefully. But at the beginning, it looked like it was going to be me,laughingmedusa, verity, jlh, and maybe five or six other people - so it seemed like we'd have plenty of time to discuss the rules later, and it seemed like surely we would share so much knowledge and awareness of each other that we wouldn't need to explain ourselves too thoroughly.
Obviously, our assumptions were wrong. Now we need to actually, you know, define what the hell we're doing, since it obviously isn't what we initially set out to do.
As a result, we've decided that, as of noon EST tomorrow (13 October), we are going to close membership to this community. The goal will be to allow people who are currently members to get to know each other without adding new folks - limiting our growth so that we can begin to understand each other and build up trust. It would be foolish to try and kick anybody off, and we don't want to, anyway: everyone who is here, we think can and should be an excellent member of the group.
This is not a step we take lightly. Obviously, there are costs to it: the primary one is that the group will remain more or less at its current demographics, which are fairly white and cis and USian. But,laughingmedusa and I have agreed that it's the only way to get some amount of stability while we determine what the hell is going on. We will probably allow people to join again at some point in the fairly near future; we just need to give everyone a chance to take a breath, learn some names, learn some usericons, and figure out who's interested in and able to speak to what.
We also would like current members' opinions on what our rules, now that we're formally writing them, should be. Fuzzy statements like "give people the benefit of the doubt" need to be clarified, because the audience is no longer the ten people who have been following the situation all the way. We also need to decide on some pretty important things. For instance: Are we interested in using private posts sometimes, that only community members can see? (Benefit: people who are in the closet or uncomfortable talking about personal matters can discuss these issues with the community without fear. Cost: Further locking down, people who are not members of the now-not-open community cannot possibly get access to the posts to give their perspective, which might be sorely needed.) Or, are we interested in engaging in discussions about what some people might call '101-level' anti-racism etc? (Benefit: People who are tired of having those discussions don't have to have them; people who have too few spoons to deal with it don't have to deal with it. Cost: Some people can no longer take an active part in the group, even though they may be awesome people who just have not ever encountered this stuff before.) I'll put my own perspectives in a comment to this post, and so willlaughingmedusa, but we want to know what you think, too. If this comm is going to work, all members need to buy into the premises.
So: What are your thoughts? What should our rules be, and where do we go from here? (And our private inboxes are also open, if you would prefer to talk that way.)
[Co-signed,flourish and laughingmedusa.]
elf kindly made for us! We're hoping to develop those resources into linkspams about various topics, so that in future, we can point to other people's words and not just rely on our own.As we've had the first couple posts in the community,
laughingmedusa and I have been talking a lot (and talking with some of you) about what direction the community ought to go. As some of you may know, the community was started based on several incidents in the feminist blogosphere, wherein it seemed like all possibility of constructive discussion was destroyed because of the huge numbers of people getting involved - people who didn't know each other at all, and therefore didn't share anything or feel any accountability to each other about their actions.That was the rationale behind creating a small community, really more of a discussion group: the idea that, if everybody has a chance to get to know each other, civil discourse will be easier, even when we are angry and frustrated and ready to snap. But almost immediately, the comm got much bigger than we had expected. We should have known better - in retrospect, we should have realized how many people from our flists and drolls would be interested, how few friends we actually shared in common, and how quickly things were going to snowball. Most of all, we should have workshopped the rules and profile info more carefully. But at the beginning, it looked like it was going to be me,
laughingmedusa, verity, jlh, and maybe five or six other people - so it seemed like we'd have plenty of time to discuss the rules later, and it seemed like surely we would share so much knowledge and awareness of each other that we wouldn't need to explain ourselves too thoroughly.Obviously, our assumptions were wrong. Now we need to actually, you know, define what the hell we're doing, since it obviously isn't what we initially set out to do.
As a result, we've decided that, as of noon EST tomorrow (13 October), we are going to close membership to this community. The goal will be to allow people who are currently members to get to know each other without adding new folks - limiting our growth so that we can begin to understand each other and build up trust. It would be foolish to try and kick anybody off, and we don't want to, anyway: everyone who is here, we think can and should be an excellent member of the group.
This is not a step we take lightly. Obviously, there are costs to it: the primary one is that the group will remain more or less at its current demographics, which are fairly white and cis and USian. But,
laughingmedusa and I have agreed that it's the only way to get some amount of stability while we determine what the hell is going on. We will probably allow people to join again at some point in the fairly near future; we just need to give everyone a chance to take a breath, learn some names, learn some usericons, and figure out who's interested in and able to speak to what.We also would like current members' opinions on what our rules, now that we're formally writing them, should be. Fuzzy statements like "give people the benefit of the doubt" need to be clarified, because the audience is no longer the ten people who have been following the situation all the way. We also need to decide on some pretty important things. For instance: Are we interested in using private posts sometimes, that only community members can see? (Benefit: people who are in the closet or uncomfortable talking about personal matters can discuss these issues with the community without fear. Cost: Further locking down, people who are not members of the now-not-open community cannot possibly get access to the posts to give their perspective, which might be sorely needed.) Or, are we interested in engaging in discussions about what some people might call '101-level' anti-racism etc? (Benefit: People who are tired of having those discussions don't have to have them; people who have too few spoons to deal with it don't have to deal with it. Cost: Some people can no longer take an active part in the group, even though they may be awesome people who just have not ever encountered this stuff before.) I'll put my own perspectives in a comment to this post, and so will
laughingmedusa, but we want to know what you think, too. If this comm is going to work, all members need to buy into the premises.So: What are your thoughts? What should our rules be, and where do we go from here? (And our private inboxes are also open, if you would prefer to talk that way.)
[Co-signed,
flourish and laughingmedusa.]
no subject
Date: 2010-10-12 10:24 pm (UTC)I definitely kept some stuff out of my intro response on the thread because it was an open post (I had somehow gotten in mind that it was going to be closed/members only--but I've been swamped with stuff the last day or two--dissertation defense! IRB workshop! Online class!--which means I wasn't reading carefully). So definitely for some locked posts.
101: welllll, I've been mumbling and gnasning my teeth about how I don't want to do 101 work any more (in my areas). That doesn't mean I'm against it for the community, but maybe there can be special tag/subject header of '101' to make sure people who want to avoid 101 because of being old and grumpy are able to do so. Will go look at profile and rules and think about other questions.
no subject
Date: 2010-10-12 11:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-10-12 11:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-10-13 12:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-10-13 12:39 am (UTC)