Board Business, April 27 2011

Sidebar Business

Readers may notice that two new items have been added to the sidebar. A "Read the FNEs" link has been added just below the link to the board FAQs. Below those two links the reader will find a new blogroll called "Citizens[1] Blogs of the Slacktiverse" which contains links to the blogs of those who asked to be included on the new sidebar. We apologize in advance for any missing links and encourage anyone who wishes to be added to the sidebar to email TBAT.

Regular Board Business

Don't forget to send in items that you want included in This week in The Slacktiverse April 30/May 1 2011.

The three sections of the weekend post are:

The Blogaround

Any denizen of the Slacktiverse who has posted an article to their own website during since the previous weekend post is invited to send a short summary of that article along with its permalink to TBAT. That summary and link will be included in the next weekend blogaround. This will help to keep members of our community aware of the many excellent websites hosters by other members.

In Case You Missed This

Readers of The Slacktiverse can send short summaries of, and permalinks to, articles that they feel might be of interest to other readers.

Things You Can Do

Anyone who knows of a worthy cause or important petition should send a short description of the petition/cause along with its url to TBAT.

Please email all submissions to slackmods at gmail dot com. The deadline this week will be 2000 GMT on Saturday.

Urgent or time-sensitive announcements will be posted immediately rather than being held for the next regular "This Weekend" post.

Generating Slacktiverse content.

TBAT would like to thank all the people who have submitted articles and encourages posters who are interested in contributing regularly or irregularly to send in  material. Having a number of articles that are ready for publication allows TBAT to maximize the variety of opinions as well as be responsive to "real-world" events and concerns.

TBAT have been contacting individuals who have expressed an interest in submitting materials but stress that people should not feel that they need wait to be invited to do so before sending in articles.



__________
[1] Amended due to a poster's request

 

The Board Administration Team
(hapax, Kit Whitfield and mmy)



Comments

[Lunch Meat]

Proofreading: a parenthesis is missing after MercuryBlue's blog name on the sidebar.

Thanks again for your work!

[The Board Administration Team]

Thanks Lunch Meat. It doesn't matter how many times one proofs a page there is always something one misses isn't there?

Especially when one is reading it in html code.

[MercuryBlue]

Can we move the Recent Comments thing above the Citizens of the Slacktiverse thing? I liked not having to page down to see what threads were active.

[Deird, who knows nothing about French culture]

Nice FNEs! I approve.

[Deird, who hates scrolling, especially from her iPhone]

Err, yes. Ditto to MercuryBlue.

[Choir of Shades]

Thirded on moving up the recent comments section.

[The Board Administration Team]

Okay, moved the Recent Posts to above the "Citizens" -- let's get a general sense of the board about it.

[Lila]

I like the FNEs, but would TBAT be willing to amend my comment to say "W/R/T tolerating intolerance", since that is no longer the "last question" (which it was when I posted the comment)? Thanks as always for the hard (and excellent) work!

[Brin (not Meir)]

Page down? When I check the "Recent Comments" section, I go to the tab with the smallest current comment page and go up. It's a couple more clicks than before, but it's not that big a deal for me either way.

[The Board Administration Team]

@Lila: Done.

[Lila]

Thanks again!

[Thalia]

I like it. I was just coming round to see what people were chatting about.

[Leum]

Request you add my blog (Stumbling in the Dark) to the Citizens of Slacktiverse blogroll. Also, please link to my latest entry "The Forest of Shadows: What is Real?" which is a psychological allegory about the nature of reality especially with respect to the metaphysical and supernatural.

[Raj]

TBAT, like many Slacktivites, I appreciate the work you have done on the blogroll. I do, however, take strong exception to this heading:

- Citizens of The Slacktiverse

This heading sounds as though the Slacktivites with blogs are the Real True Slacktivites. I know that couldn’t possibly be what you intended, but that’s how it comes across. If there is a list called “Citizens of The Slacktiverse” that contains only those Slacktivites who have blogs, how is it possible to avoid the implication that those of us who do not have blogs are less-than-citizens? (What are we? Residents?)

At this point, you might roll your eyes and say something like, “Oh, geez, it’s just a heading we came up with! It doesn’t mean anything!” True, this “Citizens” thing will have no effect on where I get hired or how much I get paid, but within our online community, it does matter. Labels have meanings. Some have very powerful meanings. “Citizen” is a label with EXTREMELY powerful and sensitive connotations (for some of us MUCH more than for others). To call some people citizens of a community is to make a very profound statement about their relationship to that community. What that heavily-loaded word implies is that among the people present in a community, there is a special category of people who truly belong to the community – and to whom the community truly belongs – in a manner not experienced by those who do not possess that special status known as citizenship. Since our community is NOT supposed to have such a social structure, why are we using terminology that implies that it does?

I realize that I could get on the “Citizens” list simply by starting my own blog. I have thought about starting one, but if I do, it will have to be because I consider it the best way to present certain thoughts. I refuse to start a blog for the purpose of being called a Citizen of The Slacktiverse. On that note, I won’t name names, but I know that some of these “Citizens” have barely, if at all, been around since The Slacktiverse was created. Now, I don’t fault those particular people for their scant presence – after all, we all have lives – but why is it that someone who has had little or no board presence is worthy of being called a Citizen merely for having hir own blog while someone who has participated in discussions, made suggestions during the formative stages of The Slacktiverse, and even submitted an article is not worthy of that appellation?

To say that I have a problem with calling one particular group of Slacktivites “Citizens of The Slacktiverse” would be putting it very mildly. I am, in fact, quite offended by that exclusionary terminology; as offended as I am when my fellow US citizens speak of “Americans” in a way that clearly indicates that they do not consider me a real American. That’s not an unfair comparison and I’m not exaggerating my level of offense. Okay, now that I’ve said the “O” word, let me reemphasize that I know TBAT could not possibly have meant any offense – I know the three of you much better than that – but you do need to realize that there is really no way to call one particular group “Citizens of The Slacktiverse” without sounding exclusionary.

And have you thought about how such exclusionary terminology might affect the way newcomers view our community? Lately I’ve been telling friends about The Slacktiverse, and one point I’ve been emphasizing, with a great deal of pride, is that this is a very open community in which all one has to do to be considered a “real” member is to participate in discussions in a non-offensive way. In contrast to what I have been telling people, this “Citizens” terminology conveys an Animal-Farm-like message that all Slacktivites are equal, but some Slacktivites are more equal than others. If someone who has been here as
long as I have can read that header that way, consider how likely it is that many newcomers and visitors will too.

Here’s a simple way to modify the heading so that it will no longer be exclusionary: Simply add “who have blogs” to the existing heading; i.e. change it to, “Citizens of The Slacktiverse who have blogs.” That way, the heading will convey the non-exclusionary message, “Among our numerous citizens, the following have their own blogs”*, as opposed to the current heading’s exclusionary message, “The following people are Real True Citizens of The Slacktiverse because they have their own blogs, so if you don’t have one, you’re not a citizen.” (Another approach would be simply to call the category “Slacktivites with Blogs” or something like that.)

Once again, please understand that I am not accusing TBAT of any malice. I’m sure no harm was intended by that heading; it probably just sounded cute at the time. Nevertheless, since this is a board whose members and Administrators keep stressing egalitarianism, applying the label “Citizens” to one particular group of members rather than to the community as a whole is just Not Cool, even if it is done in a lighthearted spirit. Let me remind you again that for some of us, “citizen” is a word fraught with VERY sensitive connotations. Please fix this problem because it really needs to be fixed (not just taken under advisement).

*I think this might actually be what you thought the title would convey, with the non-exclusionary meaning simply being understood by everyone. That might have a chance of working if we were a closed community, but as Mmy recently pointed out, we're not. Besides, even if we could ensure that 100% of all readers knew that "Citizens of the Slacktiverse" was not meant to be an exhaustive list of all people considered "true citizens", the exclusionary implication of "Citizens of the Slacktiverse" would still be disturbingly visible. The title needs to indicate that this is nothing more or less than a list of Slackti-bloggers and their blogs.

[Mmy]

@Raj: I would have appreciated it if you had bothered to email me before writing this. You know my personal email address.

[Mime Paradox]

Um...is it just me, or have a couple of posts disappeared from the thread?

[The Board Administration Team]

@Mime Paradox: No you are right -- everything has been restored now.

[Raj]

I apologize to TBAT for the bad way I handled the raising of the issues in my 9:50AM post. I'll say more via e-mail and probably here as well, but lest anyone have any misconceptions as to where I stand, I just want to say very quickly that 1.) I should have e-mailed my concerns to TBAT, 2.) I should not have taken the condescending tone I took in several places in my comment.

More later.

[Raj]

Not the best apology, I know, but I have to get going and I wanted to put *some* kind of apoloyy out there quickly. Back later.

[Lila]

Hugs to both Raj and TBAT.

Good example of the power of a word that seems neutral to one unleashing a torrent of feelings for someone else. Not "triggering" in the literal sense, but analogous, I think.

[Leum]

Note: Post contains a curse word

I think it might be appropriate to write a more polite version of Intent! It's Fucking Magic to the FNEs. I'd be willing to write it, provided I don't have to do so until the weekend's over.

[Mmy]

@Leum: That would be interesting and there is no pressure about time. I imagine that the FAQs and FNEs will grow over time to respond to community needs.

[CZEdwards (who was CSHolocene)]

General knowledge question: I'm working on a couple of pieces for submission about some of the issues that come up in a multi-faith family. How much do people generally know about (in this case) Mormon theology? ( in other words, do I need to start from scratch, or are concepts like the Celestial Kingdom and vicarious baptism known and understood? I grew up in the culture, so I know, but I know that's not universal.)

[Jarred]

@CZEdwards: How much do people generally know about (in this case) Mormon theology? ( in other words, do I need to start from scratch, or are concepts like the Celestial Kingdom and vicarious baptism known and understood? I grew up in the culture, so I know, but I know that's not universal.)

I'd say that 90% of what I allegedly know about Mormon theology came from anti-Mormon sources, and such I consider most of my alleged knowledge highly suspect. So while I've heard of both of the concepts you specifically mention, I'd personally be more comfortable hearing you briefly explain those terms and their importance rather than relying on my own current understanding of them, which is based on highly questionable sources.

[MaryKaye]

I'll second what Jarred says: much of what people "know" about Mormon theology probably isn't so. I am suspicious that at least one or two of the things I "know" might trace back to my childhood collection of Chick tracts, yikes!

(Found the dregs of that collection in a box recently. They are...much more vivid than the tracts that appear in my current environment. Not in a good way, but one sees why they have been so successful.)

[Mmy]

@@CZEdwards: Thirding Jarred. I think that you should presume that the reader knows nothing and start from there.

[Sixwing]

Fourthing Jarred. I know practically nothing about Mormon theology, and would be interested to learn more - my attempts to read the Book of Mormon have been less than successful.

[CZEdwards (who was CSHolocene)]

@Sixwing: That's not the place to start, I'm afraid. There are three additional sacred texts in Mormonism: the BoM, the Doctrine & Covenants (which is exactly what it says on the box) and the Pearl of Great Price (commentary and short works). The BoM is a mythic history of the New World, but it's a tough read. The BoM as introductory text is like dropping somebody into the more recursive parts of Leviticus, or trying to get through the first three chapters of Ivanhoe. For somebody just trying to understand what's goin' on, I found the D&C to be much more useful -- it's the rulebook.

@Jarred, Sixwing, mmy, MaryKaye: okay, thanks. I'm not Mormon (though my step-mother, step-sibs, one sister, BIL & nephews are and it was my dominant culture from age 8 to 22) so I'll try. (Unfortunately, I have a fairly dark sense of humor, so being entirely non-snarky and objective is kinda tough... )

[Lila]

CZEdwards, when I was in high school in the '70s I had one Mormon classmate. I knew there was a Book of Mormon, who Joseph Smith was, had heard of vicarious baptism, knew about the no-caffeine-alcohol-or-tobacco rule, and had heard indirectly about the violence that attended the move to Utah. (Speaking of Anti-Mormon sources: Arthur Conan Doyle and the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica were both in my house.)

And IIRC the question of full membership for African-Americans was either a recently-settled issue or an ongoing controversy, but my memory of the '70s is not the clearest.

And I like the first 3 chapters of Ivanhoe!

[CZEdwards (who was CSHolocene)]

@Lila: I like the first three chapters, too, now... but I found them hard going up front, first time. Until I had a decent grasp of medieval(ish) history, those chapters felt like a huge bolus of not-entirely comprehensible info to try to swallow. (Admittedly, my first read was in early high school, so late 80s.)

Neither Doyle nor Twain were exactly boosters for the LDS, and given all of the issues in the latter part of the 19th century, I can't imagine that the Britannica was much better. (Not that Twain's Roughing It isn't mordantly funny, but it's not kind, and A Study in Scarlet was based on the slanted journalism of the time. [Though given the horror of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, and the coverage it got, I can't fault Doyle for his perception.]) African-American (male) priesthood was allowed in 1979, but there's still a lot of institutional racism. Interracial marriage is still strongly, though more tacitly, discouraged, and men of color don't easily rise in the LDS hierarchy. It's getting better -- BYU recently elected an African-American student body president (on a campus still 98% white) -- but it's a very slow change.

[Lila]

CZEdwards: OMG...the 1911 Britannica is online. Here is the article on Mormons, and it is definitely neither kind, respectful, nor objective.

[Nenya]

Agreeing with Jarred and everyone else. I know nearly nothing about Mormon theology, having been exposed to one or two phrases or concepts but not having had them explained in detail. (Maybe about as much as Lila, but from third-hand sources.) I have a couple of friends who are LDS, but we spend 99% of our time talking about CJ Cherryh, so...

I did have the intriguing experience of stumbling across a Mormon sermon broadcast on TV, and at first thinking it was a random Protestant service, until they started talking about Mormon-specific things. It was slightly unsettling because they treated stuff that I classified as "Christian" on the same level as things I classified as "not really Christian". My next thought was, "I bet this is how Jewish people feel when Christians mention Moses and Paul in the same sentence as if they were equivalent..." I can't say I remember what they were actually preaching about, though.

[Lonespark]

I feel this is as good a time as any to mention one of my former favorite web haunts:

http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/

Former because I spent waaaay too much time reading there and had to go cold turkey. I was surrounded by LDS folks when I lived in Phoenix. My husband's partner in nursing school kinda tried to convert us for a while. And I had a co-worker, a woman engineer who had studied in Finland, who provided fascinating glimpses into (probably atypical?) LDS family life.

[Caravelle]

Off-topic : Kit, what does Mika think about the upcoming referendum in the UK ? :)
(for anyone interested I seem to recall there's a very good Wikipedia page on different voting systems, the math behind them, the advantages and drawbacks of each and why there is no such thing as a perfect voting system. It does not, however, involve kittehs)

[Kristin]

@Leum: I think Nezua has a similar post called White Magic Attack or something like that...

[Kristin]

I live near the big Mormon temple in central North Carolina, and I went to school with loads of Mormons. I know more about the rules and regulations of Mormonism than anything, because these are the things that came up, for example, when I asked my friend in the sixth grade why she couldn't drink Coke. I know about the issue of modest dress--at least, the Mormon teenagers I knew told me they weren't allowed to wear sleeveless shirts. And there were the undergarments. And because we could never hold school play practice or performances on Sundays, I know about the importance of the Sabbath.

So, yeah basically nothing at all about the theology.

[Kristin]

African-American (male) priesthood was allowed in 1979, but there's still a lot of institutional racism. Interracial marriage is still strongly, though more tacitly, discouraged, and men of color don't easily rise in the LDS hierarchy. It's getting better -- BYU recently elected an African-American student body president (on a campus still 98% white) -- but it's a very slow change.

I've read the passages in the Book of Mormon that seem like they could instantiate racist thinking in the theology. I found it troubling in much the same way that I found the gospel of John troubling when reading it critically for an anti-Semitic perspective. I would like to learn more about the extent to which that caused--or is related to--these problems.

[Lila]

TBAT: "Blogs of the Slacktiverse" sounds good to me. Thank you.

[Raj]

@TBAT:

Thank you. Thank you very much; I really appreciate it. A proper response is forthcoming.

---------------------------------------------------

@Caravelle: Silleh hyumin! Kittehs are teh troo rulerzes of teh yewniverse alreddy! Mah Musette tawt me that a long tyme ago.

[Lonespark]

"Blogs of the Slacktiverse" gets two enthusiastic, if slightly tipsy, Walpurgisnacht thumbs up from me.

[Kit Whitfield]

@Caravelle: I have posted an answer to your question on my blog...

[Caravelle]

Kit :

I have posted an answer to your question on my blog...

For the benefit of those who didn't see this and immediately checked the blog :
Oooooh ! A new Mikalogue ! *claps hands excitedly*

Thank you for the response Kit ^^

[Raj]

On April 29, after my very long and confrontational objection to the sidebar title, “Citizens of The Slacktiverse”, I posted a very hurried apology for the way I had expressed myself, but said I would return to post a fuller apology. I regret that various factors outside The Slacktiverse (I will not say “the real world” because The Slacktiverse is part of my real world) resulted in my taking much longer than I should have to attend to this extremely important matter. I would like everyone who reads this post to understand that it should have been posted considerably sooner; preferably on April 29.

@The Board Administration Team:

First, I apologize for not discussing my concern with TBAT via e-mail before considering any other approach. By making a board posting my initial approach, I denied TBAT the opportunity to correct without a fuss what was, in fact, a perfectly honest and understandable oversight regarding terminology. By going public as my initial approach, I implied that you would not have considered my reasonable concern had I broached it in private. This was a gross injustice to the three of you. Your conduct as Administrators clearly demonstrates that you do, in fact, listen intently and respectfully to concerns that are brought before you and take prompt action on such concerns. Furthermore, my interactions with each of you several times over the last few years has certainly taught me that you are always more than willing to discuss things with me in a reasonable and civil manner even when we disagree (which I didn’t even have any reason to assume we would in this case). I did, therefore, have more than enough evidence that simply talking to you directly and explaining my concern without anger would have sufficed.

I apologize too for the condescending tone of my post. By taking such a tone, I was implying that I was dealing with people too dull to understand and/or too insensitive to care why I had a problem with the heading, “Citizens of The Slacktiverse”. Given what I already knew about the three of you, there was no justification for me to imply such things about you and subject you to the humiliation of a public lecture on the insensitivity of exclusivist language. While it was clear that you hadn’t considered the awkward connotations of the word “citizen”, the fact that you hadn’t was not a reflection on your intellect or your sensitivity; it was simply the result of differences in life experience. I ought to have known that even with such differences, each of you had more than enough wisdom and empathy to understand my concern; perhaps not in quite the way I understand it, but certainly enough to be sensitive to it and to act accordingly.

I also apologize for unjustly presenting TBAT’s relationship to me – and thus, by implication, to the community – as an adversarial one. I presented the situation as though I were standing up to the oppressive Powers That Be, and that is simply NOT, nor has it ever been, an accurate depiction of the way The Slacktiverse works. Ever since The Slacktiverse was founded, the three of you have been interacting with community members respectfully and courteously – as I have experienced in my own interactions with TBAT – and you have been doing whatever you can to be as accountable and as transparent as possible, which brings up a very serious matter.

What I am about to say is directed at the community as a whole:

My actions have put TBAT in a very bad light and have set a very bad example of how to interact with TBAT. This is a very serious matter because such conduct, besides being unfair to TBAT, can damage the sort of open and safe atmosphere we have come to value (and that TBAT is working hard to maintain), so it is vital that I say something to stem the damage.

As Board Administrators, hapax, Kit Whitfield, and Mmy have been entrusted with the responsibility of managing the operational details of the board in accordance with the consensus of the community. They are honorable, hardworking, wise, rational people who are exceptionally dedicated to creating an atmosphere in which people can exchange ideas and socialize in a pleasant and safe manner. They have a difficult job that requires them to spend many hours a day of their own time; time they somehow manage to find while fulfilling their career and family obligations. They receive no economic compensation whatsoever for doing this difficult job; they do it because they care about this community, and they demonstrate this care by listening intently and respectfully to community feedback. It is therefore extremely inappropriate to attempt to get the Administrators to act upon an issue by publicly haranguing them about it as I did. Doing so is a grave injustice to these three remarkable people. Such behavior is also very stressful for them, and putting up with such stress undoubtedly takes a toll on their home and vocational lives. It was wrong of me to inflict such injustice and stress upon these three people – three friends – I have known and admired for years, and I am extremely sorry that I did so.

I deeply regret my behavior not just because of its impact on TBAT, but also because of its impact on the community. One thing that makes TBAT a potentially easy target for snark is the nature of TBAT’s relationship to the community. TBAT does not rule The Slacktiverse; TBAT is a committee that has been empowered to implement the wishes of the community. One policy upon which the community decided almost unanimously is that TBAT is not to take punitive measures against those who post scathing comments*. This policy was put into place with the view of making this community as democratic and safe as possible and Administration as transparent as possible. Exploiting this policy as a loophole for flaming TBAT is wrong. It is wrong for the reasons given in the previous paragraph, and it is wrong because unjustly attacking and stressing out the very people who work so hard to maintain openness and safety in our community undermines the community’s democratic and egalitarian foundations and its atmosphere of safety. I deeply regret contributing to such undermining of this community I have grown to love (I don’t think that’s too strong a word), and for doing so, I apologize to our Administrators and to the community as a whole.

------------------------

*For those of you who were not present during the formative stages of The Slacktiverse, TBAT does technically have the power to take corrective measures against posters who cause serious harm to the community or any member thereof. It has been decided, though, that even should such an extreme case arise, TBAT is not to act without the consensus of the community. This truly is a democratic community, and the Administrators have made it quite clear that they are committed to keeping it that way.

[Kit Whitfield]

Raj, thank you for your apology.

I can't speak for hapax or mmy, so this is just answering as an individual. As far as I'm concerned, raising objections in public isn't a problem as long as it's done politely. It's raising them angrily as if we have to be forced to listen rather than just asked, especially when it's a first resort, that's a problem - and that would be equally problematic in private, come to that. TBAT is the business side of the board, and dealing with it with business-like civility, whether public or private, is the appropriate way to go.

[Mmy]

Raj, thank you for your apology.

I would like to clarify a point for everyone who may read this exchange. When I posted that I would have appreciated it if you had bothered to email me before writing this it wasn't because anyone has to ask TBAT privately to make changes on the board.

The point I was attempting to make was that you had not been forced to write a long and (in your own words) condescending post in order to get our attention and force us to make a change. Your post was quite literally the first time I (or any other member of TBAT) knew of your objection.

I am human and I make mistakes. Sometimes I miss typographical errors. Sometimes I miscode. Sometimes I am not aware of the fact that a word/phrase that is commonplace in my linguistic/cultural/social community is triggering to someone else. The same true of the other members of TBAT and indeed of everyone else on the board. Some time back (before the Great Divide) we had a discussion among members of this community about flaming and nuking and we came to a general agreement that such behaviour undermined the safe(r) nature of this space.

So, thank you for your apology but bear in mind that (in your own words) we do not want to convey the message that all Slacktivites are equal, but some Slacktivites are more equal than others. I, as a member of TBAT, should be treated with no more (and no less) respect and civility as any other member of our community.

[hapax]

Raj, thank you for posting the apology.

Also, what Kit Whitfield and Mmy have said.

[Raj]

hapax, Kit, Mmy,

At the risk of turning this discussion into one of those "'Thank you!' 'No! Thank YOU!'" exchanges, thank you for responding so kindly to my apology and for clarifying some of the issues involved.