Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Feminists
In reply to the discussion: I have unblocked iverglas [View all]iverglas
(38,549 posts)7. Neoma should resign as co-host now
and be re-added to the list if there is essentially unanimous agreement.
For info:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1139740#post92
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 03:31 PM
iverglas
92. me personally
I can't imagine that I would *ever* block anyone. I can't imagine an emergency arising that would call for unilateral action -- but if something dreadful did happen, and hopefully there were at least other members around, I'd do it if it seemed to be the host's duty to do it. Otherwise, I might think someone needed blocking and put it to other hosts, or pass on requests for blocking to the rest.
There would also have to be some concrete event, substantiation of a complaint, demonstration of something characterized as "dismissive or abusive behaviour toward feminists" that really amounted to a pattern, and not just a bad hair day. I'm pretty tolerant of rough and tumble; my posts should always be read that way (apart from the invisible tongue-in-cheek idiotfaces).
I'm not tolerant of other people being lied about, their words twisted, ideas attributed to them that they have not espoused, and the like, in order to portray them as reprehensible.
But again, I can only imagine that banning decisions would be made not in haste, and not unilaterally, and not without at least an opportunity for hopefully all hosts to weigh in, and I would never expect that to happen in the space of less than a day. I'm not on a banning campaign, honestly. And I'd always prefer to ask that someone agree to lurk and come back next week rather than ban them.
I'm not big on shutting off avenues and sources of ideas and discussion, truly. I'm big on civil discourse -- which doesn't mean making nice, it means addressing what is said, not dismissing it, not misrepresenting it, not addressing something that was not said, not pretending something was said that wasn't, not pretending to know what someone thinks, not claiming to hold some trump card, and not going after the speaker rather than the words.
As an ordinary poster, I'm just looking for genuine engagement, and I'm almost always willing to say the well is never too poisoned to start that process. I want to see it start, though. Some straightforward talk.
iverglas
92. me personally
I can't imagine that I would *ever* block anyone. I can't imagine an emergency arising that would call for unilateral action -- but if something dreadful did happen, and hopefully there were at least other members around, I'd do it if it seemed to be the host's duty to do it. Otherwise, I might think someone needed blocking and put it to other hosts, or pass on requests for blocking to the rest.
There would also have to be some concrete event, substantiation of a complaint, demonstration of something characterized as "dismissive or abusive behaviour toward feminists" that really amounted to a pattern, and not just a bad hair day. I'm pretty tolerant of rough and tumble; my posts should always be read that way (apart from the invisible tongue-in-cheek idiotfaces).
I'm not tolerant of other people being lied about, their words twisted, ideas attributed to them that they have not espoused, and the like, in order to portray them as reprehensible.
But again, I can only imagine that banning decisions would be made not in haste, and not unilaterally, and not without at least an opportunity for hopefully all hosts to weigh in, and I would never expect that to happen in the space of less than a day. I'm not on a banning campaign, honestly. And I'd always prefer to ask that someone agree to lurk and come back next week rather than ban them.
I'm not big on shutting off avenues and sources of ideas and discussion, truly. I'm big on civil discourse -- which doesn't mean making nice, it means addressing what is said, not dismissing it, not misrepresenting it, not addressing something that was not said, not pretending something was said that wasn't, not pretending to know what someone thinks, not claiming to hold some trump card, and not going after the speaker rather than the words.
As an ordinary poster, I'm just looking for genuine engagement, and I'm almost always willing to say the well is never too poisoned to start that process. I want to see it start, though. Some straightforward talk.
TopBack to the top of the page
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
ShareGet links to this post
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
131 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
good. we all spoke out promising a member would not be banned, when they have broken no rules
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#1
If everyone resigned except requeen, then she would be re-installed as top host
boston bean
Feb 2012
#12
I still think it's important to have a host up the top who has been voted in.
boston bean
Feb 2012
#18
How about we just agree not to make anybody with a history of homo- or transphobic comments a host?
LeftyMom
Feb 2012
#26
your defense of transphobia this week makes you VASTLY unqualified to be a host of this forum
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#30
I'm not trying to take sides here, but I would like to see some evidence as well.
redqueen
Feb 2012
#43
I will not provide links because there were plenty of conversations
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#37
are you claiming that you did not defend the comments feldspar and sara bellum made?
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#40
i didnt say she had to be banned from the group. i said she is unsuitable to be a host. nt
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#66
it was me, once i understood the issue was the phrase, that i started ASKING posters for information
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#58
here as some examples. though i really think again this is an issue
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#60
Sorry, but all I see as far as evidence that she actively defended transphobia
redqueen
Feb 2012
#76
there was ONE comment by feldspar. that is not continually. we didnt know what the comment meant
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#121
you can only be a feminist "first and foremost" if nothing else oppresses you more.
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#48
no, you don't get to make these absurd rules. i can be a feminist and have other identities
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#62
look, you were the one who said you can't be a feminist first and foremost if something...
Scout
Feb 2012
#80
omg... totally dishonest? i am still waiting to hear what right you had to make your false comment
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#88
and it makes me distrust even more. that you would chose to interpret as you did.
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#106
i said that in response to your snarky comment about wanting to see me leave.
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#117
If people are shown the door because they don't participate in the spirit of the SoP
Gormy Cuss
Feb 2012
#36
Wrong question. Instead, ask whether the member was repeatedly turning discussions into heated
Gormy Cuss
Feb 2012
#55
lioness just said that i wanted to argue if transwomen were real women. my options...
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#59
so what? are you getting my pms from peole? i am saying, and i will say it now....
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#101
it seems to be that any kind of misrepresentation is allowed and if a person dares to be bothered
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#68
Are you calling redqueen a liar? Her OP says "I am making this decision unilaterally"
LeftyMom
Feb 2012
#73
i sent a post to neoma pointing out the rules and our agreement that no one could ban
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#75
both. she had our support thru conversation. she made the decision to unban at that moment. hostile
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#86
Ma'am, I'm asking a question because two people are telling mutually contradictory stories.
LeftyMom
Feb 2012
#89
Y'know, posting jury results is a real big part of the problem this group has had...
Violet_Crumble
Feb 2012
#114
in a nutshell this has become the problem with how this forum is being run
La Lioness Priyanka
Feb 2012
#123
I disagree. I think that LeftyMom's questions are appropriate and understandable.
yardwork
Feb 2012
#128
" Are you calling redqueen a liar?" btw lefty, it is comments and interaction like this
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#78
why dont you weigh in on the civility of those that have come in here to argue their points.
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#83