Subject: Oh, also:
Author:
Posted on: 2013-08-04 23:32:00 UTC
If anyone feels like bugging me about anything they can go bug me via email or on Steam if they really want.
I don't mind being talked to, basically.
-
Attention: the entire PPC by
on 2013-07-30 03:52:00 UTC
Reply
I've been avoiding writing this for
a day or soa few weeks. But someone finally gave me a straight line, and so I guess I can't put it off anymore.
Warning: this is going to be a Serious post, it is going to drone on for a long time, and it is about important, non-fictional stuff that I'd like you all to read anyway. The topics I'd like to cover are, in no particular order:
-whether the Constitution needs to be updated or not.
-the fact that it is not okay to ignore the Constitution at one's convenience
-where the boundaries between the IRC and the 'Board are, where they should be, and how, exactly, we plan to deal with that as a community.
The first thing I'd like to cover, actually, is the boundary (or boundaries) between the IRC and the 'Board, mainly because I'd like to forestall replies to this post regarding that. The stuff involving the IRC can be found here. (There may be a small bit of a wait while the server warms up, not more than a minute.) (Edit the second: yeah, I haven't put that up yet. If somebody else wants to start it, I'd be much obliged.)
Now... let's talk about the Constitution. The reason we have it, in the language used thereon, is "in order to form a more perfect Community, ensure domestic Tranquility, encourage the destruction of Badfic, promote Goodfic, and secure a certain level of wellbeing and (in)sanity for ourselves and those who will come after."
Let me clarify something, here. At the very top of the 'Board, there is a link to the Constitution, followed by the explanation: "All your posts should conform to the Constitution. Read this first, and read it often." This, I think, is pretty self-evident. Follow the Constitution while posting here. There is ALSO a link to the Constitution located under the IRC Rules, and IRC Rule 0 is to abide by the Constitution. By posting and chatting in this community, you implicitly agree to abide by that document.
If you have a problem with that, please, please, please speak up. The reason why we have the version of the Constitution that we do now is that people spoke up about issues that needed to be resolved, and how they were uncomfortable with some actions that were allowed under the old version. This is important. It is not okay, it is never okay, for anyone to simply ignore the Constitution. It IS okay for them to say "I feel that this clause/article isn't being upheld, can we do something about that?" It IS okay for them to say, "I think there's a loophole in the Constitution that allows a certain kind of bullying, can we do something about that?"
See, here's the thing. The translation of that whole long phrase about 'forming a more perfect community, enusring domestic tranquility... and securing a certain level of wellbeing,' that boils down to one very simple purpose. To get along with each other. To avoid hurting each other's feelings, stepping on each other's toes, allowing bullying to sneak under the radar, lashing out because of miscommunications, etc.
So with all of that in mind... it has come to my attention, recently, that some folks have felt like the Constitution does not fully protect them or help them, or that there are issues with it. Again, the solution to this is not to ignore it. I understand that sometimes, we all lose our tempers. Sometimes, we all feel hurt by the things our fellow community-members say. What I ask you all to remember, is that everyone has feelings. You are not the only person who gets angry; I am not the only person who gets offended. So we're clear: everyone's feelings matter on this site and in this community. There are no exceptions to that rule. That is the reason why we have the Constitution - so that everyone's feelings are protected, rather than any group that happens to be a majority.
Now there's one final thing I'd like to address. I've seen a lot of examples of this in the past month or so, and it is beginning to bother me. You are allowed to dislike other people on this 'Board, and you are allowed to dislike the tone in which they normally write. Obviously, we are all welcome to our own thoughts! To imply otherwise would be absurd. What is absolutely not okay, is attacking other people because of their tone. If you have a problem with someone's tone, to the point where you are upset and offended, say something - something that conforms to the rules of the Constitution, and please, while conforming to the Constitution, explain exactly what it is that upset you.
If you have read through this entire post without glancing through the Constitution, I urge you to please do so now. If you have a problem with it, speak up. If you don't, but you do feel that you have something to add, speak up anyway. -
Somewhat belated due to holidays: by
on 2013-08-06 16:15:00 UTC
Reply
Thank you for writing and posting this. I know you weren't exactly eager to do it, but I agree with you that it needed to be said - and I think you said it well.
hS -
The IRC-Board relations thread ... by
on 2013-07-31 00:43:00 UTC
Reply
... can be found here on T-Board. I know we already have a big pot of Serious Business going around right now, making this possibly not the best time for another serious thread, but VM wanted this put together, and so I did.
I might chime in on this thread with something relevant later. -
I'd just like to say a few words about conflict resolution. by
on 2013-07-30 20:50:00 UTC
Reply
Specifically, that it takes both sides participating equally to resolve a problem. I hope I'm not overstepping myself if I elaborate.
There's a tool we use in the UU young adult cons I attend. Basically, it boils down to this:
Person A accidentally says something that offends or hurts their friend, Person B.
1. Person B says, "Hey, that thing you said hurt me."
2. Person A says, "I'm sorry, I didn't mean to hurt you. I meant something else."
3. Person B says, "I understand that you didn't mean it. I forgive you, but try not to say that again, okay?"
4. Person A says, "Okay, I promise."
The conflict is resolved, Persons A and B are still friends. (Optional hugs here.)
I realize this is extremely simplified, and that real life is more complicated; and this does presume that both parties are acting in good faith and desire to come to a mutually satisfactory understanding. Because assuming good faith is part of our Constitution, I think this process can be applied to us.
I've seen too many conversation breakdowns happen at step 3. Specifically, Person B does not accept Person A's apology for whatever reason, and no forgiveness is offered. This makes it impossible for the conversation to move forward. Person B still feels hurt, Person A is unable to atone for it. No one is happy, and no one can fix it. This is a bad, unfair situation.
Conflict resolution takes two. Person A must be willing to accept responsibility and apologize for what they said, Person B must be willing to accept their apology and let everyone move on. Both parties must do their part for a mutually satisfactory resolution to be possible.
That's what I believe.
~Neshomeh -
OT: What's UU? by
on 2013-07-31 14:10:00 UTC
Reply
I'm assuming it's not Unseen University Young Adult Cons (although that would be awesome)?
-
Haha. No, sorry. ^. ^ by
on 2013-07-31 15:16:00 UTC
Reply
Unitarian Universalist, actually. In the briefest possible terms, it's sort of a choose-your-own-adventure religion. I could go on and on explaining it, but I think I'll just give a link to the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations website instead. The Beliefs & Principles tab is a good place to start learning what we're generally about. I'd love to discuss it more, though, so anyone, please feel free to e-mail me if you're curious—neshomeh [dot] soul [at] tripod [dot] com.
Unseen University Young Adult Cons would be totally awesome, though. I wish that were a thing. ^_^
~Neshomeh -
You have a tripod email address? (nm) by
on 2013-07-31 15:26:00 UTC
Reply
-
*blink* How did that get there? by
on 2013-07-31 15:31:00 UTC
Reply
Let's try that again:
neshomeh [dot] soul [at] gmail [dot] com
That one should actually work. {= P
~Neshomeh -
Yay, a UU! (and an general response) by
on 2013-07-31 03:28:00 UTC
Reply
*hugs*
I'm not surprised that came from UUs. We make such an effort to have open-minded communication. And we're a community that has discussions about how to open-mindedly discuss things.
This reminds me of the reason I don't like Serious Business threads. I usually just lurk - I read through, sigh, and move on to the newest fun thread.
I joined the PPC because it felt nice. We have a constitution, we have rules governing the way we spork, all to ensure that we have a safe community and are promoting good ideas in our writing. While other people may not like the restrictions on what to spork, I like that we say that you can't insult the author, that you shouldn't spork slash if you don't like some of it, that you should only spork the worst of the worst, to remember YKINMK, etc. It's in line with my UU values, is what I'm saying here.
And then whenever a Serious Business topic comes up, everybody gets all defensive and close-minded. People think of only their opinion and not of others. It bothers me to see that, since I joined because it seemed a fun, open-minded community dedicated to making good fanfiction out of bad.
And, I feel, the best way to do something about it is to not be a part of it - don't just try to check other people, try to check yourself. I think a lot of the time, people just post without thinking things through. (I'm assuming good faith here.) Take some time to think about what you say, to fully form your opinions, to consider how it might affect people. If we all do that, we'll have the awesomest community ever.
I hope this makes sense. I try. -
*hug* by
on 2013-07-31 15:29:00 UTC
Reply
Perhaps unsurprisingly, there have actually been a fair number of us in the PPC over the years. {= )
I completely agree with everything you said, by the way. And we didn't always have this problem. A lot of us have had our trust in each other damaged along the road, though, and it's really hard to get it back once it's gone. Nobody likes to risk getting hurt again.
~Neshomeh -
There are more of us? by
on 2013-08-02 15:05:00 UTC
Reply
*pricks up ears* Who? And could we possibly have a Gathering at General Assembly or some other UU event?
-
Well, there have been. by
on 2013-08-02 15:17:00 UTC
Reply
The ones I know about aren't really active anymore, sadly. The most recent (besides you) is Guvnor of Space, and I think he's pretty busy with school right now.
I've actually never been to GA. It always seems to come at just the wrong intersection of time and money for me. >.
That said, I'm all for a meetup sometime. Are you anywhere near the Chicago area, by any chance?
~Neshomeh -
*a general response (nm) (nm) by
on 2013-07-31 03:30:00 UTC
Reply
-
Re: Attention: the entire PPC by
on 2013-07-30 20:13:00 UTC
Reply
I don't have a lot to add, but I do have a question. What's 'ableism'?
-
An answer... and (to everyone) my concerns. Kinda. by
on 2013-07-30 21:42:00 UTC
Reply
Ableism is discrimination towards people who may be described as disabled - not "able-bodied", essentially. (I'm not trying to offend anyone with my phrasing here, I just can't remember what description's politically correct enough to keep everyone happy.)
My concern; guys, please can we make sure to keep it all civil? Every time something like this comes up, people get tense, edgy, and feel like they're being blamed, even if there's no blaming going on, or even if they're not actually involved with whatever the issue actually is. (*raises hand* Guilty as charged.) Someone will say something that sets everyone else off and there's a massive thread, maybe two, filled with fighting, and then people leave because they're feeling like they're being picked on, and everyone feels miserable because that wasn't what we were trying to achieve.
And this kind of thing generally makes me want to run and hide and not say anything until all the bad feelings everywhere go away and all the awesome people* stop being upset with each other. So contributing to this thread is kind of a big deal for me. I want everyone to settle things peacefully.
...Please? =)
*You're all pretty awesome, by the way, in my opinion. -
Well said. by
on 2013-07-30 19:00:00 UTC
Reply
I'm happy that people are finally speaking out about things that have been bugging me myself for a while now, even though I'm kind of not quite here any more.
As someone who's tone is... Frequently not what people are used to here, I feel that things do need a slight adjustment for the sake of accessibility. Not everyone is used to being polite on the internet all the time, this is something I know from experience and being in communities all across the scale of formality, but yeah, technical non-person speaking. -
With all due respect... by
on 2013-07-30 19:13:00 UTC
Reply
Your behavior is one of the "incidents" about which I was talking. Being consistently rude to people is not "tone," it's... being consistently rude to people. Which you were, on the IRC. You haven't done it as much on the 'Board, so people here may not be aware of it, but the number of times I saw you cut people off or tell them their opinions were stupid, is pretty high - and then there was the time you said something directly threatening to someone with whom you disagreed. Each time you were called out, you either got defensive or apologized - and, after a brief reprieve, came back and eventually did the same things.
You're not a non-person. You're a person who breaks the Constitution consistently, and one of the people I was addressing very nearly directly with "You don't get to be a jerk to people just because you're feeling emotional." Or however I phrased it. I'm tired of making general "People be nice to each other" announcements that get general nods from everyone... and then the people who actually need to change their behavior never do.
So, for the record, it's you I was addressing. And Tray, and mPoet, though I know neither of them are on here much anymore - because leaving the 'Board alone does not exempt anyone from the Constitution, just as being banned from the IRC does not exempt you from the Constitution here on the 'Board. All three of your behavior has fallen outside the rules of the Constitution which, just to reiterate, boil down to BE NICE TO EACH OTHER.
I supported your being banned from the IRC for a not-insignificant amount of time. Although I am glad you have reined in your behavior somewhat on this particular facet of the community, I remain unconvinced of your sincerity as concerns following the rules of this community, especially since to my knowledge, you have not at any point made an effort to apologize to the person you threatened.
(For the record, to anyone who feels like they've been a jerk or broken the Constitution - apologizing is a really good first step towards not-breaking-the-Constitution, as well as generally having better community relations. The next step is following through on that apology and making a serious and continual effort to improve your behavior.) -
Yeah, about that. by
on 2013-07-30 19:18:00 UTC
Reply
I haven't exactly been able to contact them, which is why I haven't yet.
-
Could anyone help me with that? (nm) by
on 2013-07-31 03:44:00 UTC
Reply
-
I s'pose I should say something here. by
on 2013-08-02 22:04:00 UTC
Reply
It is good that you are saying you want to apologize. But I admit I'm a bit skeptical. It was months ago that you were kicked from the chat. You came back numerous times in efforts to skirt the ban, and sat in the chat for a few periods of time without saying anything - not saying "Hi, I'm just here to apologize," just a handful of one-line responses until you were kicked again. The times that you've pm'd folks from the chat, no one has reported that you were looking to apologize, more that you were expressing angst and grievances - including the time you talked to me. Which is, more or less, the same thing you've been doing whenever you hit conflict for the past few years.
I finally looked up the record the DAs had of the incident that had you banned, and unfortunately, the person who you threatened is no longer around on the IRC, for different reasons. So I'm honestly not sure how to proceed from here. If you honestly want to fix things, maybe you can. I don't know. I just know that I'm skeptical of just saying "Oh, you say you'll stop! Okay, let's lift the ban!" Because this has happened before - it's why we set up so many temp bans, to give people more chances. You've been temp-banned from the chat multiple times for your behavior. It's been a few months now, so maybe you really do want to change this time. I don't know.
What I do know is that we don't have framework for "Maybe" situations in this community. We have "You have officially crossed the line we're okay with, and you are banned from the PPC" messages, but we've never really talked about "You are banned, come back when you're ready to stop being a jerk and start participating" messages. Maybe it's time we did that. -
I guess I'm not a very common kind of case then by
on 2013-08-03 05:44:00 UTC
Reply
As someone who has genuinely wanted to participate and contribute, but has... Behavior issues.
One of the things I need to learn is how to separate my attitudes for different places on the internet, as my behavior was admittedly unacceptable, and not suited for here in particular. -
You confuse me there. by
on 2013-07-30 19:12:00 UTC
Reply
Are you suggesting we should be less rude or less polite?
-
No problems with it myself by
on 2013-07-30 18:48:00 UTC
Reply
Just thought I'd say that I personally think that the Constitution is pretty clear on the whole 'getting along with each other' thing. I think it basically boils down to (and if you feel I've misread it, please correct me):
Try not to be a dick.
If you feel you have been a dick, or someone else feels that you have, work out any differences maturely and intelligently, while keeping #1 in mind.
Everyone is welcome, and entitled to their own opinion, while keeping #1 in mind.
I'm not implying that I think the Constitution shouldn't change, just that from my perspective I'm happy with it.
I can't say anything about the IRC as I never venture there. -
In agreement. by
on 2013-07-30 04:32:00 UTC
Reply
Whilst I've not actually seen any of the violation/skirting of the Constitution (besides the post linked) I have been in groups in the past that have torn themselves apart because of similar issues being left to grow. Whilst not saying that such a thing would happen here I feel something should be done to resolve the issues that this matter has raised.
I'm not saying that Flame's or any other types of bullying or harassment should be allowed but something needs to happen to cool things down and hopefully prevent something like this from happening again. -
Just stopping by to agree completely. by
on 2013-07-30 04:14:00 UTC
Reply
Allow me to reiterate what are, to me, the most salient points of what VM just said.
We have a Constitution for a reason, kids, learn it, love it, live by it. Or at least post by it. In light of recent(ish) events, I point specifically to
5. All respectful opinions that do not attack, insult, or persecute others (see Article 1) are welcome. We encourage respectful, friendly debates here. Should a debate escalate into an argument for any reason, everyone involved should step back and calm down before continuing. If this cannot be done, it may be best to abandon the conversation entirely.
6. Everyone in the PPC Community should be respected as people, regardless of who they are. The opinions of a newbie are just as valid and wanted as those of someone here for four years. Everyone deserves respect until they show themselves to be unashamedly disrespectful themselves, which means people who show disrespect and discrimination as per Article 1 do not warrant respect based on those views. However, not warranting respect does not mean they do not warrant politeness. This means you are not allowed to descend into flaming and insulting them, but instead should follow Article 9.
Also, something I've noticed is that people here seem to go from 'just fine' to 'Full Flame Mode' in a matter of 2-3 posts. This is unacceptable. This is not a community for shouting, for name-calling, for any sort of flaming whatsoever, period, the end, no exceptions. If someone posts something that offends you, you do not have carte blanche to respond in a way that offends them. Especially if it offends everyone else in the process. If you absolutely MUST speak your mind, do so via e-mail.
Finally, I hate watching my friends fight. And I do, rightly or wrongly, consider each and every one of you a friend. But what I hate worse is watching friendships break down because, in the aftermath of a fight, people stop talking to each other. There's no reconciliation, there's no discussion. Most times, people simply stop speaking, and their friendship withers. It kills me to watch that happen. So please, don't do it, for your own sake, and everyone else's. Talking helps.