Talk:Commenting Rules for the FSF Blog

2010-02-22T12:38:57Z

79.125.2.118: ZvryYQ <a href="http://brkvqncukapf.com/">brkvqncukapf</a>, [url=http://yhiylkcsqaqe.com/]yhiylkcsqaqe[/url], [link=http://ofgxfhwzrwxp.com/]ofgxfhwzrwxp[/link], http://uaksptpssxwa.com/

ZvryYQ <a href="http://brkvqncukapf.com/">brkvqncukapf</a>, [url=http://yhiylkcsqaqe.com/]yhiylkcsqaqe[/url], [link=http://ofgxfhwzrwxp.com/]ofgxfhwzrwxp[/link], http://uaksptpssxwa.com/

==Disruptive behaviour==

People asking the same-old same-old questions, disrupting an interesting thread by challenging a basic point of feminism: do we want to point them at the guidelines and tell them "go read" or allow them to disrupt the thread further by responding to their points at length? [[User:Yonmei|Yonmei]] 06:46, 12 September 2006 (PDT)

: Yes, any of us should be able to point someone to those guidelines (rules, readings, whatever) when inspired to do so. That could be out of a spirit of frustration ("you're wasting my time; go read this"), encouragement ("you've got some good ideas or a good point but you're missing some critical analyses; go read this"), or any other reason or combination of reasons. It's not a "do we want" because we are all individuals, ultimately, and if we're engaging in conversations as individuals, we will have our own levels, thresholds, and reasons for referring people to the guidelines. -- [[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 08:19, 12 September 2006 (PDT)

==Tone, Format, Structure==

Good writing should engage the reader. Ideally, I would think that the "guidelines" would be friendly, humorous, & brief, with links to more pages that include examples, etc. In practice, it might work this way: A conversation on a blog posting is progressing at a fairly high level of analysis with a lot of interesting feminist disagreement. A newbie comes along, and, in a non-hostile but clueless fashion, asks some fairly silly question. One of the bloggers who has been participating in the discussion shakes her head, rolls her eyes, and posts a response that says, "The current discussion is way beyond the issue you raise here. You should start by reading the Guidelines; see particularly #5, and the links that explain in detail." The guidelines are a fairly short rules-of-the-road kind of document that list w/ brief description common problems to avoid, common fallacies, basic behavioral & communication guidelines; whatever. Each includes links to a page with a lot more information. These pages can even have their own discussion threads which could remain open. -- [[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 08:37, 12 September 2006 (PDT)

Fuck it, I guess I'm not going to get *any* work done today. What about a structure like:

# Critical thinking / reading / Communications 101
# Feminism 101
# Check Your Privilege
# Common Issues in Feminist SF Criticism: Educate yourself
# No hate speech (this can be outright negative language)

* Most of these can be styled with positive language, not negative language, although I think that the "no hate speech" is fine to do in outright negative language; it *is* a prohibition, a rule.
* Each of these could be a short blurb or paragraph, with sublists of issues where appropriate, and links, always, to pages that have more detailed, discursive guidelines and discussions (if appropriate).

-- [[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 09:00, 12 September 2006 (PDT)

How about a section called "We've heard that one before." This is where we could list things like "I'm not a feminist, I'm a humanist," and "Sexism hurts men, too," with a discussion of what is wrong (or point-missing) about these statements.

-- [[User:Janet Lafler|JL]]

I have added a set of general "communications 101" guidelines (not specifically feminist) [[http://wiki.feministsf.net/index.php?title=Communication_Guidelines#Alternate_.5Bshorter.2C_more_general.5D_Draft|here]]. For easy readability, I think it's important that we keep these short and general.

-- [[User:Janet Lafler|JL]]

==Additional resources==

* Guidelines for Participation (FSF Blog) draft - http://blogs.feministsf.net/?page_id=19
* Call for Participants (FSF Blog) http://blogs.feministsf.net/?page_id=18
* Communications 101: How to Argue Effectively & Respectfully http://blogs.feministsf.net/?page_id=33
* Communication Guidelines (FSF wiki) http://wiki.feministsf.net/index.php?title=Communication_Guidelines
* Ginmar on invalidating women by telling them they're too angry, too crazy http://ginmar.livejournal.com/873536.html?nc=6
* Unfogged : for men on how to talk about/to feminists http://www.unfogged.com/archives/week_2006_09_03.html#005405
* The WisCon moderators' rules might be of use.
* Something to be gleaned from [http://roar-of-comics.blogspot.com/2006/06/flame-on.html this analysis] of weird & inappropriate communications on the part of commenter?
* How Not To Be Insane When Accused of Racism: A Guide for White People http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2005/12/02/how-not-to-be-insane-when-accused-of-racism/
* How to Repress Discussions of Racism http://coffeeandink.livejournal.com/607897.html
* 12 Helpful Suggestions for Men Regarding Conduct in Feminist Spaces http://community.livejournal.com/feminist/1362470.html
* Male Privilege Checklist http://colours.mahost.org/org/maleprivilege.html
* Yes, You Are (a feminist) essay http://www.tomatonation.com/youare.shtml

Feminist SF Wiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Commenting Rules for the FSF Blog