Feminist SF Wiki talk:Mission - Revision history

Lquilter: Talk:Mission moved to FSFwiki talk:Mission: consolidating fsfwiki

2007-01-11T19:26:29Z

Talk:Mission moved to FSFwiki talk:Mission: consolidating fsfwiki

← Older revision	Revision as of 12:26, 11 January 2007
(No difference)

Liz Henry at 01:33, 27 May 2006

2006-05-27T01:33:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:33, 26 May 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:

	but this isn't my show; it's a collaborative endeavor, so what do others think? [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 12:19, 27 April 2006 (PDT)		but this isn't my show; it's a collaborative endeavor, so what do others think? [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 12:19, 27 April 2006 (PDT)

			Focus on feminist sf, but have space for feminist discussion of non- or disputedly-feminist sf. There are touchstone works that are canonically non-feminist... that are important to feminist thought because they're so heinous. [[User:lizzard\|Liz]]

Liz Henry at 01:29, 27 May 2006

2006-05-27T01:29:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:29, 26 May 2006
Line 22:		Line 22:

	well, this is a wiki, and i think the nature of it suggests that we be open to commentary & discussion, certainly from within the feminist community read broadly. if anybody, male or otherwise, starts randomly or misogynistically or anti-feministically assassinating text, then we'll have to figure out how to be more restrictive. but i think there's a lot to be gained from exploring the wiki format as an inherently feminist structure, and that means the openness to challenge and discussion that comes with the format. but, i think we should start working on process (because we're feminists after all) and start developing some process & procedure pages and recommended readings. the problem is, that i can't focus on this until AFTER may 5th. so i can just take little stabs at things here & there but can't put in concentrated time into structure until then. [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]]		well, this is a wiki, and i think the nature of it suggests that we be open to commentary & discussion, certainly from within the feminist community read broadly. if anybody, male or otherwise, starts randomly or misogynistically or anti-feministically assassinating text, then we'll have to figure out how to be more restrictive. but i think there's a lot to be gained from exploring the wiki format as an inherently feminist structure, and that means the openness to challenge and discussion that comes with the format. but, i think we should start working on process (because we're feminists after all) and start developing some process & procedure pages and recommended readings. the problem is, that i can't focus on this until AFTER may 5th. so i can just take little stabs at things here & there but can't put in concentrated time into structure until then. [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]]

			Why not make a page specifically for "guys suggesting we remove entries because they fail to see how sexism applies to a subject". In fact, there should be a Laadan word for it. [[User:lizzard\|Liz]]

Lquilter at 19:37, 28 April 2006

2006-04-28T19:37:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:37, 28 April 2006
Line 21:		Line 21:


	well, this is a wiki, and i think the nature of it suggests that we be open to commentary & discussion, certainly from within the feminist community read broadly. if anybody, male or otherwise, starts randomly or misogynistically or anti-feministically assassinating text, then we'll have to figure out how to be more restrictive. but i think there's a lot to be gained from exploring the wiki format as an inherently feminist structure, and that means the openness to challenge and discussion that comes with the format. but, i think we should start working on process (because we're feminists after all) and start developing some process & procedure pages and recommended readings. the problem is, that i can't focus on this until AFTER may 5th. so i can just take little stabs at things here & there but can't put in concentrated time into structure until then.		well, this is a wiki, and i think the nature of it suggests that we be open to commentary & discussion, certainly from within the feminist community read broadly. if anybody, male or otherwise, starts randomly or misogynistically or anti-feministically assassinating text, then we'll have to figure out how to be more restrictive. but i think there's a lot to be gained from exploring the wiki format as an inherently feminist structure, and that means the openness to challenge and discussion that comes with the format. but, i think we should start working on process (because we're feminists after all) and start developing some process & procedure pages and recommended readings. the problem is, that i can't focus on this until AFTER may 5th. so i can just take little stabs at things here & there but can't put in concentrated time into structure until then. [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]]

Lquilter at 01:00, 28 April 2006

2006-04-28T01:00:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:00, 27 April 2006
Line 19:		Line 19:

	Suggestion: having a moratorium on guys suggesting we remove entries because they fail to see how sexism applies to a subject. It's not their movement, and they don't get to define it for us. [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 14:45, 27 April 2006 (PDT)		Suggestion: having a moratorium on guys suggesting we remove entries because they fail to see how sexism applies to a subject. It's not their movement, and they don't get to define it for us. [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 14:45, 27 April 2006 (PDT)


			well, this is a wiki, and i think the nature of it suggests that we be open to commentary & discussion, certainly from within the feminist community read broadly. if anybody, male or otherwise, starts randomly or misogynistically or anti-feministically assassinating text, then we'll have to figure out how to be more restrictive. but i think there's a lot to be gained from exploring the wiki format as an inherently feminist structure, and that means the openness to challenge and discussion that comes with the format. but, i think we should start working on process (because we're feminists after all) and start developing some process & procedure pages and recommended readings. the problem is, that i can't focus on this until AFTER may 5th. so i can just take little stabs at things here & there but can't put in concentrated time into structure until then.

Ide Cyan at 21:45, 27 April 2006

2006-04-27T21:45:16Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:45, 27 April 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:

	but this isn't my show; it's a collaborative endeavor, so what do others think? [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 12:19, 27 April 2006 (PDT)		but this isn't my show; it's a collaborative endeavor, so what do others think? [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 12:19, 27 April 2006 (PDT)


			Suggestion: having a moratorium on guys suggesting we remove entries because they fail to see how sexism applies to a subject. It's not their movement, and they don't get to define it for us. [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 14:45, 27 April 2006 (PDT)

Lquilter at 19:19, 27 April 2006

2006-04-27T19:19:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:19, 27 April 2006
Line 9:		Line 9:

	A misconception/confusion that crops up over Whileaway-the-LJ-community is whether its purpose is the discussion of feminist SF or feminist discussion of SF (well, it's both, but the former interpretation is catchier). How much importance do you want to give to entries on sexism and sexist SF (or SF by women who may not be feminist) on this Wiki? [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 12:08, 27 April 2006 (PDT)		A misconception/confusion that crops up over Whileaway-the-LJ-community is whether its purpose is the discussion of feminist SF or feminist discussion of SF (well, it's both, but the former interpretation is catchier). How much importance do you want to give to entries on sexism and sexist SF (or SF by women who may not be feminist) on this Wiki? [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 12:08, 27 April 2006 (PDT)


	That distinction (feminist take on SF, or feminist-identified SF) has cropped up w/r/t feministsf.org over the years too -- most painfully in the early days, when I was trying to develop an encyclopedic type resource of anything developing with feminist SF, and Suzy McKee Charnas hauled my ass over the coals on a feminist sf list for listing non-feminist SF (David Brin's GLORY SEASON) on a "feminist sf" website. ... perhaps there should be an "incidents & history" category on this wiki ...		That distinction (feminist take on SF, or feminist-identified SF) has cropped up w/r/t feministsf.org over the years too -- most painfully in the early days, when I was trying to develop an encyclopedic type resource of anything developing with feminist SF, and Suzy McKee Charnas hauled my ass over the coals on a feminist sf list for listing non-feminist SF (David Brin's GLORY SEASON) on a "feminist sf" website. ... perhaps there should be an "incidents & history" category on this wiki ...

Lquilter at 19:19, 27 April 2006

2006-04-27T19:19:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:19, 27 April 2006
Line 9:		Line 9:

	A misconception/confusion that crops up over Whileaway-the-LJ-community is whether its purpose is the discussion of feminist SF or feminist discussion of SF (well, it's both, but the former interpretation is catchier). How much importance do you want to give to entries on sexism and sexist SF (or SF by women who may not be feminist) on this Wiki? [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 12:08, 27 April 2006 (PDT)		A misconception/confusion that crops up over Whileaway-the-LJ-community is whether its purpose is the discussion of feminist SF or feminist discussion of SF (well, it's both, but the former interpretation is catchier). How much importance do you want to give to entries on sexism and sexist SF (or SF by women who may not be feminist) on this Wiki? [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 12:08, 27 April 2006 (PDT)

			That distinction (feminist take on SF, or feminist-identified SF) has cropped up w/r/t feministsf.org over the years too -- most painfully in the early days, when I was trying to develop an encyclopedic type resource of anything developing with feminist SF, and Suzy McKee Charnas hauled my ass over the coals on a feminist sf list for listing non-feminist SF (David Brin's GLORY SEASON) on a "feminist sf" website. ... perhaps there should be an "incidents & history" category on this wiki ...

			my own take, and what i would urge the fsf wiki community do, is be a feminist take on SF: so open to discussions of sexism within SF, what constitutes "feminist SF" (is heinlein's FRIDAY feminist? sexist? both? neither? why? what are the arguments?), the history of feminism & feminists within SF & fandom, as well as the smaller "feminist SF community" w/in SF & fandom.

			but this isn't my show; it's a collaborative endeavor, so what do others think? [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 12:19, 27 April 2006 (PDT)

Ide Cyan at 19:08, 27 April 2006

2006-04-27T19:08:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 27 April 2006
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Hey ... this is starting to feel like a MISSION discussion. I'm going to edit the front page and move this stuff there. [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 11:47, 27 April 2006 (PDT)		Hey ... this is starting to feel like a MISSION discussion. I'm going to edit the front page and move this stuff there. [[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 11:47, 27 April 2006 (PDT)


			A misconception/confusion that crops up over Whileaway-the-LJ-community is whether its purpose is the discussion of feminist SF or feminist discussion of SF (well, it's both, but the former interpretation is catchier). How much importance do you want to give to entries on sexism and sexist SF (or SF by women who may not be feminist) on this Wiki? [[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 12:08, 27 April 2006 (PDT)

Lquilter: notes from discussion

2006-04-27T18:47:27Z

notes from discussion

New page

When I set this up, I intended it to be in some sense a "feminist sf" version of wikipedia. With much more elaboration and specific information on relevant topics than wikipedia.

For instance, I'm pretty unhappy with the direction that wikipedia has gone in terms of "women in science fiction" replacing "feminist science fiction". Yes, I can edit wikipedia; but, there used to be *more* content in wikipedia, and a specific entry for "feminist science fiction" back in the day. Things move on, and my sense is that wikipedia is converging on being a general interest encyclopedia. People are cleaning up and trying to get rid of "non-general-interest" information. I may be wrong about that sense. But to the extent that wikipedia is general interest, this is a subject specific interest and should be much more detailed.

But we can also talk about process as well -- perhaps there are feminist processes that would be somewhat different here. The open editing process of wiki is inherently democratic and feminist in some respects. But there may be feminist issues that we need to confront with the wiki, too.

Hey ... this is starting to feel like a MISSION discussion. I'm going to edit the front page and move this stuff there. [[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 11:47, 27 April 2006 (PDT)