Talk:Commenting Rules for the FSF Blog

From Feminist SF Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

g1m8DC <a href="http://eiccpwfzueav.com/">eiccpwfzueav</a>, [url=http://gmmmjbpmojlf.com/]gmmmjbpmojlf[/url], [link=http://nqjehbdwcqpq.com/]nqjehbdwcqpq[/link], http://guxuymkzdbcd.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? 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. -- 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. -- 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:

  1. Critical thinking / reading / Communications 101
  2. Feminism 101
  3. Check Your Privilege
  4. Common Issues in Feminist SF Criticism: Educate yourself
  5. 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).

-- 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.

-- JL

I have added a set of general "communications 101" guidelines (not specifically feminist) [[1]]. For easy readability, I think it's important that we keep these short and general.

-- JL

Additional resources

Retrieved from "https://wiki.feministsf.net/index.php?title=Talk:Commenting_Rules_for_the_FSF_Blog&oldid=34305"