awesomesauce. I have unlocked Lightbulbs. go forth and post.

I found this post if you want something to follow:

"There is a proposal being discussed.

Discussion: NOW - 5/9/03 11:59 pm EST Voting: 5/10/03 12 am EST - 5/13/03 12:00 am EST

Proposal: That the community, if it is practical to code, allow individual threads to be designated, "Accessible only to members of the community," and restrict access to those threads only to registered users. Any such threads to be so designated shall be determined by separate proposal and vote. If the proposal passes, the coding of this feature shall be added to the features request list.

Proposer: DXMachina Seconds msbelle, JessPMoon, Nutty, Jesse

Voting discussion starts here:

DXMachina "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" May 5, 2003 1:24:15 pm EDT"

I don't think Glamcookie got her fourth second. I'm counting Cashmere, JenP, and Sophia (I think).

Since you seem to need a fourth second, I'll be it. If Sophia wasn't seconding it, we'll need one more.

I was seconding. I just thought it was three! Even though I am pretty sure I wrote the guidelines!

I was second in, I just thought it was three! Even though I am pretty sure I wrote the guidelines!

Indeed you did, Sophia!

Just another example of how we are all fallible!

But really cute.

I don't want to put this in Light Bulbs, because I don't think it should have any bearing on how Glamcookie's proposal progresses.

For what it's worth, I don't think the weekend's upset would have been avoided by moving the ableism conversation from Goodbye and Good Riddance (GBGR) to either Bureau, or any other thread. Moving it might have made the participants and onlookers feel a little less awkward; I think both sj and Laura expressed their discomfort in having it play out in GBGR. I know I was uncomfortable. I don't think moving it would have given us a happy ending by the end of the weekend, though.

As I first read through GBGR, I would have bet the mortgage it was going to end with KB and Laura saying, "Oh, I didn't realize. I'm sorry," or, "Oh, I didn't understand the connection. I'm sorry," and that people would have already moved on by the time I got to the end of the thread. I was shocked at how it played out.

It does not seem to me that KB and Laura received received the feedback (specifically, from sj, Debet, Dana, and me) in the spirit in which it was offered. Beyond being respectful, polite, and careful in our wording (we were), we cannot control how others interpret or "hear" what we have said.

KB and Laura have expressed that they felt attacked. I disagree that they were, but I still feel terrible that they feel that way. I am also angry though, because I feel like they gaslit sj (and the rest of us) at the end.

I just felt compelled to say this, because I think a lot of us are looking at Glam's proposal wondering how it could have fixed this. I don't think it could have, not because of any flaw or missing feature of the proposal. I don't think it could have, just because people are people, and sometimes they can't or won't understand where other people are coming from. I think this was one of those times.

sj posted this in Light Bulbs, but Glamcookie has since retracted her proposal, so I want to move the conversation here.

[sj says] I'm not sure if my answer to that belongs here or not, but I think that on this website of all places I should be able to says that something someone said has, probably unintentionally, hurt me, and get a proper apology. While I was not the one that initially pointed out that Laura's post was also problematic, I totally agreed with what Debet posted at the time, and there was no apology given for that either. I understand that people did not want the discussion to continue in GB&GR, but, as I have said, I and others didn't know where to take it. I was offended by the idea that I should just drop it. So, if people do not want the thread that GC proposed, I feel there needs to be a clear policy in place for what I and others are supposed to do in the future if something like this happens again, as I'm sure it will because we all step in the guacamole at times, if I'm going to continue to feel comfortable posting here. Because I am past the point in my life where I feel like I'm going to just smile and ignore something that I find hurtful, especially around people who I consider to be friends. I'm not even sure if any of that was coherent. Sorry.

I added the bolding for emphasis. I agree with sj and would also like us to clarify our policy or develop one so we're all clear on how to handle future incidents.

Do we still have access to our FAQ somewhere? I wanted to look at our whole Warn/Suspend/Ban language. TO BE CLEAR: I don't want to request anyone be warned, etc. I just want a refresher on our process.

FWIW, when it was playing out, I didn't suggest moving the conversation from GBGR to Bureaucracy, because (a) I felt it was sj's place to do that, not mine, and (b) I felt like it would feel like I was escalating it, but KB and Laura are longtime members in good standing, so I didn't want to escalate it. I kept thinking something would click.

Also moving from Lightbulbs to here:

I've been reading and thinking and mulling over all of this since the escalation in GB&GR (which I didn't contribute to or weigh in on because it was already past and over by the time I got caught up, and it felt like doing so would be reigniting something sad and hurtful. It utterly breaks my heart that sj, Laura and KB all feel actively unsafe and unwelcome here.

I don't doubt anyone's kindness and good intentions and desire to put in the work of anti-racism/sexism/ableism/heterosexism/cis privilege and to avoid hurting one another; having come in late to the other thread, I came away with the same impression Dana had: that this year has left every one of us raw and prickly and covered with scars and bruises that are only just beginning to heal, and we're all painfully sensitive to even the lightest pressure.

I haven't been as deep in as many online communities as Atropa and Plei, but I've also seen bad outcomes for the community in spaces like the proposed thread. If any community can do it without adding to the stress and unhappiness and possibly departures, I totally believe it's this one, but I don't have 100% confidence that we can do it either.

I feel there needs to be a clear policy in place for what I and others are supposed to do in the future if something like this happens again

Absolutely this. As Willow says, a vague disclaimer is nobody's friend. And IM*limited*E the few communities where these discussions do seem to be able to happen have been the ones with clear expectations for what's allowed and not, and when someone violates those expectations a mod steps in to remind them of which specific bowl of guac they've blundered into and why it's there. It provides a clear border and a starting point for discussions and it makes people at least a tiny bit more thoughtful and intentional about their word choices, especially when they had to read the guidelines in full and affirm their intention to follow them before joining.

We're all very much long past read-the-rules-before-joining, but, yes, clear policies about language choices, intent vs. impact, and expected post-guac actions are an excellent idea.