We should probably drop that onto the About page (with edits around the FAQ/filk, which I believe were going to be archived for posterity).

The Buffistas are an inclusive, welcoming, and flame-free community. Play nice, and you've found a home away from home. If you make personal attacks or offensive posts, or try to start a fight, you will be shunned. However, newbie mistakes are usually corrected gently and informally. Lurk for a while and you'll learn our language.

I think this is where we have a place to update. Perhaps a better word than "shunned"! This seems like written more to a newbie audience. And also some more explicit language for inclusive, welcomeing and flame-free (does anyone flame anymore???) with some of the links provided?

Aurelia thank you for what you said.

The conversation in GBBR might now resemble a pile-on, because KB and Laura deleted the comments to which we were responding. When that conversation was still intact, it looked quite different.

The conversation thereafter might be a pile on. I can't tell. I'm feeling overwhelmed. I'm also not sure that's the real issue.

I had to take a break from it. My adult son spent time in diapers last year, and the worry of incontinence still weighs on him. I've been trying hard to keep my buttons out of reach.

To the extent the Bureau convo resembles a pile-on, we should not lose sight of the fact that it is also just how we do our disagreement post-mortem. bon bon once said:

This always happens when there's a gash in the world here-- we plaster it with hundreds or thousands of posts. We just do. It's painful to read when you want the discussion over, but I don't think it can be stopped, and it always wears itself out after awhile.

I remembered the gist and was able to find the post easily, because it is so right.

I don't think it is helpful or healthy to accuse the people who need to talk things out of "piling on." Laura and KB haven't been here for days. They're not here to be piled on. The people who are still talking are taking great care be intentional about how we relate to each other in this community.

Java cat, I don't think anyone wanted KB and Laura to leave. I do not think anyone is shunning or would shun them. You said:

I feel like reaching out to Katie and Laura, and will, just to say that I hope they give themselves a cooling off period, then come back.

If you feel like it, you should do that. Personally, I figured KB and Laura were already giving themselves a cooling off period. They pretty much said (i.e. this is a paraphrase) they were out of here, because they couldn't (didn't want to?) have the conversation.

I think this is the basic right of it, but maybe state clearly that talking about it in Bureau if further discussion seems warranted isn't (necessarily) an escalation... just a lateral move. And, I mean, also that "Hey, can we take this to email privately?" or whatever is also a completely acceptable request. That is, taking a specific discussion to email - doesn't mean a general conversation for whoever has a thing to say or ask is prohibited or anything.

I agree with the first part. I just want to say one thing about the email aspect of this. Of course that's a valid approach whenever people in an online group have disagreements. Nothing I'm about to say is meant to imply it is wrong to decide to email on your own.

In the inciting incident here, however, I think sj did the harder, better thing by bringing up her concerns on the board, rather than privately. This was not a personal dispute. It was not:

KB: "Teacups sucks!"

sj: "My husband is a teacup. Pistols at dawn, in Weehawken!"

Laura: "I'm a little teapot short and stout..."

KB unwittingly breached a community standard of courtesy by unintentionally furthering an ableist idea. To diffuse the tension, Laura cracked an ill-timed joke that wouldn't have felt like a problem, had the circumstances been different.

Since the circumstances were what they were, the joke made it feel like sj should not speak her mind. (I DON'T think Laura intended that, either. I think she was trying to help. It just didn't help.)

If sj had emailed KB and/or Laura, there was nothing to prevent Buffista X from coming in and using the same ableist term, 50 posts later. It was important that (someone in) the community said, "Let's not have that here."

I don't want people who would speak out on an issue (rather than a personal dispute), to feel pressured to back channel, instead. Because we're a conflict avoidant group, it's really easy to feel pressured to not speak up, or only bring up on-board concerns off the board. I don't want to leave the idea that sj (or any of us) should have taken it to email. The thing happened on the board. It is not wrong to explore it on the board. I know you weren't saying the "should have" part at all, JenP. You made that clear. I just think it's a short emotional hop for Buffistas to get from "could have emailed" to "should have emailed."

sj, you did the right thing by speaking up in thread. Please don't second guess yourself. I know you didn't even know that aspect of my son's story when you did so, so it meant something to me that you voiced your principled objection on the board. It means something to me that this is a community where that matters.

Two of the things about this that strike me as so sad:

• sj and Laura both usually give board disagreements a wide berth (KB too, I think)

• sj and Laura have been two of the members keeping on the lights at B.org, when so many of us flitted off

It comes back to what NoiseDesign said:

I know that we want a solution where everyone comes out feeling good about things, but that is rarely possible. This is where the very hard choices about choosing where you stand comes into play. Almost always there will be outcomes where not everyone is satisfied.

I think that's where we are. We cannot do anything else to make our points to KB and Laura. Maybe in some time, they'll revisit what happened and return. We cannot control that.

My adult son spent time in diapers last year, and the worry of incontinence still weighs on him.

::Raises hand::. Me, too, Cindy. This was one of the upshots of my "troubles" starting in March 2019 for a while. I totally, totally get where you're coming from and appreciated sj pointing it out very much. Also, you interpreted my intent with the e-mail thing precisely right. Thanks for fleshing that out. Could not agree more that sj was 100% in the right for bringing it up in thread, and I thank her for that courage. Absolutely.

It comes back to what NoiseDesign said:

"I know that we want a solution where everyone comes out feeling good about things, but that is rarely possible. This is where the very hard choices about choosing where you stand comes into play. Almost always there will be outcomes where not everyone is satisfied."

I think that's where we are. We cannot do anything else to make our points to KB and Laura. Maybe in some time, they'll revisit what happened and return. We cannot control that.

Agree.

Separately - agree that the word "shunning" could use an update.

Post Deleted!

Jen, I'm going to reply in Natter.

Cindy’s teacup scenario pretty much summed it up except then Laura doubled down that “no one” which I took to me all people not just her and KB ever means the diaper comments to be ableist. In which I politely told her that was not the case and told her it hurt that I felt she was being dismissive. After which I think she doubled down again, but I cannot remember that exactly what happened next.

Sophia, after this week I may be able to give some input on the language. My brain is otherwise occupied for the next few days.

people not just her and KB ever means the diaper comments to be ableist

Honestly, even if that were true (and it's not), it's still harmful and still needed to be addressed. This is one of those times in which if you're not a part of the community calling it out, you don't get an "opinion." It is not okay for someone who is not disabled to tell a disabled person that they shouldn't take offense or call it out because it wasn't meant that way. That is when you say, "I'm so sorry. I didn't think about it like that. Thank you for letting me know." (And obviously this comment isn't for you, sj, as none of this is new information. Just clarifying for the conversation.)

I had to step away for a few days, celebrate my sister's birthday online with her on Tues., take a hike (literally) yesterday. The excerpts below stand out to me. I feel all the wordiness itself accreting in a massive blizzard makes it all more difficult. Sorry to add to it.

> Glamcookie: We can't let it go - that's the problem here. We can "let it go" in terms of the call out and discussion, but it will fester in us and we will not forget how these convos go because they have consequences for us. These convos let us know who is safe and who is not, and that is so painful when it's our friends.

> Atropa: I’m going to be very blunt: we will not be the exception to the usual in this. Because no matter how good our intentions, no matter how safe and welcoming we want this space to be, people can never be perfect, and no one will ever 100% agree on context and intent.

> Glamcookie: 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.

> David: Laura, sj did not object to you calling Trump a baby. She objected to the phrase "Diaper Don"

> Laura: An expression I have never used. If I had I would have apologized, as Katie did when it was pointed out.

>Topic!Cindy: Hec, Laura never used "Diaper Don." Katerina Bee did, BUT people responded under the assumption that KB didn't mean to be ableist when she said it, either.

> Laura: I apologize if my comments felt dismissive. That was certainly not my intent, as I would never dismiss your feelings and never want you to feel hurt. I was trying to return the thread to being lighthearted and failed quite spectacularly.

> Trudy Booth: Call out is the term that has been being used for a while now and it’s accurate.

> Trudy Booth: One of the things that makes it less of a conversation is the piling on phenomenon - which has caused us problems before. Even if everyone is being measured and thoughtful in their comments, after ten or twenty of them the aggregate is pretty aggressive.

> t- Laura and Katie were not driven away with pitchforks and torches. They both flounced.

Katie and Laura did not flounce. They both apologized, then left because: (1) it was excruciating for Katie, who did apologize, and (2) Laura apologized *and* expounded on her apology, and it was rejected. One can let it go, Glamcookie. I hope you aren’t structuring this as either you and sj or Katie & Laura. If you are, well. I hope you don’t. I choose all of us. The nerdiness, the pop culture-ness, sometimes in spite of, more often because of the wordiness, the splendid writers. I choose all of us. I’m not a fan of all parts of us -- the cliques, sometime mean-girlness, even from the nicest people; not a fan of public pronouncements of virtuous behavior that don’t manifest to all Buffista members and posts about how can you expect that, not everyone is equal. Still people here try. It’s a unique place. I choose us.

I will cc my post to Katie and Laura. That’s all I can do. Reaching out is not hard to do, I've done it, and it’s wonderful when people come back. John Horner came back to FB for years. Raq and Freya returned in different degrees. How great is it to see their pixels again! I choose us, and another hike, literally.