I don't post nearly as much because I lost my work access. I barely have time to read even Bitches anymore and hang out primarily in Bitchy Fic, where I can indulge my feedback whorish nature. Before much longer I imagine some people will see my posts in here and go "Who's this wild-eyed egalitarian?" Honestly, some days I don't know who that wild-eyed egalitarian is either.

I think Jess phrased it best by noting that there are folks who have earned their status within the group by their contributions, but this isn't formalized and it's considered a bit rude to insist upon your status. But it doesn't go unacknowledged either. It's a bit of social sleight of hand which both allows that functional status (and celebrates it), while encouraging a fairly level social field for interaction. That seems like a positive to me.

This states my primary point. Yes, there is privilege, yes, it's been earned. Pointing out this fact is just a bit gauche, as in Miss Manners pointing out that socially only medical doctors should use the title Doctor with their names. I guess so that you can find someone life-saving in an emergency, instead of someone who wrote a paper on the sex lives of bacteria or something.

I'm not sure how much longer we can continue to think of ourselves as purely organized on the social level, with interactions defined by social standards. We have a semi-public presence, due to certain Powers That Be dropping in and that fact become known to the fandom at large, and unless we want to isolate ourselves completely (a debate I remember) we're going to have to work with the fact that eventually people will come in here, behave themselves, acquit themselves in all ways as people you want to have conversations with, but who may not quite be friend material. (I know lots of people who I have fascinating discussions with who I wouldn't want to have dinner with or have in my house.)

But I am content with the state of matters as they stand.

the fact that eventually people will come in here, behave themselves, acquit themselves in all ways as people you want to have conversations with, but who may not quite be friend material

That's nothing new, surely?

No, happened all the time for me on TT, back when. Stuff like "Wow, she's smart, but scary."(Not about anyone here.)

True, nothing new, but I've seen statements that seem to say a meritocracy is possibly the best way to handle things because we're all just friends here.

Gee, could I have put any more waffle-words in that?

I didn't get that impression. The "elitist" position, as I understand it that some people are more equal than others, due to their actions previous.

I don't see what that has to do with friendship.

Connie-- I think maybe you are equating social = friends, which is not always true-- you could compare it to dorm life or something.

I read the meritocracy argument as ita did.

What was interesting to me about the tension in Bureaucracy in May was that I skipped it.

Aha!

(Sorry, just figured out why I was so lost -- I never skip or skim this thread, and I just could not remember any tension in May, so I thought I was going crazy. But David's post reminded me that I was in England during that whole thing, and only read it afterwards in one big chunk. Carry on.)

some people are more equal than others

this is what bothers me about meritocracy-- I find my self imagining us in some Buffista version of animal farm chanting " Old Hat good, New Hat BAAAAAAAD." , like the sheep.

Social does not always equal friends, true. I remain unconvinced on the meritocracy.

I remain unconvinced on the meritocracy.

How about if we call it..."respect"? People earn respect. People that are more respected are given leeway and entrusted with more power.