Firstly, Purgatory is not a free for all and I can see no reason why further discussion of the issues in the threads should not be discussed there.
The usual Purg debating style is much more robust than the discussion we (mostly) had on those threads. Of course one can have a gentle discussion in Purg. The evidence is that we don't.
But I am suggesting that the crew are not an especially diverse group ...
How diverse do you think shipmates are?
Don’t know - we could run a circus poll and see - but the results would be rather rough and ready.
Which means we don't know if the crew demographics reflect shipmate demographics.
And apparently we don’t wish to find out. Nor do we want to think about whether we are attracting a demographic representative of our various communities to this site in the first place.
And apparently we don’t wish to find out. Nor do we want to think about whether we are attracting a demographic representative of our various communities to this site in the first place.
And apparently we don’t wish to find out. Nor do we want to think about whether we are attracting a demographic representative of our various communities to this site in the first place.
Speak for yourself.
I was reflecting what the answers I have been getting on this thread convey to me.
We should investigate to what extent we could collect this data in accordance with gdpr - I suspect that trying to audit in this way is considered lawful as many, many organisations in the U.K. do it; there are lawyers on the ship who might be able to advise. Even if that is a one off poll, or an ongoing opt in survey monkey, or something similar.
In terms of promoting the voices of those who you feel go unheard (part of the purpose of Epiphanies as I understand it), perhaps we should create a process for people identifying with those groups to volunteer as part of an advice group - acting as the equivalent of a sensitivity reader as it were - to support the crew with feedback on suggested structural or major changes on the ship.
Firstly, Purgatory is not a free for all and I can see no reason why further discussion of the issues in the threads should not be discussed there.
The usual Purg debating style is much more robust than the discussion we (mostly) had on those threads. Of course one can have a gentle discussion in Purg. The evidence is that we don't.
I thought my post made clear that support and sharing threads can in my opinion take place in All Saints. And they are normally gentle.
So far as the temperature of serious debate is concerned, that is a matter for Shipmates in either Purgatory or Epiphanies. The extra Hosting dimension in Epiphanies is no guarantee of gentle discussions. It was always intended to help provide a safer space for minority groups because of the entwining of identity and issues. Provided that is observed, threads can get as heated as the general Purgatory guidelines allow. You will recall that they also form part of the Epiphanies guidelines.
I thought my post made clear that support and sharing threads can in my opinion take place in All Saints. And they are normally gentle.
I thought mine made clear that that wasn't what I was talking about.
Perhaps I've misunderstood the intent of Epiphanies. I had thought that the purpose of separating Epiphanies discussions from Purg was to have a discussion that took more care of people's sense of identity. If you are "providing a safer space for minority groups because of the entwining of identity and issues" then you are having a gentler discussion, and not a re-hash of some of the old DH threads. It's gentler because it takes care of people, and doesn't require them to defend their very existence.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
I got that, LC. I don't think the intention was to create a gentler environment for debate. Just a safer one.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
This may just be semantics, I suppose. But vigorous debate is not gentle debate. And the Epiphanies guidelines certainly allow for vigorous debate, provided the entwining of issues and personal identity is not ignored.
There has yet to be a valid, transparent explanation. I concur with mousethief.
Thank you.
I mean, yeah, you’re right. I’m less annoyed than I was, thanks to what @Eutychus said yesterday. I wish that @Doc Tor had added a couple of sentences like that to the posts shutting the threads. Just an acknowledgment that it was a slap in the face.
But I also respect and trust the Admins, so I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for now. I’d love a transparent explanation too, and hopefully one will come at some point. But in the meantime, the acknowledgment that male mental health matters is the main thing I wanted/want to hear.
There has yet to be a valid, transparent explanation. I concur with mousethief.
Thank you.
Total transparency from any management structure is not a realistic option. As admins, this is not because we're trying to hide anything, but because like any other management structure, part of our remit is to deal with matters that cannot be fully addressed in public for all sorts of reasons. Acting otherwise would be irresponsible.
In this instance, as always, we're being as transparent as we can. We're also doing our best to allow the wider Ship community to be involved in policy development by listening to what's being said here, rather than pre-empt by saying too much.
Trying to clarify my thoughts on this and work through where I feel there are problems.
Firstly, there seems to be a general consensus that the advantage of the two threads in Epiphanies was that they allowed an exploratory discussion, rather than the all out, no holds barred debate characterised by current Purgatory threads, as described here,
<snip>
Perhaps I've misunderstood the intent of Epiphanies. I had thought that the purpose of separating Epiphanies discussions from Purg was to have a discussion that took more care of people's sense of identity. If you are "providing a safer space for minority groups because of the entwining of identity and issues" then you are having a gentler discussion, and not a re-hash of some of the old DH threads. It's gentler because it takes care of people, and doesn't require them to defend their very existence.
and that the discussion is felt to be more robust than that allowed in All Saints, where the aim is support.
2. That there are qualms about moving the threads to Purgatory, particularly in view of the recent discussion about posting standards in Purgatory (link to Styx thread) and the conclusion was that although there were issues with broad brush generalisations and aggressive posting that these things were not possible to moderate through hosting, on p3 Barnabas62 said:
So I agree that some generalisations are too broad and unfair. And it is not wrong to be pissed off by them. And I've concluded that in practice the remedies are best left to Shipmates.
Now the recourse of Shipmates if pissed off, is through the use of Hell.
3. On that same thread, it was acknowledged that Shipmates who start posts in Hell often end up worse off for doing so, however justified the call, as chrisstiles said here:
Forgive me, but the goals of Hell aside, ITSM I've rarely seen a Hell thread that left the OP with less pain than they were in when they started it.
which makes calling another Shipmate to Hell fraught with difficulty.
4. I would also agree that the opening posts of those threads were perhaps too widely drawn.
So how do we have the sort of conversation we were having in Epiphanies about men's issues on the Ship within these constraints? I do have a suggestion, bearing in mind the breadth of suggested discussion and number of threads that could have been started from tangents: would it be possible to use the 8th Day board as somewhere to discuss these threads and ideas, when the current iteration of Church of Fools has finished*?
* Assuming of course that it does finish, but with churches reopening, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility.
I have reread the whole Men's Reproductive Responsibilities thread, and now see where the Admins' decision might have come from.
I’ve also been rereading it, and I can see how it doesn’t fit into the ethos of why Epiphanies was created. It would probably be better for the Epiphanies Guidelines to be retailored to echo this. If the ethos of Epiphanies had two objectives:
- Dealing with issues of identity where strong emotion can’t be taken out of the equation (as it is now), and
- Encouraging voices that would otherwise be drowned out to be heard.
Then I would be behind that. I don’t see a problem with the XY thread being shifted to All Saints (as @asher originally intended). In fact that’s still my main gripe, that the thread was just closed without warning, and what that implies. Like it or not, the way what was a helpful and fruitful conversation has been killed off means that it’s going to be difficult to get that conversation started again elsewhere. Just moving the thread, even if temporarily, would have avoided that.
As someone who has made themselves vulnerable on both the Transgender and the XY thread, what happened with both makes me wary of being vulnerable in the future.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
CK
Good post, thanks.
One point re generalisations. Shipmates can challenge over broad generalisations in Purgatory or Epiphanies and if sufficiently pissed off take the Shipmate to Hell. Ruth challenged me in Purgatory where I apologised. It's always possible to do that. If a Shipmate's comment has annoyed us we don't have to head off to Hell straight away.
Purgatory isn't a free for all, no holds barred, environment and exploratory threads are always possible there. You must expect some discordant voices, of course. I don't see that prevents exploration.
The discordant voices in Purgatory are often forceful and unwilling to concede to change, as we heard on the previous thread, too, and as I've come across again recently. Some people are more willing to accept a challenge and adjust their behaviour or apologise. Other posters are not and will keep reiterating their points whatever. This means that it is not always possible or even worthwhile to challenge other posters in Purgatory, and if meeting this intransigence decide that it's not worth bothering and there are better things to do with time. Which may partly answer the question of missing Shipmates.
Which may partly answer the question of missing Shipmates.
Missing Shipmates have one thing in common, which is that their absence cannot legitimately be invoked to support any argument unless there is explicit evidence as to why they are no longer posting, in the form of a public statement here.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
edited June 2020
I agree. It's part of my normal expectations. We pay a price for the ethos of unrest. We also derive benefit. Shipmates are free to be forceful and convinced and argue accordingly within the rules. That in itself doesn't seem to me to provide justification for extension of the extra Hosting provision in Epiphanies from what was originally envisaged when the forum was created.
(If I learned something myself from that long Purg Hosting thread, it is that there are practical limits to what Hosts may be reasonable expected to do to try to maintain both diversity of membership and the ethos of unrest. Policing generalities was certainly one of those limits!)
As @Barnabas62 noted upthread, I think an important part of understanding Epiphanies is understanding the practical problem it was designed to address. I think we had problems on the Transgender thread with some contributions that were (perhaps unwittingly) crossing the line into outright transphobia, which gave that thread an edge that I personally found very disturbing. I think the closer hosting made possible by the move to Epiphanies has largely allowed discussion to continue while taking away that edge.
I found some of the contributions on the XY Chromsomes thread very helpful, but at the end of the day I don't think the rationale for that thread being in Epiphanies is quite as compelling. In theory the thread should be workable in Purgatory, though I admit that it might not fare well in the current climate. Like some other people I'm not entirely happy about the current climate in Purgatory, but I went into that on the Purgatory-related thread and I won't repeat myself here.
I mean, yeah, you’re right. I’m less annoyed than I was, thanks to what @Eutychus said yesterday. I wish that @Doc Tor had added a couple of sentences like that to the posts shutting the threads. Just an acknowledgment that it was a slap in the face.
Potentially yes. I was 'Admin on Duty' at that point, so take responsibility for the wording.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
Hmm.
Thanks Marsupial and CK. I'm still comfortable with the Admin decisions but I accept that the reservations about Purgatory are a cause for concern, to be kept in mind re exploratory threads. I'm going to have a look at the Purgatory guidelines.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
I'm going to have a chat with Purgatory Hosts about a feature of the existing guidelines which may be relevant to exploratory threads in Purgatory. Give me a day.
As someone who has made themselves vulnerable on both the Transgender and the XY thread, what happened with both makes me wary of being vulnerable in the future.
Yes, I feel a bit like this. I wouldn't bother with posting on these threads in Purgatory, for this reason. And like Leorning Cniht, I agree that
All Saints isn't (supposed to be) a discussion forum. I don't think the majority of that thread could have happened in All Saints.
.
Well, there it is. Thanks for your efforts, mods, anyway.
'I can clarify that this is not a case of writing off all the issues raised in the XY thread forever but of declaring a time-out to prioritise and see where and how they might fit. '
I certainly don't want to go near this topic for a good while, but for clarity
Your words (time out) seem to say that Admins do not want discussions started on any of the issues raised in the XY thread for now.
And that these topics should be regarded as 'red light' for now, until Admin explicitly 'green light' them.
There has yet to be a valid, transparent explanation. I concur with mousethief.
Thank you.
Total transparency from any management structure is not a realistic option. As admins, this is not because we're trying to hide anything, but because like any other management structure, part of our remit is to deal with matters that cannot be fully addressed in public for all sorts of reasons. Acting otherwise would be irresponsible.
In this instance, as always, we're being as transparent as we can.
All but opaque, then. That's certainly your prerogative as Admins; I obviously cannot demand. My point here is that it's folly to say an explanation has been given when no such thing has happened.
@mousethief , I find Louise's post on the Reproductive thread to be particularly useful to me. Try reading the several posts leading up to it and following it. Does that give you any ideas about what the Admins might have seen going wrong with the thread? Does it seem way off base? Something in the middle?
I of course can't speak for the Admins, but for me rereading that post helped me see things on the thread that might have been thought problematic within the now-clarified vision for Epiphanies.
I haven't reread the whole Living With XY Chromosomes thread to see through new eyes whether similar issues were showing up there. I'm trying to reread, but it's exhausting reading it in light of the disappointing outcome that I know is coming up in several pages.
@mousethief , I find Louise's post on the Reproductive thread to be particularly useful to me. Try reading the several posts leading up to it and following it. Does that give you any ideas about what the Admins might have seen going wrong with the thread? Does it seem way off base? Something in the middle?
I of course can't speak for the Admins, but for me rereading that post helped me see things on the thread that might have been thought problematic within the now-clarified vision for Epiphanies.
I haven't reread the whole Living With XY Chromosomes thread to see through new eyes whether similar issues were showing up there. I'm trying to reread, but it's exhausting reading it in light of the disappointing outcome that I know is coming up in several pages.
Yeah, looking back I regret a couple of my posts, and my failure to reach out and reconcile. I can see why those exchanges on MRR might be problematic.
Comments
The usual Purg debating style is much more robust than the discussion we (mostly) had on those threads. Of course one can have a gentle discussion in Purg. The evidence is that we don't.
And apparently we don’t wish to find out. Nor do we want to think about whether we are attracting a demographic representative of our various communities to this site in the first place.
Speak for yourself.
I was reflecting what the answers I have been getting on this thread convey to me.
In terms of promoting the voices of those who you feel go unheard (part of the purpose of Epiphanies as I understand it), perhaps we should create a process for people identifying with those groups to volunteer as part of an advice group - acting as the equivalent of a sensitivity reader as it were - to support the crew with feedback on suggested structural or major changes on the ship.
I thought my post made clear that support and sharing threads can in my opinion take place in All Saints. And they are normally gentle.
So far as the temperature of serious debate is concerned, that is a matter for Shipmates in either Purgatory or Epiphanies. The extra Hosting dimension in Epiphanies is no guarantee of gentle discussions. It was always intended to help provide a safer space for minority groups because of the entwining of identity and issues. Provided that is observed, threads can get as heated as the general Purgatory guidelines allow. You will recall that they also form part of the Epiphanies guidelines.
Thank you.
I thought mine made clear that that wasn't what I was talking about.
Perhaps I've misunderstood the intent of Epiphanies. I had thought that the purpose of separating Epiphanies discussions from Purg was to have a discussion that took more care of people's sense of identity. If you are "providing a safer space for minority groups because of the entwining of identity and issues" then you are having a gentler discussion, and not a re-hash of some of the old DH threads. It's gentler because it takes care of people, and doesn't require them to defend their very existence.
Anyway, that's the difference I see. YMMV.
But I also respect and trust the Admins, so I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for now. I’d love a transparent explanation too, and hopefully one will come at some point. But in the meantime, the acknowledgment that male mental health matters is the main thing I wanted/want to hear.
Total transparency from any management structure is not a realistic option. As admins, this is not because we're trying to hide anything, but because like any other management structure, part of our remit is to deal with matters that cannot be fully addressed in public for all sorts of reasons. Acting otherwise would be irresponsible.
In this instance, as always, we're being as transparent as we can. We're also doing our best to allow the wider Ship community to be involved in policy development by listening to what's being said here, rather than pre-empt by saying too much.
Firstly, there seems to be a general consensus that the advantage of the two threads in Epiphanies was that they allowed an exploratory discussion, rather than the all out, no holds barred debate characterised by current Purgatory threads, as described here,
and that the discussion is felt to be more robust than that allowed in All Saints, where the aim is support.
2. That there are qualms about moving the threads to Purgatory, particularly in view of the recent discussion about posting standards in Purgatory (link to Styx thread) and the conclusion was that although there were issues with broad brush generalisations and aggressive posting that these things were not possible to moderate through hosting, on p3 Barnabas62 said:
Now the recourse of Shipmates if pissed off, is through the use of Hell.
3. On that same thread, it was acknowledged that Shipmates who start posts in Hell often end up worse off for doing so, however justified the call, as chrisstiles said here: which makes calling another Shipmate to Hell fraught with difficulty.
4. I would also agree that the opening posts of those threads were perhaps too widely drawn.
So how do we have the sort of conversation we were having in Epiphanies about men's issues on the Ship within these constraints? I do have a suggestion, bearing in mind the breadth of suggested discussion and number of threads that could have been started from tangents: would it be possible to use the 8th Day board as somewhere to discuss these threads and ideas, when the current iteration of Church of Fools has finished*?
* Assuming of course that it does finish, but with churches reopening, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility.
I’ve also been rereading it, and I can see how it doesn’t fit into the ethos of why Epiphanies was created. It would probably be better for the Epiphanies Guidelines to be retailored to echo this. If the ethos of Epiphanies had two objectives:
- Dealing with issues of identity where strong emotion can’t be taken out of the equation (as it is now), and
- Encouraging voices that would otherwise be drowned out to be heard.
Then I would be behind that. I don’t see a problem with the XY thread being shifted to All Saints (as @asher originally intended). In fact that’s still my main gripe, that the thread was just closed without warning, and what that implies. Like it or not, the way what was a helpful and fruitful conversation has been killed off means that it’s going to be difficult to get that conversation started again elsewhere. Just moving the thread, even if temporarily, would have avoided that.
As someone who has made themselves vulnerable on both the Transgender and the XY thread, what happened with both makes me wary of being vulnerable in the future.
Good post, thanks.
One point re generalisations. Shipmates can challenge over broad generalisations in Purgatory or Epiphanies and if sufficiently pissed off take the Shipmate to Hell. Ruth challenged me in Purgatory where I apologised. It's always possible to do that. If a Shipmate's comment has annoyed us we don't have to head off to Hell straight away.
Purgatory isn't a free for all, no holds barred, environment and exploratory threads are always possible there. You must expect some discordant voices, of course. I don't see that prevents exploration.
(If I learned something myself from that long Purg Hosting thread, it is that there are practical limits to what Hosts may be reasonable expected to do to try to maintain both diversity of membership and the ethos of unrest. Policing generalities was certainly one of those limits!)
I found some of the contributions on the XY Chromsomes thread very helpful, but at the end of the day I don't think the rationale for that thread being in Epiphanies is quite as compelling. In theory the thread should be workable in Purgatory, though I admit that it might not fare well in the current climate. Like some other people I'm not entirely happy about the current climate in Purgatory, but I went into that on the Purgatory-related thread and I won't repeat myself here.
All Saints isn't (supposed to be) a discussion forum. I don't think the majority of that thread could have happened in All Saints.
Potentially yes. I was 'Admin on Duty' at that point, so take responsibility for the wording.
Thanks Marsupial and CK. I'm still comfortable with the Admin decisions but I accept that the reservations about Purgatory are a cause for concern, to be kept in mind re exploratory threads. I'm going to have a look at the Purgatory guidelines.
Yes, I feel a bit like this. I wouldn't bother with posting on these threads in Purgatory, for this reason. And like Leorning Cniht, I agree that
.
Well, there it is. Thanks for your efforts, mods, anyway.
'I can clarify that this is not a case of writing off all the issues raised in the XY thread forever but of declaring a time-out to prioritise and see where and how they might fit. '
I certainly don't want to go near this topic for a good while, but for clarity
Your words (time out) seem to say that Admins do not want discussions started on any of the issues raised in the XY thread for now.
And that these topics should be regarded as 'red light' for now, until Admin explicitly 'green light' them.
Thanks
Asher
I am grateful to hosts and admins for all their hard work in general. And in particular their hard work arising from XY MRR threads.
Asher
All but opaque, then. That's certainly your prerogative as Admins; I obviously cannot demand. My point here is that it's folly to say an explanation has been given when no such thing has happened.
That can also be used as a cop-out by people who invent problems and refuse to explain them.
I of course can't speak for the Admins, but for me rereading that post helped me see things on the thread that might have been thought problematic within the now-clarified vision for Epiphanies.
I haven't reread the whole Living With XY Chromosomes thread to see through new eyes whether similar issues were showing up there. I'm trying to reread, but it's exhausting reading it in light of the disappointing outcome that I know is coming up in several pages.
Yeah, looking back I regret a couple of my posts, and my failure to reach out and reconcile. I can see why those exchanges on MRR might be problematic.
Less so with XY, but it's the admins call.
One related policy announcement is now to be found here.
/Admin announcement