germanjoey posted:
well, im not gonna comment on the rest of that, but i will note that the moderation system here is different than SA's. the moderator has limited powers as far as thread enforcement goes; rather, it is the moderator's job to ensure that the whole forum is functioning. individual thread enforcement is instead left up to thread "monitors", who have the ability to put people on probation.

so, you have the ability to enforce your own thread, if you so choose.

ALSO, how could I forget, i *specifically* coded into this forum software the ability for any member of this forum to create their own protected thread, untouched by any mod, on their profile page. further, there is an "ignore list" feature that, while doing nothing in the main forums, does in fact both block any on it from posting on your page, but also viewing it - and vice versa. while i did think that the idea of a "safe_list" was a step too far, you are still absolutely capable of a semi-insular community of your very own.

i'm not exactly sure what else can be done, than that -- and i really did put a lot of thought into this problem -- other than y'all starting your own forum somewhere completely different, with private membership. this is a public forum. the idea of a "safe" space in the middle of a public commons is incredibly absurd to me. a safe space by definition is one that is closed off! so yes, while a man would never be able to sneak into a woman's only meeting IRL to concern-troll them, neither would a woman-only meeting be held in the middle of a busy public square... and, if they did hold their meeting in public, how could they take offense to the public watching? it doesn't make sense to me at all!

germanjoey posted:
germanjoey posted:
well, im not gonna comment on the rest of that, but i will note that the moderation system here is different than SA's. the moderator has limited powers as far as thread enforcement goes; rather, it is the moderator's job to ensure that the whole forum is functioning. individual thread enforcement is instead left up to thread "monitors", who have the ability to put people on probation.

so, you have the ability to enforce your own thread, if you so choose.


ALSO, how could I forget, i *specifically* coded into this forum software the ability for any member of this forum to create their own protected thread, untouched by any mod, on their profile page. further, there is an "ignore list" feature that, while doing nothing in the main forums, does in fact both block any on it from posting on your page, but also viewing it - and vice versa. while i did think that the idea of a "safe_list" was a step too far, you are still absolutely capable of a semi-insular community of your very own.

i'm not exactly sure what else can be done, than that -- and i really did put a lot of thought into this problem -- other than y'all starting your own forum somewhere completely different, with private membership. this is a public forum. the idea of a "safe" space in the middle of a public commons is incredibly absurd to me. a safe space by definition is one that is closed off! so yes, while a man would never be able to sneak into a woman's only meeting IRL to concern-troll them, neither would a woman-only meeting be held in the middle of a busy public square... and, if they did hold their meeting in public, how could they take offense to the public watching? it doesn't make sense to me at all!
Edited by germanjoey (today 12:32:12)

i think the reason a desire for a safe space exists is that there is a desire to participate in the community at large, only some part of your identity makes you feel as if you cannot do so. generally i would blame specific individuals in this case: what sort of contradiction has to exist internally to identify with a community but be unable to participate in it? of course, this is precisely why certain communities make efforts to introduce people into the fold (hello debutante balls, or more specific to forums the idea of the "introduction" forum). in this sense, many posters wished to use the original women's thread in LF as a sort of introduction into the community at large, from where they could eventually participate in the forum as a whole. of course, some people did this but most did not; the thread did persist, and closed itself off eventually, becoming an island megathread in the middle of the forum that ultimately ended up contributing nothing.

in another sense, forums safe spaces are an attempt to deal with contradictions within the community as a whole, while continuing to identify with the community. for instance, there were many women who identified with progressive or liberal politics and some of the roots of radicalism that were present in old lf; however they also perceived that the forum as a whole contained misogynistic elements in addition to competitive, overly masculine style social relations, which they could not deal with. in this sense, the safe space was an attempt to harmonize the identity of some posters with only some portion of LF's identity, essentially hacking off what some perceived as the "bad parts" of LF while preserving the good.

obviously, this led in many ways to the destruction of the forum; alas, such is liberalism - they wanted all of LF without the unsavory aspect: what, in my opinion, was the only real aspect of LF; they wanted to take it all without truly taking it all. they strove to sanitize, but they could only euthanize

Impper posted:
obviously, this led in many ways to the destruction of the forum; alas, such is liberalism - they wanted all of LF without the unsavory aspect: what, in my opinion, was the only real aspect of LF; they wanted to take it all without truly taking it all. they strove to sanitize, but they could only euthanize

pretty sure LF died because of cultish genderfreaks and their bufoonery, not the women's thread (i.e. it was the former's participation in the latter, not the existence of the latter)

SA is pretty much nothing but an blob of safe spaces and its very successful

babyfinland posted:
SA is pretty much nothing but an blob of safe spaces and its very successful

successful at what

Impper posted:
however they also perceived that the forum as a whole contained misogynistic elements in addition to competitive, overly masculine style social relations, which they could not deal with.

what were lf's "overly masculine style social relations" and how did they differ from what women would have preferred?

Vivian posted:
other than that they're pretty boring but maybe its cause i don't have depression, triggers or other various bad things people who aint me have and that's usually what people like chatting about on the internet.

also not an alcoholic + prescription psychodrug user.

safespaces on the internet are impossible to implement because of anonymity - also i'd like to add that a legitimate diversity of opinion is bound to make a few people feel unsafe because of their own insecurity. they will eventually end up as an echobox of casual dissent within prescribed parameters (enforced by "sensitive" men, heh) with nothing substantial being said or argued.

edit: imagine if affirmative action was an anonymous web-based program

Edited by NounsareVerbs (Sept. 13, 2011 13:20:21)