A Question

[The Philosopher]

This http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=189581&mesg_id=189581">thread was locked with the locking mod http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=189581&mesg_id=189619">stating, "We've decided this thread is a call-out."

However, in re-reading Sub Atomic's main text, I feel bad for any GLBT person that's trying to struggle with their own identity that comes in here and has to read what's allowed to posted in the name of 'civil discourse'" and seeing the response by the moderators, I can't help but feel that he is speaking something true.

I have to ask if this particular problem is considered by y'all who run DU (and the mods), the reality that closeted LGBT (Democrats) come to the site to see the what I believe y'all have labeled "imperfections" of the moderation system as well as the rules. And if that has been considered, what is the response?

There are realities that a person who is LGBT faces everyday that a non-LGBT person--even if an ally--does not. The latter person doesn't even understand sometimes because a problem we face is unthinkable to them, because they never experience it; or they just have no way to relate to it. Even our supporters can have trouble understanding because simply offering support doesn't necessarily mean one has acquired instant understanding. The LGBT Community is unequal in a lot of ways with the non-LGBT community and this is one of them.

So how are we supposed to react when seeing the imperfections of the system, not only being imperfect, but being used against us? It's not a matter of being told, "Your opinion is stupid and worthless." That doesn't drive people to suicide. It doesn't a great many people to live their lives hidden away from their loved ones, their friends, from anyone. It doesn't destroy generations of people. But what Sub Atomic spoke about, what he was referring to, we face that offline. And it does.

One of the beautiful things about DU is that it can act as a refuge for Democrats, especially those who live in heavily red areas (like I do). But when a person makes a statement like Sub Atomic and what is basically the site's response is to shut the conversation down, to silence that person--it doesn't look like a refuge for LGBT Democrats. And isn't that a shame?

And please don't just say something like, "DU3 will fix the problem," because if changing codes around could solve the problem, the Civil Rights Act would've solved every African-American's problem in society in regards to racism, employment, housing, et cetera, as soon as it was signed into law. This has to be about the people involved.

[Skinner]

1. Believe me, I understand that there is a problem here.

I do not get any pleasure from this situation. But I also believe I CANNOT adequately "fix" the problem under the current DU2 system. I just can't. I can try to do better, and the moderators can try to do better, and we have. But I think one thing is painfully clear: Better is not good enough. Right now, I'm the guy who is supposed to make everything better, but I'm obviously not up to the task. So I'm going to get out of the way.

So, if I'm not allowed to say "DU3 will fix the problem," then unfortunately I don't have an answer. Because DU3 is what I'm spending 75% of my time on these days, and I promise you that it will radically change the way the site is run. And I mean RADICALLY. I cannot promise that everyone will like DU3 better. But for better or worse, I can promise that it will completely change the way the site is run. It'll be a risk, but I believe it is a risk worth taking. Because too many people are dissatisfied with DU right now.

Here's a taste of what you're gonna get on DU3:

- Every DU member will be empowered to participate in how the site is run (if they so desire).

- No more all-powerful elite moderators.

- No more deleted posts.

- Total transparency.

- Separation of powers.

- The people who are empowered to take action are also responsible for their actions.

- Members have power to run the groups you participate in, however you see fit. Block out whomever you like. Lock any thread you like. You enforce your own group's mission, not me.

- The emphasis is on stopping disruption, rather than enforcing a long list of arbitrary rules.

I think DU3 is revolutionary and radical. I used to think the risk of radical change was too great, but now I believe that the risk of not changing is even greater. I believe it is going to work. But I also think there is a not-insignificant chance that it will fail. If it does fail, then we can go back to the DU2 approach. And we know how well that works.

[The Philosopher]

2. I think from the forum's perspective that isn't good enough.

I think when the LGBT posters read that DU3 will fix the problem it astounds and frustrates them to no end because some of the example of fixes given seem, from our point of view, not to be code based. For example, the "No more all-powerful elite moderators" example you provided doesn't seem to need any restructuring of code, but rather a restructuring of practice. If I remember correctly, the current practice now is that when a post is alerted, it takes a 100% agreement to take action and if that 100% can't be reached, nothing is done. What would need to be done to shift it, especially for one forum, to a majority vote? To us, something like that only takes a policy email and not hours upon hours of code work.

There is a disconnect between the Mod system and the realities of the GLBT Forum. There is currently a http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=189018&mesg_id=189018">thread right now where posters have alerted on an individual who has called men who wear makeup abnormal and if they wanted to do so, to become Drag Queens. It's been addressed by you before, but it's one of those cases where it's blatantly obvious to us what's going on, but it doesn't--to use a word you used in a similar situation--"technically" violate DU rules. However, it's like an acrostic, where the beginning letter of each paragraph combines to make a hidden sentence. As a people who encounter this sort of thing day after day, it's neon; but when we alert and provide the explanation, pointing it out, either nothing is done or ONE post is deleted, leaving a slew to keep the insulting poster's message going. And the only answer we get when we question what's going on is either denial of any problem or that anything can be done.

In another ATA http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=437x4953">thread started by Sub Atomic where he asked about the lack of action (from the GLBT Forum's perspective) on the part of the Admins (although he used your name) Earl replied basically that it was our job to decide what was the problem and the solution; that y'all did not get "any further follow-up" from us (although I wonder what the definition of follow-up is here, considering we replied plenty and still reply to this day) and that "Nevertheless, based on the feedback we received in those threads we decided to move forward by ourselves." Any suggestion offered by us and taken by y'all are used for DU3. This is another problem that the community seems to have. Whether it is true or not, intentional or not, there is an image of y'all brushing us off. In that thread, Earl claims we never "followed up" on an issue, yet in the same sentence admitted that (some of) the solutions we provided are being used for DU3. In the latest thread he referenced, you can see we responded plenty of times. But a final response from you was lacking. What are we supposed to do when we stop hearing from y'all? Then we're told, "Oh, you didn't get back to us?" It's pretty much a given that there would be a problem from such an action. And it touches on my original question in this thread.

Many of the actions one can see between the Admins and the GLBT Forum sets an image that we're not protected here and that there is no real desire (or maybe less harsh, maybe the need isn't seen) to protect us. We stand up for ourselves, we're http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=189581&mesg_id=189581">silenced. When we're attacked, the attackers are left alone or symbolically dealt with. Again, that has nothing to do with code. So what are we going to have to do to make sure things get better, to do what is right?

[Skinner]

3. Well, we are talking past each other here to some degree

which is understandable, because the Admins have a very good idea of how DU3 is going to work and you are just getting a taste of it for the first time. I'll try to break some of this down for you.

You write:

There is a disconnect between the Mod system and the realities of the GLBT Forum. There is currently a thread right now where posters have alerted on an individual who has called men who wear makeup abnormal and if they wanted to do so, to become Drag Queens. It's been addressed by you before, but it's one of those cases where it's blatantly obvious to us what's going on, but it doesn't--to use a word you used in a similar situation--"technically" violate DU rules. However, it's like an acrostic, where the beginning letter of each paragraph combines to make a hidden sentence. As a people who encounter this sort of thing day after day, it's neon; but when we alert and provide the explanation, pointing it out, either nothing is done or ONE post is deleted, leaving a slew to keep the insulting poster's message going.

You also write:

In another ATA thread started by Sub Atomic where he asked about the lack of action (from the GLBT Forum's perspective) on the part of the Admins (although he used your name) Earl replied basically that it was our job to decide what was the problem and the solution; that y'all did not get "any further follow-up" from us...

EarlG was referring to the very specific proposals in http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=221&topic_id=174572">my "ideas" thread, one of which would have solved your "disconnect" problem. I wrote:

2. Do you want Democratic Underground to create a new "forum liaison" position for the GLBT forum (and any other forum that wants it), who would have the power to block any person from their assigned forum for any reason? If so, which person (or people) would you like to serve in this position?

This is what EarlG was talking about when he said we received no follow-up. You mention that you are frustrated. Well, I must admit that it is pretty frustrating for me to hear people expressing their anger about things posted in the GLBT forum, when I offered a solution to that problem back in the spring -- a solution that would have 100% guaranteed that NOBODY could post in that forum if you did not want them there.

The reason why EarlG said "Nevertheless, based on the feedback we received in those threads we decided to move forward by ourselves," is because we thought that despite the lack of consensus from GLBT forum members on whether we should do this, we continued to think it was a good idea. So on DU3 forums and groups will no longer be policed by a small group of elite moderators who are responsible for trying to deal with problems everywhere on the site. Instead, forums and groups will be policed by the very DU members who have a particular interest in those forums and groups, and who wish to take charge of running them.

We are calling these people "Hosts." If you or any of your friends wish to become a Host of the GLBT forum, you are welcome. You will have the power to lock any thread in your forum, and you will have the power to block any member from posting in your forum. (You will NOT have the power to delete posts -- that is going to be taken care of by a different aspect of the DU3 moderating system that I'm not going to go into here.)

So on DU3, the GLBT forum will be yours to deal with as you see fit. You won't have to come running to me or the moderators every time there is a problem, and you won't have to worry about us dealing with it differently to the way you would. And you should also understand that Hosting is a not a one-way street -- you will have to take responsibility for how your forum is run. I will no longer be there to screw up your forum by making bad decisions.

This is just one of the radical changes to the moderating system that I was talking about. There is a lot more too it which will be revealed soon enough, but I hope that you can already see the value of this particular piece of the puzzle.

[The Philosopher]

4. I don't think we are.

I've commented in both my posts now about the image that's created with the Admin/Mod interaction and the GLBT Forum. Apparently, from your perspective, you see an effort on your part to please a section of DU and that section not doing their part, except to continuously complain; while from our perspective we experience something we can see with our eyes closed, come to the Admins for help only to be told time and time again that it's on our head for a solution and that the Admins are http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1299874&mesg_id=1299874">washing their hands of us or that a software that has an unknown release date (so far as I know, and I'm probably not alone in that) will solve all the problems. Now that may work for the Admins and the majority of DU members and we could talk about it 'till the cows come home, but those are actions which aren't working for us in the forum.

So, let's put that aside for now. You say you never got an answer about this:

2. Do you want Democratic Underground to create a new "forum liaison" position for the GLBT forum (and any other forum that wants it), who would have the power to block any person from their assigned forum for any reason? If so, which person (or people) would you like to serve in this position?

Whether it's accepted or not, I'll answer on behalf of the forum: yes. Yes we want a Forum Liaison position. We want that person to be someone who understands what we're going through and who we can trust will do the right thing by us. We want at least three. But the particulars we would like you to discuss that with us. Once the Admins and the Forum get on the same page, you can help us selecting the 1-3 people needed for the position.

I was always a supporter of this idea. I always felt it was someone who could have access to the reasons behind actions taken by the regular moderators, who could take care of the bigoted posts that are left alone by mods because they don't see it as bigoted, someone we can trust and go to rather than having to express things angrily at y'all all the time. So if you're still interested in solving the problem, you have your answer from the community. All we need is your answer.

[Skinner]

5. OK. Let's do it.

Now, here's one issue: at this point we're kinda working against the clock, because we're going to switch over to DU3 in mid-December. On DU3, every small forum is going to have their own Host or Hosts (that's what we're calling them on DU3), who will have a number of powers in their assigned forums -- blocking people out of the forum, assigning people as Hosts, locking and pinning threads.

So, I don't think it is in our interest to spend time hammering out a bunch of details that are going to be moot in one month. If you want this to happen on DU2, we should just do it asap. You pick whomever you want -- you don't need me to tell you who is qualified to do this job.

The people you select will have the power to block anyone they like out of the GLBT forum. If Elad tells me that this functionality can be programmed relatively quickly, then we'll set it up so the chosen people can block people out of the GLBT forum without going to the DU Admins. But if it's going to take a long time to program, then we'll have to do it in a low-tech way: The liaisons contact an admin and the admin does the deed.