GLBT Forum Liaison

[The Philosopher]

As long-time posters know, there have been problems between the DU Admins and the GLBT Forum regarding the moderation of bigoted/attacking posters. For a long while we've discussed with them that there is a problem and some solutions were offered, but things (as we're all aware of) went quiet. This pretty much upset GLBT Forum members.

So instead of waiting for DU3 any longer (not knowing he was about to release the release date), I asked Skinner to let us have one of the solutions offered and he agreed. The only condition so far is that we get it in gear quickly as things will be different under DU3.

You can read it all here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=437x5009

So we've got our chance to improve things.

I say we give ourselves the deadline of Monday, November 21st, of having the positions filled and their roles/powers adequately described. I proposed an odd-number of people who use a majority vote to enact the heavy punishments, but the actual number can be decided between now and next Monday. The position would be basically OUR set of moderators, who can delete and lock posts or even ban posters from coming into the forum if they keep being disruptive. The position would also enable us to have a stronger voice when going to the Admins, so instead of having to go to the ATA to ask a question, the person in the position can do it and we can at least feel a bit more trust in the answer received.

As Skinner says, this is just until DU3. According to him, the position will be inherent in the design. So this gives us a way of testing out if it will work or not in keeping the GLBT Forum a safe place for not only regular posters, but those who haven't signed up yet and only read the posts; those who are in the closet and needing a positive place to give them hope.

I think we should nominate names and then have a poll to select the people who fill the position. Someone will have to handle that poll, because I'm unable to post one myself. If anyone is interested in that, let me know.

So what say everyone?

[xchrom]

1. Agreed. Nt

[DURHAM D]

2. I nominate yardwork. nt

[yardwork]

13. Thank you! You are very kind, but I can't take this on right now.

I'm not sure how I feel about the idea, anyway, although I will whole-heartedly support whomever is selected.

That was very kind of you to suggest me. You're a sweetie. :hug:

[Sub Atomic]

3. Thank you for doing this.

[The Philosopher]

18. Don't thank me

I probably wouldn't have started my ATA thread if you hadn't stirred up some fuss. It's going to take us all to get some change around here, so this is all our a-doings.

[cate94]

4. Agree

[Pab Sungenis]

5. I think this is a mistake.

Under the new system these "Hosts" are going to be able to do the exact same thing and lock people out arbitrarily. So if these "Hosts" are drawn from the same bigoted pool of people that make up the current Moderator pool then we'll have GLBT for ourselves and will end up locked out of everywhere else.

So gay bashing will not only be prevalent in GD: P, it will be protected de jure instead of de facto as it is now. Any criticism of Obama's anti-gay tendencies? Smite! Be gone you ungrateful little faggot.

DU3's system is going to make things worse.

That said, if we HAVE to go down this road I second the nomination of yardwork and also put dsc forward.

(Edit to remove an amazingly appropriate smiley.)

[yardwork]

14. I tend to agree with your concerns about this. However, I will support whomever we choose.

It's very kind of you to suggest me but I can't take this on right now. Thank you, though. :hi:

[The Philosopher]

16. I agree with your concerns.

However, this is a chance--even if during a small window--to take them head on. One of the problems has always been too much control over how this forum is treated by those who may believe they understand but honestly don't. The only answer I can see is to put ourselves in the position to defend ourselves and protect others properly.

If this works out, when DU3 comes along and the Hosts end up being as you say, we have something we can point to that tells Skinner that works. We are at a different risk than the other forums for what I believe the Admins have called "trolls." That risk needs a different response than what GD: Presidency would need.

Would this liaison only work in the GLBT Forum? Would they have some sort of extension to other forums in equal or lesser power than here? I think that's something we need to discuss in the next few days.

Remember, this liaison won't be picked by the Admins. Skinner won't have any say (I hope) over who fills the positions. That is our decision as a forum. Only those who identify as GLBTQ get a say in this, because we're the ones being directly affected. I know we have allies and that last sentence sounds a douche thing to say; but I hope they understand.

Right now all we have the power to do is make a few complaints in the ATA or find another message board. This liaison position gives us the opportunity to do something different, something that might actually affect Admins viewpoint about us and our treatment for the better.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

6. agreed. i would like to nominate someone who has managed

to not get banned or put on time out, during their time at DU. its not because those who got banned/suspended necessarily were at fault, but many of us didnt get banned during this time, and obv showed some amount of self-restraint.

i dont really care who it is, but i do care that they can show an appropriate amount of restraint. i think its a needed quality when dealing in these situations

[DURHAM D]

7. Agree.

[William769]

8. Would like to see it happen but am doubtful of the time constraint.

Since people are voting my vote would go to xchrom.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

9. i would support that in a hearbeat!

[mitchtv]

10. Oh me too! nt

[WillParkinson]

11. Fourthing the nomination...

For XChrom.

For lack of a better reason he's got great taste in athletes.



And because I think he can be completely fair without seeming impartial.

[TriMera]

12. I would also vote for xchrom. n/t

[Prism]

15. There's no point

We're merely discussing a cosmetic difference to paper over the inherent problems underlying DU - administration that has no idea how to talk to or treat LGBT people. We can haul in as many gay people as we want. At the end of the day, the same administrators will be there, judging whether or not LGBTers' opinions are worthy or unworthy of comment or action.

Look how awesome Mending Fences worked out. The homophobia on DU certainly hasn't abated in all this time. How many years has this gone on?

Too many brick walls, too few heads.

Just stop banging. They don't care what gay people do here. Stay, go, whatever. That's the attitude.

[The Philosopher]

17. It’s possible Skinner and I are seeing it differently

But, myself, I don’t see this as mere cosmetic. Can I be wrong? You’re damn right. But I’d rather find out definitely. I see this position has giving US the control and the responsibility of what gets locked or banned in this forum. If something goes wrong, it gives us a better chance than simply relying on the Administration and any negative views they have of us.

It’s not like I didn’t notice what went on in my ATA thread with Skinner. But I see this as being more irritating than simply not doing something. After all, if you can’t win, you can at least be irritating.

If they are trying to ignore us into silence, if they’re trying to denial us into silence, please don’t let them. Let’s try to make this liaison position a win for our side.

[ruggerson]

19. I'm not so concerned about this forum

Although it will be nice for us to have some more control over what occurs here.

The worst bigotry on this site occurs in the larger forums and much of it goes untouched. Us having "hosts" here will not address that problem, which has almost become institutionalized.

When Skinner had the "free for all" thread (which was a great idea - he should do another one) most of the real antagonizers of the LGBT community were too scared to enter the discussion. They only feel comfortable gay-baiting, when they are protected by the system currently in place.

THEY are the problem. Not the random bigot that every so often shows up in the GLBT forum.

If anyone can come up with a creative solution for THAT, it would go a long way towards making DU a more gay-friendly environment.

[WillParkinson]

20. I can come up with a creative solution but, as a Democrat...

I'm against capital punishment. :P

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[William769]

22. To the deleted message above.

It's not what you ask but how you ask the question. Trust me I've been there & done that. I am willing to give it one last shot I would ask you to please do the same. This is of course my personal opinion but I feel this is the closest we have come on both sides coming together. We have hung in here this long, I am willing to give it the time frame asked. "The Philosopher" and "Sub Atomic" have done very well (I only wished I could convey my thoughts half as good as "The Philosopher" does, but my fingers just don't work well with my thoughts".

[Pab Sungenis]

23. There's only one way to ask a question.

Blunt and to the point. And the predictable reaction to the question proves that this will solve nothing.

The entire problem could have been fixed within 48 hours of "Mending Fences" starting. A solution was offered then and there. It was ignored, and the problem persisted. This last round of deletions proves the problem.

There is an easy solution and the Admins have said they're not going to do it.

[Sub Atomic]

24. let's not let this very important discussion fall to the wayside.

I will support any decision made by this community.

Let's not let another opportunity to run our own show slip away.

[Pab Sungenis]

25. It's already fallen by the wayside.

It's been seen for what it is: more eyewash that will only make things worse, not better.

I would elaborate on why, but the reasons it won't work would smite that conversation if we tried to start it.

[Sub Atomic]

26. *sigh*

[Pab Sungenis]

27. I share your frustration.

The "liaison" will be able to keep a couple of low-level disruptors out, but won't be able to kick out the people who have really caused the problems here.

The "liaison" won't be able to stop certain people from locking or disappearing threads they don't approve of, as has been seen here in the past couple of days. Look at the "deleted messages" in these threads. You can't look at the threads on the issue that have gotten flushed down the memory hole. And they've done it anonymously.

These same people will also continue to operate elsewhere on the board to shut down gay-positive discussions, discussions that suggest that Obama is anything but the Savior come from Jerusalem to make Our Lives Perfect for the Gay Community, or discussions that suggest that anything less than marriage is second-class citizenship. And they'll use their power to block "consensus" for the deletion of gay bashing posts and threads as often as they can, and to keep bashers from getting tombstoned.

All the "liaison" will do is give an opportunity for the Administrators to pretend to have done something and offer them an excuse to ignore the real problem as it continues.

There is a simple solution to this problem. I offered it in the early days of "Mending Fences" and it was dismissed. We're not even allowed to discuss it here because the people affected by it would make that discussion disappear.

Just as "civil unions" have proven to be a big failure by allowing those who think "God is in the mix" to say "see? We gave you some rights. So sit down and shut up," this liaison will fail because it will allow the abuse to continue unchecked but also allow the Administrators to pretend they've done something.