Forthcoming changes to group settings
ForumFeminist Theory
Melde dich bei LibraryThing an, um Nachrichten zu schreiben.
1southernbooklady
This group was one of the first on LT to experiment with having a moderator. Since the moderator position was created, it has rarely needed to be invoked. However, the recent format changes on LT have changed or disabled some of the moderator's abilities. A moderator can hide or delete messages, but can no longer remove members from the group without changing the group's settings from "anyone can post" to "must join to post."
I am recommending we make this change, even if we rarely use it, so that we have all the original tools available for making FT a positive space that lives up to its group terms:
Civil discussion is welcome.
I am recommending we make this change, even if we rarely use it, so that we have all the original tools available for making FT a positive space that lives up to its group terms:
We seek on-topic, respectful, and constructive discussion about feminism. The validity of feminism is a given. Dissent is acceptable; disruption is not. Comments should pertain to the thread topic. Obnoxious, insulting, abusive, and threatening comments are unacceptable.
Wähle: Should we change the terms "to join to post"?
Aktueller Stand: Ja 12, Nein 1, Unentschieden 2
2LolaWalser
Generally I dislike forcing people to join in order to post, but in this situation it seems like the only way to end harassment.
3Jesse_wiedinmyer
If this suggestion is in reference to my own recent posts, I'd have to suggest that I have joined and have been a member for years, even if my participation is generally limited to lurking and reading, except in situations where the current geopolitical climate requires more direct interaction.
As always (and as repeatedly stated), I'll abide by your decisions in any case, even if I don't personally agree with them.
As for a different poster, they recently asked that I "go away". I'll gladly respect that request/boundary insofar as direct communication is concerned.
Boundaries are important to me.
Edit - I will still maintain that my own discussion of (a rather minor, at least in terms of those I've been subjected to) act of sexual violence is entirely adjacent to and within the group's stated purview of ending sexual violence. I fail to see how discussing my own violation isn't germane to the discussion at hand, as the group has agreed that it is indeed an act of assault, therefore an act of abuse, and performed by a person in position of power over a person in a subordinate to them.
As far as I have been informed, this is precisely the sort of issue that metoo addresses (maybe Tarana can disabuse me of this notion if she chooses to respond).
As always (and as repeatedly stated), I'll abide by your decisions in any case, even if I don't personally agree with them.
As for a different poster, they recently asked that I "go away". I'll gladly respect that request/boundary insofar as direct communication is concerned.
Boundaries are important to me.
Edit - I will still maintain that my own discussion of (a rather minor, at least in terms of those I've been subjected to) act of sexual violence is entirely adjacent to and within the group's stated purview of ending sexual violence. I fail to see how discussing my own violation isn't germane to the discussion at hand, as the group has agreed that it is indeed an act of assault, therefore an act of abuse, and performed by a person in position of power over a person in a subordinate to them.
As far as I have been informed, this is precisely the sort of issue that metoo addresses (maybe Tarana can disabuse me of this notion if she chooses to respond).
4Jesse_wiedinmyer
Ein Gruppen-Admin hat diese Nachricht gelöscht.
Anmelden um mitzuschreiben.