Cry Havoc, and Let Slip the Linkspam

[elf]

sparkindarkness Lambda Awards – disagree if you must, but put the privilege and homophobia away

eumelia My own fuzzy opinion about Lambda Literary Awards

gehayi DVD Commentary: Lambda Literary Awards

shemale So Lambda has stated that they will take into consideration…

dubious_virtue A lynching in the making (Same post as one from previous roundup; different site.)

dubious_virtue More re: Lambda Lit versus the Breeders
Selah March: More re: Lambda Lit versus the Breeders (Same post; different sites; different comments)

lanning well, now, here's a to-do

strangetwn_god Lambda Literary Wank

karjack Mini-rants

babel A few things.

Towleroad: Lambda Literary Foundation Announces New Rules, Leadership

TeddyPig: Because Someone Asked

Seeking Avalon: On Isms & Idiots (Part 2)

Seeking Avalon: On Isms & Idiots (Part 3)

emmyjag Lambda Literary Awards: Breeders need not apply

senior_witch Got into internet wank

Comments

[keeva]

And yes:

As I recall, you had your chance, and bowed out because you thought people would assume you couldn't be unbiased.

I created the community, and recruited both you and naraht, and I even wrote the tagline in question.

And when I felt that my outspoken views would be a liability to the community (both in the LJ/DW sense of "community" and the greater whole of the anti-oppression fandom community), I did step down, lest I harm the good that could be done.

Nobody is asking you to step down, of course. Just change the tagline.

[elf]

Sorry; I'd forgotten because it was naraht's linkspam work it was created to continue.

Want it back?

If so, I'll give it to you. (Or anyone else who wants to step up and nudge me out of the way.) If not, no, I won't change the tagline in the middle of a round of collections. Tempers are hot, and I'm not going to turn the comm into a fucking mood ring.

If I'm working alone, I'm working to my preferences. If I'm accountable to a group, which I'm willing to be, I'm happy to meet/discuss with them. I'm not, however, accountable to your particular biases.

I said at the start that I had strong & controversial opinions, and if people didn't think they'd be welcome, or the comm would suffer for them, I'd stay away. (Did I mention that a lot of them had to deal with sex? That sex is a religious matter to me, and a whole lot of people think I'm particularly wingnutty in that category? If not, I apologize, but there's certainly been plenty of time to see those tendencies in my journal.)

The offer to leave stands. But I'm not doing this work to try to match biases that aren't mine, no matter how popular--or even accurate--they are; I have more integrity than that.

My biases, my privileges, my status as several types of minority, my history, my hopes and fears, all go into what makes me willing and able to do this. I'm not willing to pretend to be someone else, nor to stand behind a comm I don't believe in.

I'm a member of the LGBT community; I have just as much right as you do to decide what is, and is not, harmful to us.

I suggest you start polling for people to take over for me.

[hl]

Er, I don't want to get into something that isn't my business, but... if the fear is that you're too biased to get all the links to both sides* (particularly the 'other' side), I'm pretty strongly (though I haven't been posting about it) in that other side, and I can, if coached a bit on how to actually go about it, collect links and dump them with you. Particularly if I could get one other person to take over Thursday, which is a day I can't be at the computer.

*I'm not saying you are. I don't know what prompted this.

[keeva]

No, I still don't want to run the community, nor want you to quit.

Do you always play the martyr so much?

[elf]

Martyr?

I'm doing something I more-or-less enjoy. I thought it was useful to other people, in the context of the Linkspam comm. If it's not, I'm willing to stop.

But telling me, "I don't like some of what you're doing, but you should keep doing it, only change the parts I don't like," isn't going to work.

Should you wish to convince me of my errors, you're doing it wrong.

[keeva]

Flounce if you like, if you're unable to handle minor criticism. It's your call. I've made my suggestion.

[sami]

You haven't, that I've seen, justified your suggestion.

Seriously: Where are the links that elf isn't posting? Where are the editorial comments reinforcing one view over another? Where, IN THIS COMM, is elf acting to reinforce oppression?

Because unless there is some fashion in which that's actually happening, what this looks like, to someone (like me) who hasn't been following the argument and has no formed opinion, is that you're pretty much saying that linkspam can't be moderated by someone who disagrees with you even if that disagreement does not, in fact, affect their work as linkspam moderator, and what the hell.