linkspam_mod: A metal chain (Default)
[personal profile] linkspam_mod
We really appreciate all the feedback that you've offered on the warnings issue, both positive and negative. It's good to hear when we get things right and it helps us even more when we get suggestions as to how we can do better.

One important point that the discussion seems to reinforce is the idea that offering warnings is an inherently subjective enterprise. A post that is viewed by one person as enlightening and important can be viewed by another as marginalizing and hateful. Subjectivity comes not just from the commenter(s) but from the fact that people will inevitably respond to texts in different ways. Even warnings themselves can be read in different ways: as commentary, as reading tools, as educational tools, as activism, as value judgment, as a means of bringing problematic content to light. And, yes, also as criticism, attack, or proof of undesired bias. In all of this discussion, the mod team has attempted to pay particular attention to those who find warnings a necessary tool for reading and participating in anti-oppression discussions.

In general the message we've taken away from your comments is that warnings are useful for many (if not all) people for a whole host of reasons, even given their inherent subjectivity. It seems that they would be more helpful if we could improve their specificity and come up with a set of guidelines that would improve both consistency and transparency. (Particularly when it comes to tricky intersectional and intragroup issues.) Ideally we would like our warnings to function as a means of illuminating and improving the discussion rather than shutting it down.

So... we as the [personal profile] linkspam_mod team will now be going away and trying to put together a coherent set of guidelines on warnings. This may take some time, but hopefully not too long. Naturally the guidelines will be for your use as well as ours, and once we've drawn them up we will present them in [community profile] linkspam so that we can hear your thoughts.

If you have further feedback right now we're still eager to hear it. You can comment on this post, the previous one, or get in touch with us by PM. (As per usual, comments are screened by default but will be unscreened unless they are derailing, abusive or off-topic. If you want your comment to stay screened, please say so.)

One final note: thank you to everyone who expressed concern about burn-out on the part of the mods! For the time being we feel that we have our workload under control, but we'll certainly be looking at our warning policy with an eye towards keeping it that way.
linkspam_mod: A metal chain (Default)
[personal profile] linkspam_mod
Several areas of concern regarding the issue of warnings have led to this post.

One: The process of reading lengthy threads in multiple intersectional discussions has proven to be complicated and exhausting. Because of the inherent subjectivity of warnings, deciding when to apply them is a difficult and lengthy process for the linkspam mods. We realize that offering full and ideal warnings may be a task beyond our current capacities and therefore wonder whether it would be preferable to cease warning altogether if our current warnings system proves to be unacceptable.

Two: We have received several comments requesting us to rethink our warnings policy/practices. Requests for ending the practice exist alongside requests to expand the range of things we warn for.

We understand our warnings have been inconsistent, and we have been discussing that, as well as the nature of what to warn for. Since no single Linkspam post is the work of one person (in most cases, three-five people participate), a certain inconsistency may be inevitable.

Our philosophy is that we are not aiming for objectivity. We know we will fail which is why we welcome feedback. As a result of the recent feedback we have received, we are opening up this thread to solicit reader commentary on the issue of warnings.

1. Comment settings will allow anonymous comments.
2. All comments are screened
3. Comments will be unscreened as long as they are not derailing, abusive or off-topic (unless poster requests the comment remain screened).

We would especially appreciate feedback on the following, but of course you are free to respond on any issue.

1. Should Linkspam continue warnings?
2. What kind of warnings are most helpful? Least helpful?
3. If you believe we should offer warnings, how important are they for you?


ETA: When we say we're not objective, we don't mean we allow our personal dislike of a poster to cloud our judgement. In fact, we (as a matter of policy) recuse ourselves from warning when we've a personal history with the poster, or when our personal opinion of zie has become too entangled for us to be neutral. What we mean is that we will always try to be on the side of anti-oppression, and that we try to see issues under that light before any others. Us not being objective is to be taken in context of the usual emphasis on objectivity for journalists, and criticisms we have received pointing out that warning was 'editorialising'.' /ETA

Welcome...

Jan. 1st, 2010 07:43 pm
linkspam_mod: A metal chain (Default)
[personal profile] linkspam_mod
Welcome to the new and hopefully improved version of [community profile] linkspam! The community is now run by a team of co-moderators: [personal profile] aedh, [personal profile] hl, [personal profile] inkstone, [personal profile] ithiliana, [personal profile] kaz, [personal profile] melannen, [personal profile] naraht, and [personal profile] the_future_modernes.

We've made some changes in how the community operates. New linkspams should start in a day or two. Until then you might want to peruse:

Linkspam policies

Moderator bios

Suggestions/feedback/critique post

We're always looking for more volunteers to add to our team, especially because we recognize that the current moderation team has gaps in its areas of expertise. If you are interested in collecting links, formatting posts, or simply in providing advice and perspective, please let us know. We are considering the idea of forming an advisory board for the latter purpose.

[community profile] linkspam is still a work in progress. We hope that you'll bear with us and give us your thoughts as we continue to refine our approach.
linkspam_mod: A metal chain (Default)
[personal profile] linkspam_mod
[personal profile] hl is an Argentinian woman in her early twenties; she has been a member of online fandom for about five or six years now, and is multifannish. She's supposedly a student (biology), though she doesn't actually do much studying. She's white, lower-middle class, momentarily able-bodied, cis-gendered, and considers herself vaguely culturally jewish. Her interest in anti-oppression work began with learning about race online, and has extended to intersectionality.

[personal profile] inkstone ([livejournal.com profile] blackmagie) is a 30-year-old Filipino-American cisgendered woman whose family immigrated to the US when she was a toddler. She's also middle-class, able-bodied, thin, and has a history with eating disordered behavior. Offline, she works in applied scientific research while her online fannish activities revolve around mostly anime, manga, and the SFF and YA book genres. When it comes to anti-oppression work, her personal interests lay with race and gender but her main focus is intersectionality of all types.

[personal profile] ithiliana ([livejournal.com profile] ithiliana) is a 54 years old, white, middle-class, cisgendered, queer woman who is a U.S. Citizen. She is a solitary animistic pagan. She was active in Trek fandom during the late 1970s, in APA fandom during the 1980s, GAFIATED, then came back to LOTR fandom in 2003. She has been fat most of adult life and has cyclical biochemical depression. She is an aca-fan who does scholarship on fan studies (as well as on more traditional literary topics and does fan meta on gender and race oppression. She is interested in intersectionality and is currently educating herself on trans and ableist issues.

[personal profile] kaz is a German cis woman in her twenties who has been a member of online fandom for about eight years and has a secret double life as a maths PhD student in the UK. Her user name on Livejournal is [livejournal.com profile] kazaera. She is white, middle-class, thin, and an atheist from a Christian cultural background. On the sexuality side of things, she is aromantic-tending-homoromantic asexual and identifies as queer. She also has Asperger's, stutters, has difficulties with anxiety and depression and considers herself disabled. Her main interest in anti-oppression is disability rights, especially its intersection with feminism and/or asexuality, but she does her best to be an ally for issues she is not personally affected by.

[personal profile] naraht ([livejournal.com profile] emily_shore) is a cisgendered white American woman in her late twenties. Her involvement in linkspamming started with MammothFail and she hasn't yet managed to stop. Unschooled in the US and then educated to doctoral level in the UK, she is a historian of gender, education and the family. She is currently able-bodied, thin, straight, and middle-class. Raised in several Christian denominations, she identifies as a Greek Orthodox agnostic. Her interests include feminism (with all of its flaws), children's rights, religious issues and, on an academic rather than personal level, the phenomenon of modern antisemitism.

[More bios may be forthcoming.]
linkspam_mod: A metal chain (Default)
[personal profile] linkspam_mod
Basics

1) We are an anti-oppression group of activist archivists. We aim to be comprehensive in our linkspams but not impartial. We do not subscribe to the belief that there is is an objective perspective on any oppression, nor will we try to present "two" sides equally. We are biased in favour of oppressed voices.

2) We understand that intersectional practices are vital in anti-oppression work. We will try to focus on imbroglios relating to power imbalances and conflicts between minority and majority group members. Such imbroglios include but are not limited to the interlocking systems of oppression relating to ethnicity, race, nationality, religion, class, gender identities and presentations, size or weight, age, sexual identities, and disability. This list is not meant to be exhaustive and we are open to connecting to imbroglios relating to other aspects of power and identity as they arise.

3) We are positioned primarily in LiveJournal and Dreamwidth. Our main concern is anti-oppression issues as they impact SFF and transformative works fan communities. We define fan communities broadly in regard to media and fannish activities and believe that anti-oppression work will, at times, connect with online areas beyond fan spaces.

4) We are currently run by a team of eight co-moderators. We are considering a proposal to set up an an Advisory Board that would oversee Linkspam and welcome feedback on that proposal.

Collecting links

1) We aim to cover issues that prompt substantive discussion and debate. Between six and ten links is enough for an initial linkspam post. As such this is the minimum threshold for a linkspam topic to register on our radar.

2) We collect links through: word of mouth, our flists, other people's flists, our delicious network, links from other posts, use of search engines and recommendations from our alert readers. Links can be recommended by: commenting on a recent post, sending a PM to a mod or to [personal profile] linkspam_mod, tagging a post on delicious with "for:linkspam", or sending an email to the linkspam_mod address. (linkspam_mods@yahoo.com)

3) We will link to posts on LJ, DW, LJ clones and other blogs. We do not generally link to articles on mainstream news sites.

4) We link to posts that offer substantive content. We only link to "signal boost" posts if they already contain a significant discussion in comments. We are particularly cautious when linking to "signal boost" posts that are not overtly anti-oppression, as we do not wish to drown out productive discussion.

5) We will publicize relevant festivals/carnivals because we consider them to be substantive anti-oppression discussions.

6) We will be compiling links using the Linkspam account on Delicious (http://delicious.com/linkspam). Different volunteers will be posting links at Delicious, tagging and sorting links, compiling and editing linkspams in GoogleDocs.

7) We use a single [personal profile] linkspam_mod account to post links and comments. As a result, the person posting may not necessarily be the person who compiled the linkspam. We believe having a single account provides a mechanism for collective responsibility in that persistent failings by one member are the responsibility of the team as a whole if nothing is done to remedy the situation. At the same time, we recognize that this practice may present problems in terms of transparency and accountability. We are willing to reconsider it if significant issues arise, and welcome suggestions or critiques.

Posting links

1) For most significant imbroglios, we will aim to post one linkspam per day. Very active discussions may require two posts per day.

2) In general we post links without comment or categorization. We indicate the title of the post (when it is titled) and either the username of the poster or the blog where it was posted.

3) Warnings will be made based on toxicity of post and/or comments. We will warn for content of post and comments at the time the link is added. If, at a later time, readers see that the warning or lack thereof is no longer accurate, we would appreciate a comment. While we cannot guarantee that an unwarned link will be safe, we will attempt to warn to the best extent that we can. Since we are imperfect, we welcome information regarding incomplete or incorrect warnings. Our priority for link-colllecting is oppressed groups and allies which will affect how our warnings are presented.

4) If posts are mainly signal boosts, we will mark them as such.

5) When we link to a post, we (where practicable) leave a comment stating that we have done so. If a post is particularly offensive, the linkspammer may at hir discretion decide not to leave such a comment.

6) As we exist in order to provide an archive and record of discussion, we do not remove links to posts, except in exceptional circumstances. While we discourage requests to take down a link, we will consider them on a case-by-case basis. We are very unlikely to remove links to posts that were made from a position of privilege.

7) We do not link to posts that were locked from the start. However we do not remove links to posts that have since been locked. (Except in exceptional circumstances, see above.) Where practicable we will add a note saying that the post has been locked.

Moderating comments

1) All comments will be screened by default.

2) Comments will be unscreened if they are new links or if they represent a critique of Linkspam which the poster has requested to be made public. Comments, anonymous or named, that try to engage in discussion of the content of links will not be unscreened.

3) We allow anonymous commenting but we only unscreen such comments if they are signed in some way.

4) We do not unscreen abusive or threatening comments.

Suggestions, feedback and concerns

1) While ideally linkspam moderators would always be on the side of the less privileged, we realise that in practice this will not always be the case and that intersectional issues lead to a great deal of complexity. Although the linkspam team is dedicated to anti-oppression work, each member of the team will have their own individual views and biases. What we ask of moderators is that they be proactive in identifying their own biases, pay attention to the voices of those who are less privileged, and remain aware of the existence of intersectionality. In cases where an individual moderator's outlook is in conflict with the linkspam ethos regarding a particular issue, they may choose or be asked to recuse themselves from dealing with that issue.

2) Because we recognise that we may fall short when dealing with complex issues, we welcome privilege checks, suggestions and critiques from our readers. Such feedback is an important part of our work.

3) We accept feedback via: comments on a recent posts, PM to one or more of the moderators or to the [personal profile] linkspam_mod account, e-mail to the linkspam account, and by comment on a dedicated suggestions post. We also pay attention to feedback that is not addressed to us directly (critiques of linkspam found in blog posts, for instance).

4) All critiques offered privately will be kept confidential to the linkspam moderation team unless their originator requests otherwise. (For example, a request to unscreen a comment, etc.)

5) When we receive a critique, we will acknowledge it as soon as practicable. We will let its originator know that it will be discussed by the linkspam moderator team and give them an idea how long they will have to wait for a response. We will ask them in what form they would like a response and whether we may address their concerns publicly.

6) We will post in the moderators' community, [community profile] linkspam_jaotr, in order to discuss critiques. While we will aim to reach consensus on how to deal with them, we will place significant weight on the opinions of those moderators and advisors who have personal, direct knowledge of the type(s) of oppression concerned.
linkspam_mod: A metal chain (Default)
[personal profile] linkspam_mod
Because we recognize that we may fall short when dealing with complex issues, we welcome privilege checks, suggestions and critiques from our readers. If you have an issue you would like to raise with the Linkspam moderation team, you can:

1. Comment on any post. (Comments will be screened.)

2. PM one or more of the moderators: [personal profile] aedh, [personal profile] hl, [personal profile] inkstone, [personal profile] ithiliana, [personal profile] kaz, [personal profile] melannen, [personal profile] naraht, [personal profile] the_future_modernes

NOTE: Any message sent to individual mods will be circulated to the entire group for discussion.

3. Contact the Linkspam account:

Email: linkspam_mods@yahoo.com
PM: [personal profile] linkspam_mod

4. Comment on this post: comments are screened and your comment will not be made public unless you specifically request it.
naraht: Star cluster (nasa-Star Cluster)
[personal profile] naraht
Effective immediately, [community profile] linkspam will be going on a temporary hiatus. This is to allow time to recruit a broader team of linkspammers and to develop policies that will hopefully re-affirm the community's commitment to anti-oppression work.

[personal profile] elf has agreed to step down as moderator and maintainer. As the co-maintainer of the community, I take full responsibility for not having stepped in earlier to moderate the discussions that have occurred over the past few days. I took my eye off the ball and I apologize for that.

Comments on this entry will be closed. Please feel free to PM me with comments or concerns, and particularly if you are interested in becoming a part of the [community profile] linkspam team. I will be on holiday for the following week but will do my best to respond promptly as soon as I return.

ETA: Due to the hiatus and to my upcoming absence, I am freezing discussion on the earlier posts.
elf: Subvert (Subvert)
[personal profile] elf
I've been asked (told?) to step down as mod of [community profile] linkspam.
[personal profile] hl is willing to help, but has limited time right now.
[personal profile] haunted has said s/he'd be willing to help, but won't deal with me.

Thats, um, it for volunteers that I know of.

This is either a call for volunteers, or a call for a vote of confidence, or both. If I'm too wanky to do this right, I'll stop. I'm potentially willing to change, but my detractors can verify that I've got weird button issues and I don't take to change smoothly. (Some might say I'm not actually willing to change.)

Read more... )
[personal profile] keeva
If you want to help out, and maybe do a week or so as a Junior Archivist of the Revolution, please leave a comment here, and you'll be contacted by one of the current admins.

Linkspamming involves gathering the links by surfing around, by following links, by searching on google or IceRocket, and then posting them here to the community.

One more thing, if someone with a paid LJ account wants to make a syndication feed (such as calling it "linkspam_feed"), that would be appreciated! That way LJ users can follow along effortlessly.

Done! LiveJournal folks can follow along by subscribing to [livejournal.com profile] linkspam_feed, here. Thank you, [personal profile] cimorene!

Profile

linkspam: A chain of links (Default)
Anti-Oppression Linkspam Community

April 2010

S M T W T F S
    123
456789 10
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags