"We don't allow namecalling, you Troll"

 I'm not sure why you sent me a message and posted in here, but I'll respond in open forum.

I think my blog speaks for itself - "The idea of anyone suggesting that so and so needs anger management or sensitivity training on women's issues, to me, is a veiled insult that can be as damaging as the original "offensive" statement".

My blog was not about you, Rick.  It's about something that I see in here, in The Olympian and in real life, that being when someone shows a little emotion about something, someone decides that they got their PHD and begin with the "anger management" stuff.  I'm in wonder how anyone can make such a diagnosis from reading someone's written word. 

I could take offense to your comment - "do either of you have anything positive to add to this discussion" - considering I started the discussion.  I think what I said had lots of positive merit to it, as I was hoping that my post would get people to stop using such manipulative phrases on an internet blog.  Rather than get offended, I'll just accept that you and I maybe disagree on what is determined as "positive" on this discussion.

I have not complained about being oppressed, so I'll guess your comment was directed at someone other than me.

Please read my blog for the content.  It was directed at a behavior, not a person.

"There is only one race, the human race" - The Neville Brothers

 to figure out the rough content, Rick.  Read the rest of the blog - the other posts.  I'll bet I can guess what Norm said, or come darned close to it.

You still don't see to get the point of my blog, though.  It's not about Norm's post, it's about the desire on the part of others to suggest anger management or sensitivity training for people.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that type of post is nothing short of trying to "one-up" another poster.

So, for the final time.  I didn't see Norm's exact quote, but I'm also not going to suggest that someone seek anger management assistance just because their post offended me.  If so, I'd have to say you're getting close to that line, and I don't hold a PHD to make such a diagnosis.

"There is only one race, the human race" - The Neville Brothers

 I was just sent a PM that repeated the phrase Norm used.  As I said in return, it's not a comment I would use, nor do I endorse it, yet, without something more than words on a page, I still suggest that people not turn this blog into their private psychiatry practice.  Before that comment gets out of control, I also mean that to be true if someone IS in private practice. 

I don't believe either Norm's comment or psychiatric diagnosis belongs on this blog.  If someone were actually giving Norm medical advise, it was in a public forum and thus a violation of his privacy.

I hope we can keep our eyes on the ball here.

"There is only one race, the human race" - The Neville Brothers

So I have pretty much stayed out of any thread having to do with Plan B for various reasons. But I did, unfortunately, read Norm's infamous comments.

Larry, I agree with you when I apply your comments generally. However, please consider the "anger management" remarks in context.

Many of us have met Norm, we like him, and usually enjoy his contributions to OlyBlog. But those Plan B remarks went beyond a personal attack, it was so very much not-Norm. I don't even want to repeat some of things he said, but I can promise you, if he directed those same words at your spouse or daughter you'd be seeing red. Since so many of us care about the guy, we are grasping for some explanation, hence the "anger management" suggestion.

So please cut each other some slack, OlyBloggers. And remember, think twice, post once.

if it turns into a pattern, then it's a problem. Enough has been said about it already and I'm sorry to be talking about it at all. More generally,

Suggestions for anger management, counseling, or other interventions should really be handled privately. In much the same way you might counsel someone about their new herpes outbreak.

Speaking of Larry, he is correct to point out that here it is impossible to take advantage of the cues available in personal interactions. Some things, however, are beyond interpretation. They are simply and obviously unwelcome guests in this forum. It's like obscenity, I know it when I see it. If you don't like the standards of "good taste" imposed in this forum, calmly post your opinion about it.

We wouldn't have these problems if everyone answered "yes" to at least one the following questions before posting:

Am I being constructive?

Am I being funny?

Am I Larry?

To Norm, if you're typing and that alarm goes off in your head that says, "This is probably going to be removed for being inappropriate", maybe next time leave it out. We should all use that filter.

Merwyn, my friend. I'm going to quote you and respond to you because I feel this was directed at me in way.
"Does that include calling people together to block roads, disrupt shipments, protest businesses. Does that include challenging people to say what was posted to their face? Does that include reposting press releases from Indymedia with their angry bile? Or is some selective anger alright? Is there a list of approved righteousness I can familiarize myself with?"

In my opinion there is a big difference between me, a person dedicated to class struggle, raging and spewing my anger against a system that perpetually holds my friends and fellow workers down, and Norm, a man, saying what he said about women. (I realize, Norm, that it could have been directed at men as well but I think we all know what gender it was directed at when it was written) Norm, having been born with a penis, has power over women in this world whether he recognizes it or not. It's our obligation as men to equalize our relationships with women and do away with thousands of years of inequality. Statements like Norm's set us back dramatically. That, Norm, is why the outrage on the blog. That is why Rick and enpen have come out so strongly. Whether you realize it or not your comment made this blog less safe for women.

It is not enough to provide a place for women, or members of other suppressed groups to be active, such as this blog. As a man, especially a white man, I feel I have a responsibility to intentionally bring others into conversations and quiet dominant voices. There are not enough women on this blog, we need to face that fact and do something about it. The women that I am active with in the community have so much to offer (as if that is surprising) in every aspect of community building. This blog needs to be a welcome place for all. Comments that detract from a safe environment need to be removed, and something needs to be done about the culture that creates them.

The idea of anger management was brought up and raised some ire. The idea behind that was that it would be a way to get to the nut of why the comment was posted, or why Norm thought it was OK. I don't think, as Larry as suggested, it was an attempt at psycho-analysis. I believe that StevenL hit it on the head. The people that were the most vocally outraged by his comment were people that have met him and like him, not just met him, but hung out with him nearly weekly for quite a while.

I do believe that a different tack could have been taken in the process to avoid the argument that ensued. I think from now on, if a docent finds a comment inappropriate, the docent who finds it should remove it, the comment should be copy and pasted into the docent email list and a consensus decision should be reached about the comment. If the poster of the comment has a grievance with the docents' decision, they should express that and be able to make a case as to why their comment is valid. If no consensus can be reached between the poster of the comment and the docents then it could be opened up to discussion among the general membership and perhaps a vote could take place with the comment being distributed via private message.

I know this is a lot but it's what has been bouncing around in my head.

Docents would have terms and be rotational as to not give the perception of authority.  Actually, I think docent is the wrong word for what is being discussed here.  Moderation seems more appropriate.  That said...tomorrow's a new day and a fresh start, no?

With the Plan B thread on ice, maybe we should just archive (is this possible?) the entire thread if enpen agrees.  I don't think it's something anybody wants to go back and read again.  I doubt there's anyone who hasn't read it that wants to.

...if a docent finds a comment inappropriate, the docent who finds it should remove it, the comment should be copy and pasted into the docent email list and a consensus decision should be reached about the comment. If the poster of the comment has a grievance with the docents' decision, they should express that and be able to make a case as to why their comment is valid. If no consensus can be reached between the poster of the comment and the docents then it could be opened up to discussion among the general membership and perhaps a vote could take place with the comment being distributed via private message.

And with the consensus power invested in my by the OFS board, I declare it The Supreme Law of the Land.

 I was denied access to my blog earlier today and just now restored.

"There is only one race, the human race" - The Neville Brothers

Are there strangers among us? 

I've said my peace (piece) (peese) on this subject.  As usual, some agree some don't.

While I was unable to post, I played golf.  I was five strokes off yesterday's score for nine holes.

Anger management starts tomorrow.

"There is only one race, the human race" - The Neville Brothers

"There is only one race, the human race" - The Neville Brothers

Man oh man...  I go away for a much needed couple of day so of relaxation and come back to THIS???

Come on now people!  Let's not eat each other alive!  That's the job of the whackjobs who post over on the comments section at The Olympian!  Remember, this is the place where we can freely share our opinions and discuss them openly with respect???

I'm a woman, didn't get to read whatever it was Norm posted but whatever it was, I'm adult enough to either ignore it or take it up with him privately!  I wouldn't resort to tattletailing, expecting it to be removed or whatever!  After a day or 2, it's generally forgotten anyway!  I'm not afraid to banter around here or even with the guys who post here.  What I am afraid of is not being intelligent enough to keep up with them!  I'm really not a political person and don't speak in big words!  (Heck, I had to look up the word zeitgeist to see what it meant!)  I know better than to voice my opinion on the whole Storemans/Plan B fiasco (but trust me, I am very opinionated about it!) So if you think I'm not posting cuz these big guys intimidate or worry me, think again!  I WORRY ME!  LOL!

I see no anger, hatred or animosity in anything Larry originally posted.  I think it's great Merwyn can speak freely and we should respect his thoughts & opinions.

Now everybody kiss & make up or I'll be forced to  ground you from the next gathering!  LOL!

JstPlnOnry

"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown

Really, all this does make one curious what Norm said.

Anyway, I think objectivity and clarity are important in a standard if there’s going to be one enforced. I’m admittedly new here, but while there’re allusions in blogs or forums to some sort of standard, I have yet to see a consolidated, independent list of criteria for which a post would be removed. Something that sits on the front page with a link that says: “Olyblog Content Policy”. So everyone knows what to expect and there isn’t confusion over why one post is taken down and another is left up. I think clarity is important for objectivity which is important for consistancy.

If a situation comes up where several people are involved in a heated exchange and only one of them gets called out (and shut down) . . . unless that one really did cross a well-defined, meaningful line that the others didn’t . . . . . . So it’s important that any standard enforced is crafted in such a way as to lend itself to consistent interpretation (and that those who enforce it are willing to enforce it consistently).  

Sometimes hateful comments may come following an escalation among several bloggers and so, perhaps, we need to review our first Blog Skool lesson:

Every conflict has many sides and there is enough responsibility for everyone. Attempting to place blame only creates resentment and anger that heightens any existing conflict. In order to resolve a conflict we must accept our share of the responsibility and eliminate the concept of blame.”

I don’t want to over-generalize and say that all hateful comments come after an excalation of increasingly heated comments, but it is one possible scenario. I also encourage you all to consider what Rob Richard’s question indicates about the state of OlyBlog’s anti-hate policy. His post shows some good attitudes: a commitment to constuctiveness, and critical self-evaluation. I don’t know what all the history is behind this post, as I am rather new here. I’ll also admit that he is likely talking about a kind of unproductiveness that falls short of the criteria (?) for taking a post down. But it still seemed like a worthy reflection on the subjective nature of such guidelines.

I started this blog two months ago.