We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.
-
Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.
-
Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.
-
Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.
-
Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.
-
Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.
-
Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.
-
American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.
-
Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.
-
AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.
Nearly every time I've attempted to push irl meetings at least one person has claimed it is ableist (even with masks) or classist (harder for some to travel). I still try though...
Like at all?? Wow.
Maybe get a decent Bluetooth speaker phone thingy? Get your own or the org can pay, which is mote than justified as a cost of accomidation to avoid ablism. The people who can't or dont want to attend in person can participate remotely that way, same as they do now. Since the tech has become available and normalized I have attended various events set up that way. Need to practice using it before rolling out, and start with a committee or something small to work out technical issues.
Then make it so attending the meeting in person has social benefit like pre and post chit chat, maybe hangout or food sometimes. Make a pan of brownies to share. Or shoplift cheese and dates. the informal waiting around time is important as well as business. (Unless your meetings are extremely meandering.) Those who attend in person will have more coherency due to being physically present with each other. Which will incentivise attendance.
Depending on your organizational context, could possibly try to work around the ablism by supporting people to attend if possible such as organizing transportation either by carpooling or paying cab fare for people who truely cannot make it otherwise. (Just an example.) A hardship travel fund.
Another strategy is to rotate the meeting location around rather than defaulting to somewhere "central" which typically favors those who live in the city. The downtown people then need to have some commitment to occasionally going "far away" to a suburb or neighboring town, to share the burden of travel. And finding suitable meeting space can be difficult anywhere. But you learn a lot about your surroundings and create relationships while searching for them.
Idk what kind of group you're in, where or with whom, so may or may not be exactly applicable. All the above is very doable though. IMO planning meetings is a foundational skill for any organizer/activist/revolutionary individual or group. It is not out of reach for anybody. It always includes some sort of thinking such as the above no matter the context. It is never a matter of just announcing a time and location you feel like and everyone just stops their life to obey. Planning meetings, including logistically difficult ones, is a way to learn about how to think about balancing the conflicting needs of various people, to do things fairly. And practical tasks like securing a venue, communicating to everyone, setting up and tidying after. Depending on your membership these are all things that people may have never done before, in which case they should all learn. They are skills of democracy.
No I mean strictly in person for things that are particularly sensitive. No online option. I understand it is a burden but it's also a trade-off not just a cost, and the benefits are increasingly worth it.
They should be able to suggest ways to make things accessible to them, like as above examples.
I have worked with all kinds of people in all kinds of situations. The idea of being 100% unable to attend any meeting, ever, is implausible. Someone who smacks down such a proposal without trying to work it out is abusing good will.
I don't think the people making such claims will enjoy what the "justice" system has in store for them.
Every real org with enough people will inevitably have members that overly focus on their own hardships and weaponize them when convenient. Handling them can be challenging because they often do good work despite the toxicity and because consciousness around these topics is often limited or liberal. This site, while not an org, sometimes struggles with tokenizing logic, for example.
I'm saying this because there is not an appeal to be made that can always make every person happy or mollified. For example, in the past I've suggested hardship funds, adding locations near them to the rotation, meeting outdoors while still masking (I actually prefer this). Eventually an org has to decide whether they want to alienate a self-centering member or work around them and it can really go either way depending on context.