yoink

Thank you for listening and replying - I hope the future changes do what we both hope they do.

All I'm really asking is for things to be more democratic. I know we joke about voting all the time, but genuinely it feels like the only way to truly avoid things like this happening is to open up the decision making process. I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest that, and I know it's not as simple as just 'make everything a vote', but as it stands right now it does feel very one-way, and it doubtless contributes to the way things spark up like this over and again. Obviously, even under a process like that things like this will still happen, where decisions are made that I don't agree with, but at least it would be transparent and in line with our ethos of good faith and open discussion. Everything so far has felt very closed - it's only now that it feels obvious that we're working from 'the mods want this to happen' backwards in order to find justifications for this particular change and wording.

And while we can repeat that 'mod applications are always open', it doesn't solve the inherent problem here - why should it be only for the mods to have all the say? And is it really good practice to join a mod team just to try and change the culture as a single, new mod? Yes, I agree that moderating is thankless work, and that in a lot of ways it does matter a lot what the people guiding the community feel about the direction of said community - but on the flip side, as someone who works full time and who isn't posting constantly, why should I count for less? I think we really need to put more time into recognising that this is a shared space, and that both sides of things are ultimately needed for a community.

It really does feel like at the centre of this is just a feeling of discontinuity between the mod base and the users, and the end result is feeling like there is no true recourse for someone who is 'only' a user in situations like this. We've opened and closed user union, we've opened and closed feedback - and whether intended or not, it does feel like the power is entirely one directional. I don't know if I can offer anything else, beyond the thanks I have for administrating and even getting this entire community started in the first place - I just want to say again that the reason I do feel so passionate about trying to resolve this is the fact that a space like Hexbear feels important, both to me and in the wider context. I don't want to be telling myself to just accept things here, I want to feel like when I try and contribute and explain my reasoning for or against anything here, that it feels like it's taken on-board by the people involved and considered for what it is.

In the least snappy way possible - I've been here and active for four years, I'm aware of the history of moderation on this site. I am aware anyone is welcome to submit a mod application, but that has nothing to do with what I'm saying. I'm not asking to be a mod, I fully recognise that it takes volunteer work to be done and that not everyone is willing to do it.

I am saying that each of these decisions, and the way that it seems that it doesn't matter how we, or hell how I feel as part of this community. From this comment all I can gleam is that the response is 'well, this community is not for you then'. Which seems counter to the whole renaming exercise to begin with, considering it's an attempt to make the space feel safer.

But again, so be it if this is how things are. Like I've said in another comment, I'm not going anywhere cos I don't have anywhere else like this, I'm stuck having to put my trust in the team, even if I feel shaky about it. This whole thing has just made me sad, I'm not gonna lie.

Thank you for replying.

Again, I'm trying not to be cynical, but that does sound like it just confirms that at the core of it the decision has been made by the mods and that's all there is to it. If so, I genuinely disagree on all levels with how this is being handled, but at least that is finally honest about what's going on - there is no real debate about it, it's just so.

To be honest, I'm not even really all that hung up on the literal thing that started all this anymore, I'm just stuck at the fact that this is just tacit recognition that it really doesn't matter how we feel, the mods will just overrule us. And while I appreciate the suggestion at the end of the comment, in light of that fact I really don't see how my voice is suddenly going to matter if/when I suggest names. There's no guarantee that anything I say, any attempt to hold people accountable, isn't just going to be met with 'well we disagree, so that's that'. It's genuinely disheartening.

This is also not even touching the idea of 'this can be used in an offensive way, but I'm not using it offensively so you should't take it that way'. I'm sure I don't have to point out where else that exact argument pops up - not to draw direct parallels, just to point out this is pretty weak as a justification.

In all of this, not once have we gotten an explanation of why it HAS to be gossip, or why gossip doesn't have the connotations that we keep arguing it does. The most we get is 'we don't think it's that bad'. You'd think that if there was such a strong case for it despite all the protest against it, it would be easy to put together a comment explaining the logic, but not once has that happened, and at this point I don't think we're going to be told.

In all honesty, it's starting to feel less like they don't think it has the baggage it does, and instead they're fully aware but just really, really want to call it that anyway, everyone else's feelings be damned. I don't want to be cynical, but absent literally any explanation what am I supposed to think?

I wasn't going to relitigate this, because I'm tired boss, but I still have to say, even translated to another language, I still don't agree with renaming it to gossip or any equivalent. In addition, this:

While there are some legitimate arguments being made relating to misogynistic societal perceptions of that word, the mods include women and enbies who disagree and specifically requested this name. I feel that this situation parallels the initial pushback that was experienced with disabled in which users voiced concerns that this name could be ableist, but the moderators of that community are themselves disabled and specifically requested that comm name, verbatim.

is exactly why this should have been put to a vote. Why do their voices and preferences matter more than mine? Especially considering at least one of the mods has already admitted they don't even like the thing they're in charge of? Not to mention that, whether intentionally or not, all users are relegated again to some mass of people, while the mods get the nuance of being part of these minority groups - why isn't it noted that the 'legitimate arguments' were also coming from women and enby users? And this parallel you're trying to draw comes off as essentially 'anybody arguing against this is clearly not informed or from the minority group affected', again whether you intend it to or not. Not to mention, if you accept them as legitimate arguments, why are they being cast aside for the personal preference of a handful of mods?

I really think yall have a lot of learning to do.

Editting to add: the more I think on this, the more this whole thing is baffling. We're seriously going to replace 'dunk tank' because of it's racial connotations, and we're going to rename it some variation of 'gossip' in spite of it's sexist connotations. What are we doing here?

el chisme is spanish for gossip

again, posting here after posting in the other thread because i need to get words out, even if they're not taken up

one of the founding principles, and one of the most important things that makes this site something I return to often, is the fact that we are willing to take each other in good faith. Absolutely there are times when people are posting dripping in irony, but for the most part I think this is something we've done well, and something we've managed to maintain over the years since this site launched. That said, the jacketing that keeps happening, and especially what took place yesterday in regards to 'cishet white vibes', needs to stop. We can change the rules all we want, we can struggle and struggle over and over again but until the leadership team here internalises this, the issue is never going to go away. It is clear that there is some level of contempt for the userbase, even if it's not framed as such. Even if we meme about it, the underlying culture of the leadership team seems to allow for this contempt to fester, and it's most clear when the team throws aside any nuance and understanding of the users here in favour of casting swathes of us as 'white' or 'cishet', so that sweeping decisions can be made about us. I don't know how you weed this out, I just recognise it as the seed that it is.

As a trans woman, as a Person of Colour, this is one of the few sane places online. Ultimately, I don't care about the tanks closing, even if I want them around. I don't even really care that we have struggles every now and then, but I admit I say that as a regular user and not a mod or admin. I'm not about to leave this site, I don't have elsewhere to go, but that is precisely why things like this concern me. I understand the effort and everything needed to run a site, let alone a site like this one, so I understand slip ups and miscommunication. I'm not about to call for the abolishment of the system, but some level of self diagnosis of the problem and consequences thereafter feels like the only good way forward here.

i wasn't sure if I wanted to join the struggle session, but I feel like I have to get my words out.

we have taken demographic polls of this site. we have pronouns, we have an em_poc comm and we have had struggle sessions about both of these in the past.

the gall to decide that our queer users are giving off 'cishet vibes'. the gall to decide that our POC users are giving off 'white vibes'.

this is genuinely disgusting behaviour, and I cannot believe the admin team let this fly, let alone decided it was worth adding to the argument. I am aware of what other info has come out - this point still stands regardless. why has the admin team signed off on this argument? why wasn't this shot down immediately? why was it ever entertained as a valid argument in the first instance?

superheroes, well known for only operating in societies where everyone is fundamentally good

Dunkey also has a legacy of chuddery in online games (see his history with League of Legends) so I wouldn't be surprised if that's a factor too

B'Gush

Beorge Gush