All communities have values, some are implicit, some are explicit. OBOL has
a very few short guidelines and I respect the goal of trying to not have to
explicitly state everything and not trying to regulate everything, it would
be nice if we would all just "behave" implicitly. The problem is
"behave"*** apparently means different things to different people; and
that's made all the more difficulty of trying to read intent through text.
As I mentioned in the OBOL thread. I've heard a lot of "no one care what
your opinion is" in the last year (I used a different email and recently
switched to this one), those are the least bullying I've seen. This is
someone being "annoyed" at something someone else said, so then they are
choosing (whether they're self aware or not) to be rude back to try to
change that persons behavior of posting something they don't like in the
future: brown-headed cowbird or the egg, which came first? But it creates a
hostile air on the listserv. I'm inert to be offended by others, but I do
think about how it comes across to others, what community it creates, and
I've questioned if all the wonderful and enlightening banter of OBOL is
worth me staying because of all the rudeness and bullying. Its fine, I
don't really care for myself, I just don't need it in my life and just
won't take the time to participate in groups where the curmudgeons and
bullies have the strongest voice. My time is best spent elsewhere. But for
others that this community might be more important in their lives, and
still marginalized, that's a community problem: when one person in the
group is treated badly, we all are: we can expect that same treatment to
apply to us in the future
On the positive side, I don't think "be civil" is an overly oppressive
request to make of the community, on boards where content can be regulated
after the fact this is easy to change, moderators point it out, tell the
user, and then the user just says "oh, oops, I didn't realize how that came
across, I'll modify it." For listservs like OBOL, sadly it has to be more
draconian because it can't be changed, users get flagged, and have X many
strikes (being told about them and pointed to the guidelines) and after a
point they have a cool down (no post) period, or if they have some
oppositional defiance they just don't stay in the community. This can be a
great loss, for example some of the users who were really upsetting people
are great content contributors! and helpful for IDs etc. They're old hands
at birding and have a lot of knowledge. Basically, it seems the time has
come that OBA/OBOL might have to agree on what the values are of the
community, whether its kindness and recruiting participation first, or if
seniority matters and some people should be allowed to say whatever they
want, or any combinations thereof. I personally don't think a full policy
of absolute free speech works, because in the end you'll just have others
leave, as we've heard. Its not a free marketplace of ideas when all the
"buyers"/"vendors" you're trying to recruit leave due to the hostility of a
vocal, repeat-offending few.
Either OBA/OBOL could set community standards; or the current OBOL members
could vote Oregon Audubon and others do this, its pretty normal. I would be
happy with either. If the community standards were "no statements about
protecting women, etc" then without an ill will, I would unsubscribe and be
happy to have a different community. I really don't think that is that much
of a big deal, I'd go elsewhere if the community was not something I agree
with. In the same way that if OBOL adopted a "no bullying" policy, people
that wanted to bully could do that "on Parler" :)
This is, I think, a time of great stress for a lot of people. Having
someone to inoffensively say "hey, slow down there" when someone is out of
line, can help both sides of the conversation to not keep ramping up and
ruining their own day. Its a tough job the moderators have, kudos and so
much respect to Teresa, you're having to teach communication skills to us
adults who haven't yet learned them, in real or digital worlds/communities.
I respect Teresa and the Board's response trying to deal with this for the
good of the entire community.
Ideas: have community standards to point to; have rules outlined for
moderation, silencing; have a remediation process for "offenders" and the
"offended" (including ways to say, "wait please don't leave, tell us where
we can improve" to community members that feel disenfranchised, whether
they're the offender or offended; and accept a balance between individual
and group good that will have to be a compromise that doesn't suit everyone.
-Stephen
***to be clear, I'm not trying to pull away from the conversation about
sexual assault and fear specifically. I wish we could take for granted that
those matters, if any, were widely accepted implicit and explicit community
norms, "behave." As I said in the other post, I *choose* to believe that
everyone on OBOL stands against sexual assault; and I try to assume I'm
misreading and its my failure to commuicate and understand when it sounds
like people don't represent those basic human values. Perhaps not everyone
does <--- I find that terrifying. I'll fight to my dying day to try to make
sexual assaults more successfully prosecuted, women (and men et al) more
heard and supported, and those community standards everywhere I can. But to
make progress on that specific issue, I'm zooming out to the larger issue
of "its okay to have community standards" at all.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 9:10 AM Mary Garrard <springazure1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I laughed. I think that’s what she meant was funny (Parler).
Mary
On Feb 25, 2021, at 8:55 AM, jmeredit@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Clever and funny, "go to Parler instead" ! Maybe that was what she meant!
Judy Meredith
On 2021-02-25 16:49, Margaret Stephens wrote:
I don't understand what you found funny....
------------------------------
*From:* boo-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <boo-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
Teresa Hertzel <teresa.hertzel@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Thursday, February 25, 2021 8:22 AM
*To:* Margaret Stephens <mlstep@xxxxxxx>
*Cc:* BOO List <boo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* [boo] Re: Discussion
Margaret, you are too funny. Thank you for a good laugh! It has been
suggested a few times now that we post the guidelines once a month, and my
first instinct is that once it gets into a rhythm of appearing on the 1st
of each month, people would no longer "see it."
But I have an idea, based on having been in a Catholic school for 1st
grade. The day would open with the teacher picking a random child and
saying, "Joe, the 3rd commandment!" Then poor Joe would have to stand by
his desk and recite the 3rd commandment. The following day, she would pick
another child and another commandment. In this way, you can bet we all
learned our commandments quickly and thoroughly. How about if I pick ONE
guideline to highlight each month and post it?
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 10:13 AM Margaret Stephens <mlstep@xxxxxxx> wrote:
First, the OBOL list is somewhat better than it used to be, when neophyte
birders could get their heads bitten off for posting innocent questions or
comments that were then sneered at by the "elite". I certainly have been,
hesitant to post because of this. Thank you to vigilant moderators!!
On a related note, about birding or being alone in nature (or anywhere) as
a female: I don't think that men, especially white men, can fully
understand the fear that marginalized community members, including BIPOC,
LGBTQIA people, and women, generally experience being alone, and then
seeing a male stranger nearby. Will they attack because they see someone
vulnerable who can be taken advantage of violently, will they attack
because they see someone that doesn't fit their idea of what that person
should look like, will they attack because they think their color doesn't
belong? This is REAL. As a female, when I see a lone man, or a group of
men or males, and I am alone, the adrenaline shoots up and I am on guard
and will generally go out of my way to avoid interaction; I am sure this is
true for others that are targeted; unfortunately, this limits the enjoyment
and experience of solitude in natural areas. White men probably do not
have to think of this. Not picking on white men, but privilege comes with
being born that way, generally. And look at the perpetrators of most
violence....for example, the Capitol mob on January 6. Therefore, there is
a duty for the privileged to work on any lack of awareness on their part;
which involves, first: LISTENING and self-education and knowing when to at
least* shut up.*
Do you think the OBOL guidelines need to be changed? It should be
changed so that moderators can post guidelines and reminders of the ethics
of this list and birding in general. See below.
Do you think the Board violated their own policies by posting a statement
about violence against women on the birding listserv? - No. Moderators
need to moderate.
How should OBOL handle people who are perceived as bullying others? Warn
them once, and if it occurs again, ban them permanently. Maybe they can go
on Parler instead.
How can OBOL be more friendly and welcoming? - Moderators could post a
statement on the listserv at the beginning of each month that has reminders
for respectful discussion, states the consequences if posts violate the
guidelines, states the basic ethics of birding, and includes the assertion
that birding should be actively inclusive and safe for all (?) and that
birders have a responsibility to help make nature study inclusive. State
that this post is a moderator post that is not open for discussion, and
delete any posts in reply.
OBA has a few hundred members, I think it's right around 300, but I don't
have the exact number. OBOL has almost 2,000, so the vast majority are not
OBA members. Do you think OBOL should be broken off from OBA and no longer
be under their umbrella? Don't know about this.
------------------------------
*From:* boo-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <boo-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
Teresa Hertzel <teresa.hertzel@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Thursday, February 25, 2021 4:01 AM
*To:* BOO List <boo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* [boo] Discussion
BOOers,
Here are some questions for you, although you certainly don't have to
stick to these topics.
Do you think the OBOL guidelines need to be changed?
Do you think the Board violated their own policies by posting a statement
about violence against women on the birding listserv?
How should OBOL handle people who are perceived as bullying others?
How can OBOL be more friendly and welcoming?
OBA has a few hundred members, I think it's right around 300, but I don't
have the exact number. OBOL has almost 2,000, so the vast majority are not
OBA members. Do you think OBOL should be broken off from OBA and no longer
be under their umbrella?
Treesa
