I get that sometimes we don't have pants. I even get the idea that sometimes it takes a little while before we're able to really hear it when people say, "Omigod, you're not wearing any pants!"
Deleting everyone's comments was... well, special. That was the moment that I though: yeah, this person does not belong at Wiscon.
I hear you. Moon is going to have to do a lot of work before the community would be willing to accept her as a GoH and keep WisCon as a semi-safe space.
However, disinviting her (if the committee decides to do that) is going to have fallout, and it's going to need careful stage management.
I don't know where I stand on this. I mean, conceptually, I dislike the idea of retracting an GoH invitation. But if someone offends a big segment of the audience, then that's just not viable. I'm not committee, and I don't hafta be involved in any of those hard conversations, but... man.
In the Platonic Wiscon of my mind (where everything works out right), the con com would talk to Moon, explain that her post makes her appearance at Wiscon problematic, and encourages Moon to... I dunno... at least engage on the issue. The fact that she's taking her ball and going home leaves me with the feeling that that's never gonna happen.
I thank all goddesses that I'm not concom either. Unfortunately, I agree that deleting the comments makes her participation as a GoH at Wiscon next year a non-starter. She's alienated the community by trying to obliterate the responses. And the concom should be upfront about why deleting the comments is absolutely intellectually dishonest and against what we're trying to do at the con. We have a worthy GoH in Nisi, and I suggest that we don't invite a replacment for Moon.
If she had the courage to keep them up and engage in dialogue, I would say that that's behavior we want to encourage and model. Hell, we could have a panel on how to behave well when you get caught pantsless. emceeaich and I both hope that we will behave well when we, goddess forbid, get caught out.
Yeah, it was pretty deplorable. I don't know Moon, I've never read any of her books, and I have zero personal investment in whether or not she alienates all of Wiscon for all time.
But it was tremendously hard to see people that I know apparently not having concerns with what she wrote. I mean, the very first comment on that thread was from a guy I knew from Usenet circles. His response to an ugly Islamophobic posting? He says, (I'm paraphrasing), "hey, I like what yer saying about civic morality; we Americans are the best when it comes to that!"
Now, I've met this guy. I think he's nice guy and all. And yet he has nothing to say about the big bundle of fail he just witnessed? Instead, he gets all chuffed about how great it is that Americans care about their country? Without noticing that those very things he's praising lead her right to an anti-Muslim rant? What the hell?
I don't follow his activity closely so all of this is pretty much out of my nether regions.
He's a military guy. Moon also served in the military. She was using a military outlook and language in discussing civic responsibility. I think he jumped on that as a point of commonality.
He disapproves of some forms of racism (see his september 13 post) but I think he might not have a nuanced outlook on racism or oppression issues. He might not have noticed the $fail or might not have read the whole post. If he did notice it, maybe his policy is not to argue with people in their own journals.
For what it's worth, I saw some comments elsewhere on LJ that were of the form "Oh. Dear. I read the first three paragraphs and stopped." Some of them may even have commented on those first three paragraphs: not certain, but possible. If that comment had been from someone I knew and had liked, I would probably ask him whether he'd read the whole thing before commenting. (If it was one of hundreds whose handles I vaguely knew, probably not.)
Months later...maybe it should be noted that at the time, I dropped a note to the guy, asking him what was up. He claimed not to have noticed it on his read through, questioned whether it had been there at the time, but did post a (IMHO rather too mild) "I think that was problematic" sometime before she deleted everything.
I had an extended discussion with him, wherein he came across to me as being rather more concerned with the pile-on than the original fail. I suspect he and I will continue to talk about this sort of thing in future iterations. (As far as I'm concerned, it's a conversation I've been having with him and a few other people since back on Usenet, and one of the reasons I dropped out of a certain newsgroup and ended up in alt.poly.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regna
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 10:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 11:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 11:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 11:21 pm (UTC)Deleting everyone's comments was... well, special. That was the moment that I though: yeah, this person does not belong at Wiscon.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 11:24 pm (UTC)However, disinviting her (if the committee decides to do that) is going to have fallout, and it's going to need careful stage management.
ObDisclaimer: I am not committee.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 11:33 pm (UTC)I don't know where I stand on this. I mean, conceptually, I dislike the idea of retracting an GoH invitation. But if someone offends a big segment of the audience, then that's just not viable. I'm not committee, and I don't hafta be involved in any of those hard conversations, but... man.
In the Platonic Wiscon of my mind (where everything works out right), the con com would talk to Moon, explain that her post makes her appearance at Wiscon problematic, and encourages Moon to... I dunno... at least engage on the issue. The fact that she's taking her ball and going home leaves me with the feeling that that's never gonna happen.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-17 05:01 am (UTC)GoH at Wiscon next year a non-starter. She's alienated the community by trying to obliterate the responses. And the concom should be upfront about why deleting the comments is absolutely intellectually dishonest and against what we're trying to do at the con. We have a worthy GoH in Nisi, and I suggest that we don't invite a replacment for Moon.
If she had the courage to keep them up and engage in dialogue, I would say that that's behavior we want to encourage and model. Hell, we could have a panel on how to behave well when you get caught pantsless.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-17 12:59 am (UTC)ugh.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 11:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-16 11:54 pm (UTC)But it was tremendously hard to see people that I know apparently not having concerns with what she wrote. I mean, the very first comment on that thread was from a guy I knew from Usenet circles. His response to an ugly Islamophobic posting? He says, (I'm paraphrasing), "hey, I like what yer saying about civic morality; we Americans are the best when it comes to that!"
Now, I've met this guy. I think he's nice guy and all. And yet he has nothing to say about the big bundle of fail he just witnessed? Instead, he gets all chuffed about how great it is that Americans care about their country? Without noticing that those very things he's praising lead her right to an anti-Muslim rant? What the hell?
That's a bit hard to swallow.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-17 06:40 am (UTC)It's painful watching people rush to agree with her.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-17 07:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-18 05:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-18 07:42 pm (UTC)He's a military guy. Moon also served in the military. She was using a military outlook and language in discussing civic responsibility. I think he jumped on that as a point of commonality.
He disapproves of some forms of racism (see his september 13 post) but I think he might not have a nuanced outlook on racism or oppression issues. He might not have noticed the $fail or might not have read the whole post. If he did notice it, maybe his policy is not to argue with people in their own journals.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-17 11:40 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-11-22 07:33 am (UTC)I had an extended discussion with him, wherein he came across to me as being rather more concerned with the pile-on than the original fail. I suspect he and I will continue to talk about this sort of thing in future iterations. (As far as I'm concerned, it's a conversation I've been having with him and a few other people since back on Usenet, and one of the reasons I dropped out of a certain newsgroup and ended up in alt.poly.)