Let's talk about the BIPOC board. March 20, 2025 2:33 AM Subscribe
I've been interested in the BIPOC board since they were an idea here in metatalk about three or four years ago. I've read all their minutes. I don't see much evidence of their continued existence and I'd like to know what people here think about that.
There is a link at the bottom of every metafilter page that links to the BIPOC board page, where their minutes are.
There was a meeting scheduled for Feb 22 2025. This meeting happened.
They haven't approved minutes for more than a year now. The One Year Anniversary was about three weeks ago. I'm not the first person to notice this- A brief history.
The reason given for them not approving minutes is that Everyone has full lives and there are international members.
They get paid $50 per meeting.
I couldn't tell you what this board does. I've been holding onto this post, because I keep thinking "Well, the minutes will show up tomorrow" but I have been wrong. I'm curious about what happened to this board and I'm curious about what else we could be doing to be inclusive.
There was a meeting scheduled for Feb 22 2025. This meeting happened.
They haven't approved minutes for more than a year now. The One Year Anniversary was about three weeks ago. I'm not the first person to notice this- A brief history.
The reason given for them not approving minutes is that Everyone has full lives and there are international members.
They get paid $50 per meeting.
I couldn't tell you what this board does. I've been holding onto this post, because I keep thinking "Well, the minutes will show up tomorrow" but I have been wrong. I'm curious about what happened to this board and I'm curious about what else we could be doing to be inclusive.
And I might suggest that rather than coming in here with excuses, any mod on duty might more profitably spend the next few hours actually tracking down the minutes and posting them.
Supposedly they are approved through at least December 2024 and have been ready for about three months, so the best and really the only thing staff can do here is to... publish them.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:54 AM on March 20 [8 favorites]
Supposedly they are approved through at least December 2024 and have been ready for about three months, so the best and really the only thing staff can do here is to... publish them.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:54 AM on March 20 [8 favorites]
MiraK's comment about the substance of the board's work is worth pasting here in full:
I used to be in the BIPOC board until shortly after this incident with n-p, and it was the direct precursor to me exiting the BIPOC board. That thread and its aftermath were a wake up call to me personally on how much of the work of the BIPOC board is theater, the fact that it exists just for the sake of existing "look, we have a BIPOC board!" - and how the board lacks both power and any semblance of an agenda.posted by Klipspringer at 6:58 AM on March 20 [21 favorites]
As far as I know there has been no BIPOC board acknowledgement or steps taken or any kind of movement from the board towards making the community better. What is the point of the board? Damned if I know. I was in it for over a year and I have no idea what we did during that time. There was such a vast gulf between the ability of the moderators who were members of the board vs. the non-moderators who were members of the board, specifically in our capacity to DO anything on the site, affect policy or effect change, hold anyone accountable, etc. that the non-moderator members might as well have not existed, not been on the board.
There was no way for the BIPOC board to address the harms to the community (let alone to individual MeFites like n-p) in the days and weeks following. The mods are not answerable to the BIPOC board. The BIPOC board has no effect on moderator decisions or policy. When n-p left, this became more clear to me than it had ever been.
Since I wasn't able to see any way to work to change policy to prevent what happened to n-p from happening again, I bowed out of the BIPOC board, and also been away from Metafilter since then. It's difficult for me to feel like a part of this community now.
MiraK's comment reposted above was the third strike in a series of mod events that shifted me from "these are but hapless good hearted people" to "leadership here is a farce and needs to go."
posted by phunniemee at 7:03 AM on March 20 [24 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 7:03 AM on March 20 [24 favorites]
Only strictly on the minutes, they are ready now but the lag has been trying to get approval from those attending including those no longer with the board. Only recently the board decided to have a final round of approval review/request with deadline attached (went with a generous timeline as this was a new instruction after all, and didn't want people to feel like they're forced to review something in a short period of turnaround), for those who haven't responded despite a few more followups. There's been some changes to what goes into the public minutes - the length that they used to be in contributed a lot to most of the runtime of previous meetings (and the email chains in between meetings) before December 2024 being spent on going over them. (Edit: to be clear, that left little time for other items) The new change has been in place since this year but not able to be posted owing to the approval pending mentioned above.
posted by cendawanita at 7:36 AM on March 20 [5 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 7:36 AM on March 20 [5 favorites]
The staff’s failure to support the board or do even the most minimal work for them was the beginning of my realization that no one working for MetaFilter actually cared about MetaFilter as anything other than a paycheck. Which is fine, but at least do the work you’re paid to do, yeah? Over the time since that linked comment, I’ve hoped to be given a reason to reinstate my donation, but they’ve never given me one. MiraK’s comment (and the realization that the BIPOC board was 50% mods for much of its life) should have been a wake up call to everyone who wasn’t already aware that its mostly a grift at this point
posted by donnagirl at 7:45 AM on March 20 [14 favorites]
posted by donnagirl at 7:45 AM on March 20 [14 favorites]
I think even if the minutes were posted today that would not be enough to justify continuing this broken process. What would happen if we stop doing this and think of something else to do?
posted by Vatnesine at 7:59 AM on March 20 [3 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 7:59 AM on March 20 [3 favorites]
I would suggest to the Board that wanting to get a consensus approval is understandable, but not necessary and particularly in the case of people who have resigned from the Board -- I don't think it makes sense. You can pretty much assume that they have no real issues with the minutes if they haven't responded. It's even a little unfair to try to make them review the minutes given that they have, you know, resigned.
Obviously a lot of this is because regular order (minutes sent out with time for members to review before the next meeting, and a brief review/approval of minutes at the beginning of the subsequent meeting) hasn't happened. (As far as I or anyone else who's not staff or on the board knows, since... well, we haven't seen minutes.)
Unfortunately, if BIPOC wants to be effective it needs to step up and run its meetings independently, including the clerical work. You cannot depend on staff to provide the administrative work at this time, since they've repeatedly demonstrated their unwillingness or inability to do so.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:03 AM on March 20 [15 favorites]
Obviously a lot of this is because regular order (minutes sent out with time for members to review before the next meeting, and a brief review/approval of minutes at the beginning of the subsequent meeting) hasn't happened. (As far as I or anyone else who's not staff or on the board knows, since... well, we haven't seen minutes.)
Unfortunately, if BIPOC wants to be effective it needs to step up and run its meetings independently, including the clerical work. You cannot depend on staff to provide the administrative work at this time, since they've repeatedly demonstrated their unwillingness or inability to do so.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:03 AM on March 20 [15 favorites]
If I understand the regular order definition, yes that's definitely something that was done. (Edit: so not hearing back from attendees began even from that stage) In terms of last year's timeliness, there was a number of unplanned-due-to-IRL departures, that did impact the capacity of the board itself doing much of that admin work (which it did do).
The remaining members weren't those invited in who could do that, including MiraK, and myself, and I assume a main part of why she made her observations was because we're the cohort who wasn't part of the initial inception, and by the time we're in, those meeting minutes seem to dominate most of the runtime. I was on work travel for a number of meetings during the short season Brandon was part of the board, so I can't speak much as to what happened during then though, but MiraK can/could. I would say the makeup of the board being half mods happened in that short interval when I wasn't around. It used to be, when I joined, myself + 4 more members and meetings I were in was joined by Loup. For my experience, it's only recently that travelingthyme took back the role (I think related to their work schedule and the personal reasons, but I can't comment on that), and we've done quite a bit of work to resume what the board should be.
What would happen if we stop doing this and think of something else to do?
Sure, let's talk about it. Fwiw, the remaining board members don't actually check Talk or any other subsite but the Blue and sometimes Ask (me for example). We've been discussing on where to take this forward with that in mind.
posted by cendawanita at 8:17 AM on March 20 [6 favorites]
The remaining members weren't those invited in who could do that, including MiraK, and myself, and I assume a main part of why she made her observations was because we're the cohort who wasn't part of the initial inception, and by the time we're in, those meeting minutes seem to dominate most of the runtime. I was on work travel for a number of meetings during the short season Brandon was part of the board, so I can't speak much as to what happened during then though, but MiraK can/could. I would say the makeup of the board being half mods happened in that short interval when I wasn't around. It used to be, when I joined, myself + 4 more members and meetings I were in was joined by Loup. For my experience, it's only recently that travelingthyme took back the role (I think related to their work schedule and the personal reasons, but I can't comment on that), and we've done quite a bit of work to resume what the board should be.
What would happen if we stop doing this and think of something else to do?
Sure, let's talk about it. Fwiw, the remaining board members don't actually check Talk or any other subsite but the Blue and sometimes Ask (me for example). We've been discussing on where to take this forward with that in mind.
posted by cendawanita at 8:17 AM on March 20 [6 favorites]
I'm a clerk myself (for my church's vestry) and it's a pain in the ass to do the scut work but once you get into the rhythm of it it's fine. I think the board probably needs a designated secretary to take the notes and write up minutes if you don't have one already (it sounds like a staff person has been responsible for that in the past and possibly still is?)
I would also advise this for the governing board once it gets up and running.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:24 AM on March 20 [4 favorites]
I would also advise this for the governing board once it gets up and running.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:24 AM on March 20 [4 favorites]
it sounds like a staff person has been responsible for that in the past and possibly still is?
Oh no, before Nov 2024, that was a board member volunteering to do so (edit: apologies for the recall issue, there were 2). Now thyme has taken over, and they're actually ready, except for the pending approval bit as mentioned. Ironically I think the deadline to comment for a couple of those minutes just lapsed and those minutes would be up according to the site update schedule (unfortunately not something I have cared to know, so that's on me, if the explanation seems thin).
posted by cendawanita at 8:29 AM on March 20 [1 favorite]
Oh no, before Nov 2024, that was a board member volunteering to do so (edit: apologies for the recall issue, there were 2). Now thyme has taken over, and they're actually ready, except for the pending approval bit as mentioned. Ironically I think the deadline to comment for a couple of those minutes just lapsed and those minutes would be up according to the site update schedule (unfortunately not something I have cared to know, so that's on me, if the explanation seems thin).
posted by cendawanita at 8:29 AM on March 20 [1 favorite]
I feel we should perhaps worry less about the minutes in particular and more about the wider issue of the whole exercise being a waste of time.
posted by Phanx at 8:42 AM on March 20 [13 favorites]
posted by Phanx at 8:42 AM on March 20 [13 favorites]
Keep going. I do need to sleep though.
posted by cendawanita at 8:55 AM on March 20 [1 favorite]
posted by cendawanita at 8:55 AM on March 20 [1 favorite]
My mind is blown by reading justifications of the current state of affairs. The only sensible response to it taking thirteen months and counting to produce a read-out of a meeting is "yes we recognise this is obviously ludicrous".
How can anyone have confidence a group does anything of substance if it can't output a page of bullet points once a month?
The primary purpose of a board is to oversee actions. The primary purpose of minutes is to record agreed actions. At some point (approximately 12 months ago...) someone should have realised that any actions agreed at the February 2024 meeting have either been undertaken, so the minutes don't matter, or enough time has passed that the actions will realistically never be undertaken, in which case the minutes also don't matter. And instituted a rational process going forward which reliably outputs the absolute bare minimum of any board.
posted by Klipspringer at 8:58 AM on March 20 [23 favorites]
How can anyone have confidence a group does anything of substance if it can't output a page of bullet points once a month?
The primary purpose of a board is to oversee actions. The primary purpose of minutes is to record agreed actions. At some point (approximately 12 months ago...) someone should have realised that any actions agreed at the February 2024 meeting have either been undertaken, so the minutes don't matter, or enough time has passed that the actions will realistically never be undertaken, in which case the minutes also don't matter. And instituted a rational process going forward which reliably outputs the absolute bare minimum of any board.
posted by Klipspringer at 8:58 AM on March 20 [23 favorites]
Please post the minutes without approvals as they are a distraction from a larger problem. And then we can talk about what this board is supposed to be doing vs what they’ve done.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:01 AM on March 20 [15 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 9:01 AM on March 20 [15 favorites]
My confusion about this approval process is this: How realistic is it to expect people can accurately remember the details of a single meeting that happened more than a year ago?
If we want to be able to move past this kind of thing and get to real discussions about the purpose of the board, then posting them with notes of who has and has not approved them seems like the way to go for all of the missing minutes. Many people have said that approvals should be agenda item #1 at the next meeting. Again, seems like a good process.
posted by soelo at 9:47 AM on March 20 [9 favorites]
If we want to be able to move past this kind of thing and get to real discussions about the purpose of the board, then posting them with notes of who has and has not approved them seems like the way to go for all of the missing minutes. Many people have said that approvals should be agenda item #1 at the next meeting. Again, seems like a good process.
posted by soelo at 9:47 AM on March 20 [9 favorites]
Hold up. This is chock full of information.
The minutes are ready.
There was an approval deadline.
That deadline has passed.
There is a site update schedule, according to which the minutes should already be posted.
But they’re not up and people just don’t care?
This is actually worse than I thought.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:52 AM on March 20 [3 favorites]
The minutes are ready.
There was an approval deadline.
That deadline has passed.
There is a site update schedule, according to which the minutes should already be posted.
But they’re not up and people just don’t care?
This is actually worse than I thought.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:52 AM on March 20 [3 favorites]
Pick a trusted board secretary. They are a non voting member. Send the minutes out with a short time limit for response. Change the bylaws so you can post draft minutes. Post them. If any board member has an objection, the minutes can be changed and posted as amended with the change noted.
posted by mygothlaundry at 10:11 AM on March 20 [4 favorites]
posted by mygothlaundry at 10:11 AM on March 20 [4 favorites]
Can anyone involved with this board post a very brief introduction to what the board has done in the last couple years? It is difficult for anyone here to understand what the board does when the only output we've seen over the last year or so was the weird rice cooker post, which it turns out wasn't actually approved by the board.
Fundamentally, the political power to either put this board on haitus until we can figure out what to do about it or to push for change seems to rest with the site's interim board. And since that board doesn't seem to be able or willing to set a timeline for elections, the members here appear to have little power to change anything.
posted by ssg at 10:38 AM on March 20 [18 favorites]
Fundamentally, the political power to either put this board on haitus until we can figure out what to do about it or to push for change seems to rest with the site's interim board. And since that board doesn't seem to be able or willing to set a timeline for elections, the members here appear to have little power to change anything.
posted by ssg at 10:38 AM on March 20 [18 favorites]
Yeah, the two boards I am on receive the minutes after each meeting, and vote to amend/accept them at the next monthly meeting -- then they are finalized and recorded. Done and dusted.
Former members are gone, so they have no vote on the contents.
posted by wenestvedt at 12:56 PM on March 20 [8 favorites]
Former members are gone, so they have no vote on the contents.
posted by wenestvedt at 12:56 PM on March 20 [8 favorites]
Can anyone involved with this board post a very brief introduction to what the board has done in the last couple years?
It's just as important to ask what the BIPOC Board is actually empowered to do. The Board was established after several posts on the blue went wildly, racist-ly sideways in 2019 (?), but has never had the authority to actually enact change (much less to advise mods to reword racist rice cooker posts, or to change their moderation approach). Yes, it's important to hold advisory committees like the BIPOC Board accountable, but it's equally important that those committees are empowered to actually do things — not just to wokewash actions of the proverbial "white moderate" and their allies who maintain the status quo. After a few years of this, it's no wonder that the BIPOC Board isn't especially engaged, and that formerly active members have stepped down.
I agree with those who are concerned about the Board's lack of track record — but rather than playing into the hands of the current political climate, we need to be discussing how to make the BIPOC Board more effective without losing sight of 1) Its mission, and 2) The constraints imposed upon it that limit, or enable, that mission. Without that, we're not seeing the forest for the trees.
posted by knucklebones at 1:18 PM on March 20 [20 favorites]
It's just as important to ask what the BIPOC Board is actually empowered to do. The Board was established after several posts on the blue went wildly, racist-ly sideways in 2019 (?), but has never had the authority to actually enact change (much less to advise mods to reword racist rice cooker posts, or to change their moderation approach). Yes, it's important to hold advisory committees like the BIPOC Board accountable, but it's equally important that those committees are empowered to actually do things — not just to wokewash actions of the proverbial "white moderate" and their allies who maintain the status quo. After a few years of this, it's no wonder that the BIPOC Board isn't especially engaged, and that formerly active members have stepped down.
I agree with those who are concerned about the Board's lack of track record — but rather than playing into the hands of the current political climate, we need to be discussing how to make the BIPOC Board more effective without losing sight of 1) Its mission, and 2) The constraints imposed upon it that limit, or enable, that mission. Without that, we're not seeing the forest for the trees.
posted by knucklebones at 1:18 PM on March 20 [20 favorites]
Yeah I chair a couple of boards and everyone gets draft minutes as soon as possible after the meetings, with a deadline of a couple of weeks to make any changes or corrections. We then circulate the revised versions at least a week before the next meeting and we vote to approve them in session. If you don't speak up you are deemed to have accepted the text.
In the rare instance that somebody raises a substantive issue with the draft for approval, we amend the document at the meeting. It's even more rare that someone is still is unhappy with something that is or isn't recorded after the rest of the group reaches consensus, we can put a note to the effect of "Member X asked that point Y be put on the record [despite contrary views from the rest of those present]."
It's ridiculous that minutes would be held up for months for things like this, but it's a symptom of much larger issues. The place needs proper management and governance ASAP. None of these things are rocket science but if they don't happen, we're going to keep having the same discussions over and over again.
posted by rpfields at 1:25 PM on March 20 [15 favorites]
In the rare instance that somebody raises a substantive issue with the draft for approval, we amend the document at the meeting. It's even more rare that someone is still is unhappy with something that is or isn't recorded after the rest of the group reaches consensus, we can put a note to the effect of "Member X asked that point Y be put on the record [despite contrary views from the rest of those present]."
It's ridiculous that minutes would be held up for months for things like this, but it's a symptom of much larger issues. The place needs proper management and governance ASAP. None of these things are rocket science but if they don't happen, we're going to keep having the same discussions over and over again.
posted by rpfields at 1:25 PM on March 20 [15 favorites]
There’s no processes in place to “fix things” so I don’t necessarily hold it against the BIPOC board that they didn’t fix anything. But they could have made posts or commented on various topics or just been **visible** in the past three years since they were created and they have not even done that. The last minutes I saw they were still figuring out what to do, after existing for 2-3 years.
I’m still working on why this bugs me so much.
posted by Vatnesine at 2:31 PM on March 20 [4 favorites]
I’m still working on why this bugs me so much.
posted by Vatnesine at 2:31 PM on March 20 [4 favorites]
Beyond tired of every MeTa turning into a "Let's attack the mods" post. You're attacking them because you want them to fix racism. What makes you think they can fix racism when the entire world can't? They can't make the whole world unicorns and puppies any more than you or I can.
posted by Melismata at 2:57 PM on March 20 [3 favorites]
posted by Melismata at 2:57 PM on March 20 [3 favorites]
That's not why anyone is criticizing the BIPOC minutes situation. Go reread the thread.
posted by Bugbread at 3:18 PM on March 20 [29 favorites]
posted by Bugbread at 3:18 PM on March 20 [29 favorites]
You're wrong.
posted by Diskeater at 3:19 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
posted by Diskeater at 3:19 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
I'm thinking the idea of having one page with all the committees, the elections, the boards. perhaps this is coded into the new interface but we need something.
posted by clavdivs at 3:31 PM on March 20 [2 favorites]
posted by clavdivs at 3:31 PM on March 20 [2 favorites]
Mod note: I'm thinking the idea of having one page with all the committees, the elections, the boards.
I am working today on a General Information page that does things like this, it'll be mentioned in the Site Update, which is running a little late (should have been posted this week but waiting on some information)
The site update should happen by Wednesday of next week at the very latest. If it doesn't, mods will make a post a MeTa explaining the delay.]
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 3:44 PM on March 20
I am working today on a General Information page that does things like this, it'll be mentioned in the Site Update, which is running a little late (should have been posted this week but waiting on some information)
The site update should happen by Wednesday of next week at the very latest. If it doesn't, mods will make a post a MeTa explaining the delay.]
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 3:44 PM on March 20
Clarifying just one part of this discussion as someone who was on the board from inception (Sep 19, 2020) until Oct 19, 2024, to help fill in some information gaps:
tivalasvegas asked
I think the board probably needs a designated secretary to take the notes and write up minutes if you don't have one already (it sounds like a staff person has been responsible for that in the past and possibly still is?)
cendawanita responded
Oh no, before Nov 2024, that was a board member volunteering to do so (edit: apologies for the recall issue, there were 2).
This wasn't quite the case. From inception in 2020 until April/May 2023, a staff person was responsible for taking notes and writing minutes, with other members and attendees welcome to comment and suggest edits. The final meeting minutes published were reviewed and approved by all attendees of the respective meetings. There was no other designated or default secretary/notetaker besides the staff person.
Around April 2023, the staff person requested additional support from board members for compiling the minutes, and the board was in agreement that the minutes workflow should be revamped. The board decided that meeting minutes should be taken and compiled collaboratively by all members, with members filling in notes during the meeting and making edits in the week after. (The new workflow was detailed in April 2023's minutes - item 7.) There were no specifically-designated members for minute-taking (or rather no members for whom minute-taking was a mandatory task): with varying schedules and capacities for notetaking and asynchronous work, members would contribute what they could on a meeting-to-meeting basis, although some were able to help more often and more consistently. The final meeting minutes published continued to be reviewed and approved by all attendees of the respective meetings.
When I left the board in Oct last year this was more or less still the official policy and workflow at that time, although I know the board was also keen to make more adjustments and improvements to the workflow. I appreciate the current board's efforts to figure this out, especially in light of the personnel changes that have taken place over the past year or so.
posted by aielen at 3:45 PM on March 20 [9 favorites]
tivalasvegas asked
I think the board probably needs a designated secretary to take the notes and write up minutes if you don't have one already (it sounds like a staff person has been responsible for that in the past and possibly still is?)
cendawanita responded
Oh no, before Nov 2024, that was a board member volunteering to do so (edit: apologies for the recall issue, there were 2).
This wasn't quite the case. From inception in 2020 until April/May 2023, a staff person was responsible for taking notes and writing minutes, with other members and attendees welcome to comment and suggest edits. The final meeting minutes published were reviewed and approved by all attendees of the respective meetings. There was no other designated or default secretary/notetaker besides the staff person.
Around April 2023, the staff person requested additional support from board members for compiling the minutes, and the board was in agreement that the minutes workflow should be revamped. The board decided that meeting minutes should be taken and compiled collaboratively by all members, with members filling in notes during the meeting and making edits in the week after. (The new workflow was detailed in April 2023's minutes - item 7.) There were no specifically-designated members for minute-taking (or rather no members for whom minute-taking was a mandatory task): with varying schedules and capacities for notetaking and asynchronous work, members would contribute what they could on a meeting-to-meeting basis, although some were able to help more often and more consistently. The final meeting minutes published continued to be reviewed and approved by all attendees of the respective meetings.
When I left the board in Oct last year this was more or less still the official policy and workflow at that time, although I know the board was also keen to make more adjustments and improvements to the workflow. I appreciate the current board's efforts to figure this out, especially in light of the personnel changes that have taken place over the past year or so.
posted by aielen at 3:45 PM on March 20 [9 favorites]
There is a list of staff and committees, though it's kind of hidden in the FAQ. There should be a staff page, with a link in the footer. Which by the way still has a link to the defunct Steering Committee.
posted by zompist at 3:58 PM on March 20 [1 favorite]
posted by zompist at 3:58 PM on March 20 [1 favorite]
Mod note: There is a list of staff and committees...
That's the page I mentioned a few comments ago and since it's publicly visible now, just gonna leave it so. Was waiting for confirmation on who is currently on the BiPOC committee, which I got about 30 minutes ago.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:06 PM on March 20
That's the page I mentioned a few comments ago and since it's publicly visible now, just gonna leave it so. Was waiting for confirmation on who is currently on the BiPOC committee, which I got about 30 minutes ago.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:06 PM on March 20
Does the BIPOC board report to the interim board? Have they ever done so? Or does the BIPOC board report to staff and if so, how do they report to staff? How does the output of their meetings effect change on the site, in other words?
posted by ssg at 4:22 PM on March 20 [4 favorites]
posted by ssg at 4:22 PM on March 20 [4 favorites]
I wish I was surprised that this is the state of affairs with the BIPOC board, but... it's increasingly obvious that all the past "we're going to do better" talk was just that: talk, designed to get the troublesome folks (meaning non-white, non-cis folks) to shut up and accept whatever crumbs might happen to fall their way.
posted by maryellenreads at 4:27 PM on March 20 [10 favorites]
posted by maryellenreads at 4:27 PM on March 20 [10 favorites]
Beyond tired of every MeTa turning into a "Let's attack the mods" post. You're attacking them because you want them to fix racism. What makes you think they can fix racism when the entire world can't? They can't make the whole world unicorns and puppies any more than you or I can.
Well, that's certainly a take.
posted by maryellenreads at 4:31 PM on March 20 [14 favorites]
Well, that's certainly a take.
posted by maryellenreads at 4:31 PM on March 20 [14 favorites]
(still speaking for myself)
Does the BIPOC board report to the interim board?
Not as far as I know.
I appreciate the call to be more present. I know I have personally pointed out that I don't hang out anywhere else but the main site (the Blue) when invited to join the board + I'm not a Western-residing minority just a global southie, but I did in the end decided to stay on (and take aielen's recollection as fact as I joined much later in 2023). I don't behave as though I'm representing any body though, but I would say my contributions there as a commenter/member have been heavy on representing a non-western viewpoint. For reasons due to site culture (a greater issue than the mods) however, the remaining board members inc myself have opted to further reduce our participation here - this has been what's on my mind when it comes to being more aware of what's going on, talking about the same things/dynamics which's led us to reduce participation here in the first place.
posted by cendawanita at 4:42 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
Does the BIPOC board report to the interim board?
Not as far as I know.
I appreciate the call to be more present. I know I have personally pointed out that I don't hang out anywhere else but the main site (the Blue) when invited to join the board + I'm not a Western-residing minority just a global southie, but I did in the end decided to stay on (and take aielen's recollection as fact as I joined much later in 2023). I don't behave as though I'm representing any body though, but I would say my contributions there as a commenter/member have been heavy on representing a non-western viewpoint. For reasons due to site culture (a greater issue than the mods) however, the remaining board members inc myself have opted to further reduce our participation here - this has been what's on my mind when it comes to being more aware of what's going on, talking about the same things/dynamics which's led us to reduce participation here in the first place.
posted by cendawanita at 4:42 PM on March 20 [6 favorites]
You're attacking them because you want them to fix racism.
Always a hot take with this one
posted by donnagirl at 5:14 PM on March 20 [14 favorites]
Always a hot take with this one
posted by donnagirl at 5:14 PM on March 20 [14 favorites]
Cendawanita, can you clarify: when you say the remaining board members inc myself have opted to further reduce our participation here does “here” mean MetaTalk or Metafilter in general?
posted by Vatnesine at 5:27 PM on March 20
posted by Vatnesine at 5:27 PM on March 20
Either way, that seems exactly like the sort of scenario where the board should make a recommendation to ameliorate that, and the mods should respond to it. Hard to say if that in fact happened in the absence of minutes, though.
posted by sagc at 5:31 PM on March 20
posted by sagc at 5:31 PM on March 20
Mefi in general.
posted by cendawanita at 5:44 PM on March 20
posted by cendawanita at 5:44 PM on March 20
This is MeFi's loss, I'm sorry to hear it
posted by ginger.beef at 6:29 PM on March 20 [11 favorites]
posted by ginger.beef at 6:29 PM on March 20 [11 favorites]
It is MeFi's loss, but it's important to note that the loss happened a long time ago, and was very quiet.
If the BIPOC board members are souring on Metafilter...
and they don't care enough to post minutes...
and they haven't done anything...
... what if we stopped doing it? Let's stop.
posted by Vatnesine at 8:09 PM on March 20 [5 favorites]
If the BIPOC board members are souring on Metafilter...
and they don't care enough to post minutes...
and they haven't done anything...
... what if we stopped doing it? Let's stop.
posted by Vatnesine at 8:09 PM on March 20 [5 favorites]
I don't think they don't care enough and I don't think they haven't done anything, but I think the overall point is worth considering if the current structure is just causing burnout among BIPOC board members without a lot of forward progress (for whatever reason).
Maybe it does make sense to dissolve it for now and reconstitute something that better meets the needs that were identified in the creation of the BIPOC board. At this point, I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but it's worth thinking about.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:16 PM on March 20 [2 favorites]
Maybe it does make sense to dissolve it for now and reconstitute something that better meets the needs that were identified in the creation of the BIPOC board. At this point, I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but it's worth thinking about.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:16 PM on March 20 [2 favorites]
Appreciate the concern but the board isn't why I'm gearing down. Should I retype my comments? Did I indicate people didn't care enough to post minutes? I did say site culture. I did also say I don't make a habit of checking Talk. I did say that if I'm active it's on the Blue. For the record I'm just a holdout at this point when it comes to dealing with Westerners' casually validating the point of view of a genocidal state across random threads while staying well out of the ones where the crimes are documented.
posted by cendawanita at 8:34 PM on March 20 [17 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 8:34 PM on March 20 [17 favorites]
I didn't realize participating in the board is to be the class prefect. I say that sarcastically but I'm also literal-minded enough to ask if that's really what people want, because sure, let's talk about it.
posted by cendawanita at 8:38 PM on March 20 [5 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 8:38 PM on March 20 [5 favorites]
Let's go back to the first "Hearing from our members of color" thread on MetaTalk. That thread came about as a result of jj's.mama buttoning because her post about an incident of racism was deleted for being "outragefilter" (MetaTalk thread). cortex acknowledged it was a bad decision and apologised to jj's.mama for "the crappy experience."
In many ways, this echoes the recent deletion of nouvelle-personne's comments, which also resulted in an apology. Both deletions happened because a mod was oversensitive to reading about racism experienced by Black people, especially when written without a special regard for non-Black people's comfort.
Ok, back to 2019. In that thread, divabat shared links to discussions of racism going back to 2001. There was wide acknowledgment that the MetaFilter community had problems with racism. Many of us believed that the moderators failed to address racism or, sometimes, actively perpetuated it. We had three more BIPOC-only threads (two, three, four).
Somewhere in that first POC-only thread, Brandon Blatcher (before he was a moderator) proposed on a whim that "mefites of color organize themselves into a small board/group/whatever and present a bi-monthly/quarterly report to the mods via MeTa on how PoC issues on the site are going" and also mentioned "If a PoC mod is hired at some point, [...]".
After the first POC-only thread, cortex decided to hire a POC mod and eventually hired travelingthyme part-time, who created the BIPOC board "as an intentional space and tool for addressing the ongoing concerns of the site."
Acknowledging the problem is the first step toward accountability.
posted by ftrtts at 6:39 AM on March 21 [22 favorites]
In many ways, this echoes the recent deletion of nouvelle-personne's comments, which also resulted in an apology. Both deletions happened because a mod was oversensitive to reading about racism experienced by Black people, especially when written without a special regard for non-Black people's comfort.
Ok, back to 2019. In that thread, divabat shared links to discussions of racism going back to 2001. There was wide acknowledgment that the MetaFilter community had problems with racism. Many of us believed that the moderators failed to address racism or, sometimes, actively perpetuated it. We had three more BIPOC-only threads (two, three, four).
Somewhere in that first POC-only thread, Brandon Blatcher (before he was a moderator) proposed on a whim that "mefites of color organize themselves into a small board/group/whatever and present a bi-monthly/quarterly report to the mods via MeTa on how PoC issues on the site are going" and also mentioned "If a PoC mod is hired at some point, [...]".
After the first POC-only thread, cortex decided to hire a POC mod and eventually hired travelingthyme part-time, who created the BIPOC board "as an intentional space and tool for addressing the ongoing concerns of the site."
I wish I was surprised that this is the state of affairs with the BIPOC board, but... it's increasingly obvious that all the past "we're going to do better" talk was just that: talk, designed to get the troublesome folks (meaning non-white, non-cis folks) to shut up and accept whatever crumbs might happen to fall their way.The BIPOC board always seemed like an attempt to address the problems of people of color without reckoning with racism. The original BIPOC board announcement doesn't mention racism. It only mentions race in the context of the members of the board. It promised "tangible and sustainable results." To what end? It's the bureaucratic equivalent of trying to moderate racism without making white people uncomfortable.
Acknowledging the problem is the first step toward accountability.
posted by ftrtts at 6:39 AM on March 21 [22 favorites]
I didn't realize participating in the board is to be the class prefect. I say that sarcastically but I'm also literal-minded enough to ask if that's really what people want, because sure, let's talk about it.
Speaking for myself, here's what I'd like to see: a workable and effective strategy to address ongoing issues that have been or will be identified by BIPOC MeFites.
I don't have a problem making the assumption that the establishment of the BIPOC committee was a good-faith attempt to address this. That being said, there have been serious problems with how that has worked out; I think pretty much everyone would agree that we haven't seen the results that we had been hoping for from this. Assigning fault or blame is probably not particularly helpful here, but we do need to look dispassionately at what the problems are and how they can be addressed.
I would add to the above list that I'd like to see a situation where BIPOC people who volunteer for the board don't get burnt out. Almost by definition these are the people who have demonstrated the highest commitment to addressing this issue, and while the committee may or may not have made every decision perfectly, the fact that burnout and stepping-back or resigning is an ongoing issue for them is not good and needs to be addressed as well.
BIPOC committee members shouldn't have to feel like they are "prefects" or like they need to spend a bunch of time monitoring contentious MeTas to explain or defend stuff. So part of the solution is figuring out how to build and maintain regular and workable/sustainable lines of communication between the community and the committee, whether it continues to exist in the general current format or changes in some way.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:06 AM on March 21 [7 favorites]
Speaking for myself, here's what I'd like to see: a workable and effective strategy to address ongoing issues that have been or will be identified by BIPOC MeFites.
I don't have a problem making the assumption that the establishment of the BIPOC committee was a good-faith attempt to address this. That being said, there have been serious problems with how that has worked out; I think pretty much everyone would agree that we haven't seen the results that we had been hoping for from this. Assigning fault or blame is probably not particularly helpful here, but we do need to look dispassionately at what the problems are and how they can be addressed.
I would add to the above list that I'd like to see a situation where BIPOC people who volunteer for the board don't get burnt out. Almost by definition these are the people who have demonstrated the highest commitment to addressing this issue, and while the committee may or may not have made every decision perfectly, the fact that burnout and stepping-back or resigning is an ongoing issue for them is not good and needs to be addressed as well.
BIPOC committee members shouldn't have to feel like they are "prefects" or like they need to spend a bunch of time monitoring contentious MeTas to explain or defend stuff. So part of the solution is figuring out how to build and maintain regular and workable/sustainable lines of communication between the community and the committee, whether it continues to exist in the general current format or changes in some way.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:06 AM on March 21 [7 favorites]
Clarification note: when people talk about being a “prefect”, I think this means that they feel as if they are being role models / held to a higher standard.
It’s not a common American word, let me know if I’m misunderstanding.
posted by Vatnesine at 7:24 AM on March 21 [1 favorite]
It’s not a common American word, let me know if I’m misunderstanding.
posted by Vatnesine at 7:24 AM on March 21 [1 favorite]
hello, artist formerly known as divabat here
Man, looking back at that PoC only thread is a trip. I fought so hard for there to be PoC mods. Willing to burn everything down for it too. And look, we have PoC mods now!
But did that actually bring about any of the changes I was predicting would happen? Not really. Now there's just threads upon threads about how the mods are failing Metafilter somehow, then this one, and it doesn't seem like PoC members are feeling any more comfortable posting here even with greater representation within the mod base.
Wonder why that is tbh :( I did button divabat and take a break from Mefi for a couple of years before returning, looks like a lot happened in between.
posted by creatrixtiara at 7:39 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
Man, looking back at that PoC only thread is a trip. I fought so hard for there to be PoC mods. Willing to burn everything down for it too. And look, we have PoC mods now!
But did that actually bring about any of the changes I was predicting would happen? Not really. Now there's just threads upon threads about how the mods are failing Metafilter somehow, then this one, and it doesn't seem like PoC members are feeling any more comfortable posting here even with greater representation within the mod base.
Wonder why that is tbh :( I did button divabat and take a break from Mefi for a couple of years before returning, looks like a lot happened in between.
posted by creatrixtiara at 7:39 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
A prefect at my school was a student elected by their house who headed up the house and also came to talk to you if your bad behaviour was resulting in losing too many house points, because everyone wanted to win the House Cup at the end of the year. It was an internally-prestigious but really a pain in the butt role.
(Wasn't Hogwarts, no.)
(I was in Cody in case anyone from my high school is lurking. :))
posted by warriorqueen at 7:42 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
(Wasn't Hogwarts, no.)
(I was in Cody in case anyone from my high school is lurking. :))
posted by warriorqueen at 7:42 AM on March 21 [2 favorites]
I didn't realize participating in the board is to be the class prefect. I say that sarcastically but I'm also literal-minded enough to ask if that's really what people want, because sure, let's talk about it.
posted by cendawanita
I think I understand this, you do feel like as a person with direct knowledge of a situation, that you become the focus of the conversation. You wanted to provide facts and now people expect you to provide answers to things that are outside of your experience or about things that happened before you even joined. I see that pattern a lot with interim board members and people like kirkaracha when they speak up in meta. They're trying to help out but have to deal with a lot of overlapping frustrations from people, which are usually justified frustrations but not always useful in the specific conversation being had.
As always, it is not even clear who can make a decision here. Who is empowered to do so, who is ethically right in doing so, and who will actually do so. It is just a spiral of increasing decisions - should this decision be made before the board elections or after?
posted by soelo at 7:52 AM on March 21 [4 favorites]
posted by cendawanita
I think I understand this, you do feel like as a person with direct knowledge of a situation, that you become the focus of the conversation. You wanted to provide facts and now people expect you to provide answers to things that are outside of your experience or about things that happened before you even joined. I see that pattern a lot with interim board members and people like kirkaracha when they speak up in meta. They're trying to help out but have to deal with a lot of overlapping frustrations from people, which are usually justified frustrations but not always useful in the specific conversation being had.
As always, it is not even clear who can make a decision here. Who is empowered to do so, who is ethically right in doing so, and who will actually do so. It is just a spiral of increasing decisions - should this decision be made before the board elections or after?
posted by soelo at 7:52 AM on March 21 [4 favorites]
Somewhere in that first POC-only thread, Brandon Blatcher (before he was a moderator) proposed on a whim that...
Ok, here's my current ideas based on the years since then and being a mod and being a person who doesn't like meetings, though realizes they are important:
Find several people to work on BIPOC issues. This is critical, 'cause in my experience of doing things on MeFi and watching things be done, having several people helps to keep the project moving forward or make the inevitable stalls short ('cause volunteering on MeFi tends to take up more time than people originally guess).
Start tracking on site racist issues/incidents via a Google Sheet. Set up an email that people can report incidents to and keep tracking them. Do this for several months to get an idea of the current situation regarding BIPOC issue.
Or publish a report of the incidents every month, via MeTa to educate people or at least illustrate what the issues are. 'Cause not every POC may have the same thoughts about a particular incident and Non-POC people are blind to most of these incidents. If going this route, have a firm deadline, like every third Monday of the month and stick to it religiously, no matter what. Consistency is important. It's ok to leave things out to meet the deadline. Having a report with only one
It may be tempting to start with solution, like the BIPOC board should do X, but I think having incidents that illustrate what's going would be more helpful to start with and from there people can formulate what an end or ongoing goal is. "Stopping racism on the site" is a good goal, but impossible. "Pointing out incidents of racism to those who do them and the community itself" is more attainable goal because it's specific.
I loved Jessamyn's cooter clock and have often thought something similar should be adopted for BIPOC issues.
I would keep meetings to a minimum, because they take time, always go longer than you think, are notoriously difficult to coordinate with people from around the globe, and time is a limited resource when you're volunteering.
As always, it is not even clear who can make a decision here. Who is empowered to do so, who is ethically right in doing so, and who will actually do so. It is just a spiral of increasing decisions - should this decision be made before the board elections or after?
I'd recommend deciding on a course of action, talk with the current BIPOD members about it and move forward. No need to wait for moderators or Board members.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:22 AM on March 21
Ok, here's my current ideas based on the years since then and being a mod and being a person who doesn't like meetings, though realizes they are important:
Find several people to work on BIPOC issues. This is critical, 'cause in my experience of doing things on MeFi and watching things be done, having several people helps to keep the project moving forward or make the inevitable stalls short ('cause volunteering on MeFi tends to take up more time than people originally guess).
Start tracking on site racist issues/incidents via a Google Sheet. Set up an email that people can report incidents to and keep tracking them. Do this for several months to get an idea of the current situation regarding BIPOC issue.
Or publish a report of the incidents every month, via MeTa to educate people or at least illustrate what the issues are. 'Cause not every POC may have the same thoughts about a particular incident and Non-POC people are blind to most of these incidents. If going this route, have a firm deadline, like every third Monday of the month and stick to it religiously, no matter what. Consistency is important. It's ok to leave things out to meet the deadline. Having a report with only one
It may be tempting to start with solution, like the BIPOC board should do X, but I think having incidents that illustrate what's going would be more helpful to start with and from there people can formulate what an end or ongoing goal is. "Stopping racism on the site" is a good goal, but impossible. "Pointing out incidents of racism to those who do them and the community itself" is more attainable goal because it's specific.
I loved Jessamyn's cooter clock and have often thought something similar should be adopted for BIPOC issues.
I would keep meetings to a minimum, because they take time, always go longer than you think, are notoriously difficult to coordinate with people from around the globe, and time is a limited resource when you're volunteering.
As always, it is not even clear who can make a decision here. Who is empowered to do so, who is ethically right in doing so, and who will actually do so. It is just a spiral of increasing decisions - should this decision be made before the board elections or after?
I'd recommend deciding on a course of action, talk with the current BIPOD members about it and move forward. No need to wait for moderators or Board members.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:22 AM on March 21
Eh I'm not a fan of the "report on racist incidents for education" idea. We already have that in the form of Metatalk threads, and as one of my divabat-era comments shows, we've had more than enough opportunity for education.
The issue here is systemic change, especially from leadership. That's why the board was formed to begin with. The Incidents are symptoms. Doing a report without actually making any structural meaningful change is just busywork.
Also there's something very cop-like about it that doesn't sit right with me.
posted by creatrixtiara at 8:49 AM on March 21 [11 favorites]
The issue here is systemic change, especially from leadership. That's why the board was formed to begin with. The Incidents are symptoms. Doing a report without actually making any structural meaningful change is just busywork.
Also there's something very cop-like about it that doesn't sit right with me.
posted by creatrixtiara at 8:49 AM on March 21 [11 favorites]
Also there's something very cop-like about it that doesn't sit right with me.
Part of my work involves working on racial equity projects and culture change, and one of the other equity managers and I were talking about how we don't want to be "the racism police." It's not helpful to the culture, because it makes everyone defensive and anxious about being called out, and as creatrixitiara says, it doesn't create meaningful change.
What authority would a BIPOC board (committee?) have/do they have now? It seems like there should be structures and policies in place about what they have jurisdiction over and how they're interacting with the Board and moderators. It didn't seem like the mods or owner was listening to them previously. Given that we're still waiting on the Board taking any real authority, I don't think there's much possibility for creating structures of authority right now. Absent that, they're basically stuck playing an activist/advocacy role and trying to convince other people to do things. Which is fine and useful, if that's what they want to do, but that doesn't seem like the site should benefit from the illusion that it has a "board" guiding its way around racism on the site.
posted by lapis at 9:12 AM on March 21 [7 favorites]
Part of my work involves working on racial equity projects and culture change, and one of the other equity managers and I were talking about how we don't want to be "the racism police." It's not helpful to the culture, because it makes everyone defensive and anxious about being called out, and as creatrixitiara says, it doesn't create meaningful change.
What authority would a BIPOC board (committee?) have/do they have now? It seems like there should be structures and policies in place about what they have jurisdiction over and how they're interacting with the Board and moderators. It didn't seem like the mods or owner was listening to them previously. Given that we're still waiting on the Board taking any real authority, I don't think there's much possibility for creating structures of authority right now. Absent that, they're basically stuck playing an activist/advocacy role and trying to convince other people to do things. Which is fine and useful, if that's what they want to do, but that doesn't seem like the site should benefit from the illusion that it has a "board" guiding its way around racism on the site.
posted by lapis at 9:12 AM on March 21 [7 favorites]
Absent that, they're basically stuck playing an activist/advocacy role and trying to convince other people to do things.
Unless I've missed something, the BIPOC board is definitely not playing an activist/advocacy role (because that would be visible on the site). So unless the board is giving feedback to mods via travelingthyme, it's not entirely clear what they are doing.
posted by ssg at 9:57 AM on March 21
Unless I've missed something, the BIPOC board is definitely not playing an activist/advocacy role (because that would be visible on the site). So unless the board is giving feedback to mods via travelingthyme, it's not entirely clear what they are doing.
posted by ssg at 9:57 AM on March 21
Regarding "cooter clock"----Do people not know that cooter is a slang euphemism for a woman's genitalia? Wow. Metafilter is so embarrassing.
posted by mxjudyliza at 10:05 AM on March 21
posted by mxjudyliza at 10:05 AM on March 21
Regarding "cooter clock"----Do people not know that cooter is a slang euphemism for a woman's genitalia? Wow. Metafilter is so embarrassing.
Yes, I think that was Jessamyn's point.
posted by kbanas at 10:17 AM on March 21 [26 favorites]
Yes, I think that was Jessamyn's point.
posted by kbanas at 10:17 AM on March 21 [26 favorites]
I guess my question is, if the staff believe that anti-racism work is a high priority, what are staff wanting and willing to do differently? I had forgotten that the committee was initiated by a mod actually.
I admit that after the now-removed-from-easy-viewing and comments-deleted post about the n-p situation in MetaTalk, as well as the whole original situation and the two other incidents around that time, I do not know what to think about anti-racism activities on the site as a whole.
In any case once we get the moderation second-look process in place (delay is on me due to my organizational capacities being temporarily blown out by palliative care arrangements, in-patient arrangements and work) we'll definitely look for patterns and insights and recommendations.
Anti-racism work is everyone's work.
posted by warriorqueen at 10:35 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
I admit that after the now-removed-from-easy-viewing and comments-deleted post about the n-p situation in MetaTalk, as well as the whole original situation and the two other incidents around that time, I do not know what to think about anti-racism activities on the site as a whole.
In any case once we get the moderation second-look process in place (delay is on me due to my organizational capacities being temporarily blown out by palliative care arrangements, in-patient arrangements and work) we'll definitely look for patterns and insights and recommendations.
Anti-racism work is everyone's work.
posted by warriorqueen at 10:35 AM on March 21 [13 favorites]
The anotherpanacea thread was a fucking disaster, and it's an embarrassment to Metafilter that his horrifically shitty, mask off, increasingly explicitly racist comments in that thread were all memory holed--not by mod action for removing shitty content that broke guidelines and disrespected our non white userbase, but because anotherpanacea dirty deleted and fucked off.
Everything about that thread is proof that the staff are maintaining the status quo.
That thread should either have been better moderated and called out for being gross immediately upon becoming gross, or left to stand as an example of what every POC has been telling this community for YEARS, that we've got problems with racism. Instead the harm was allowed to be done and the rude ass white boy was allowed to scarper off with his dignity sanitized.
posted by phunniemee at 10:53 AM on March 21 [24 favorites]
Everything about that thread is proof that the staff are maintaining the status quo.
That thread should either have been better moderated and called out for being gross immediately upon becoming gross, or left to stand as an example of what every POC has been telling this community for YEARS, that we've got problems with racism. Instead the harm was allowed to be done and the rude ass white boy was allowed to scarper off with his dignity sanitized.
posted by phunniemee at 10:53 AM on March 21 [24 favorites]
Agreed, it was that thread that really planted the seed in my head for this post. The issues there were exactly the reason the BIPOC board was created, and they were completely invisible. I’d read the minutes to see if anyone thought to say anything to them about it, or if they had anything to say about it but, you know…
posted by Vatnesine at 11:50 AM on March 21 [4 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 11:50 AM on March 21 [4 favorites]
Unless I've missed something, the BIPOC board is definitely not playing an activist/advocacy role (because that would be visible on the site).
Yes, sorry, I agree. My verb tenses were confusing. I meant that that pleading with the mods but not having any authority would be the only real role available to them, which is no different from any other user. Not that they had chosen to play that role (which is understandable). Having fake authority is worse than not having authority, because people blame you for stuff that you can't fix, and the people who can fix it avoid accountability by blaming you. It's a no-win situation.
posted by lapis at 12:49 PM on March 21 [6 favorites]
Yes, sorry, I agree. My verb tenses were confusing. I meant that that pleading with the mods but not having any authority would be the only real role available to them, which is no different from any other user. Not that they had chosen to play that role (which is understandable). Having fake authority is worse than not having authority, because people blame you for stuff that you can't fix, and the people who can fix it avoid accountability by blaming you. It's a no-win situation.
posted by lapis at 12:49 PM on March 21 [6 favorites]
My understanding was that the BIPOC Board was intended to provide a place for users to be heard if they were feeling unheard on the site itself. That is, to serve at least part of the time in an ombuds or intermediary role for the complainant, as well as possibly an advisory role for the site.
In the Board's published minutes, however, there is extensive detail on Loup's repeated promises to complete a task, but then failing to do so. I believe this is at least part of what led to them having an accountability partner. From the vantage point of reader, rather than participant, this seemed to be repeatedly blocking Board progress.
In the last published set of minutes, it's mentioned that Aielen served as informal ombudsperson in two instances.
If I got any of this wrong, members should feel free to correct me. I always thought an intermediary/advisory Board always seemed like a good idea, and I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on what went wrong, and how it could be made right.
posted by Violet Blue at 1:24 PM on March 21 [1 favorite]
In the Board's published minutes, however, there is extensive detail on Loup's repeated promises to complete a task, but then failing to do so. I believe this is at least part of what led to them having an accountability partner. From the vantage point of reader, rather than participant, this seemed to be repeatedly blocking Board progress.
In the last published set of minutes, it's mentioned that Aielen served as informal ombudsperson in two instances.
If I got any of this wrong, members should feel free to correct me. I always thought an intermediary/advisory Board always seemed like a good idea, and I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on what went wrong, and how it could be made right.
posted by Violet Blue at 1:24 PM on March 21 [1 favorite]
I guess my question is, if the staff believe that anti-racism work is a high priority, what are staff wanting and willing to do differently?
Loup's off this weekend, and Travelingthyme is off today, so I'll just chime in and say we're open to offering help and support. My person suggestions are above, so willing to help with setting up a form, tracking data, participating in discussions and reviews. Always available for questions and advice.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 9:02 AM on March 22
Loup's off this weekend, and Travelingthyme is off today, so I'll just chime in and say we're open to offering help and support. My person suggestions are above, so willing to help with setting up a form, tracking data, participating in discussions and reviews. Always available for questions and advice.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 9:02 AM on March 22
The site/foundation are not functional enough to really have a productive BIPOC board, in my opinion. Who would they report their findings to? Who would implement recommended changes? The site has had a complete leadership vacuum for years and the current interim board intends to perpetuate that for months (years?) before the election of a real board or hiring someone to lead the foundation. It is totally unlikely that even a perfectly functioning BIPOC board could actually do anything given the overall situation.
posted by snofoam at 10:40 AM on March 22 [18 favorites]
posted by snofoam at 10:40 AM on March 22 [18 favorites]
I have just two very general suggestions:
1. Staff members should not be voting members of any boards or committees, etc. Staff members as voting members detracts from being community run.
2. Any minutes should be a simple affair, indicating general discussion topics but specifics of any motions and votes. A staff member should take the minutes. they should go out before the next meeting, and amendments are made at the meeting, and they are voted on and finalized then.
posted by NotLost at 11:23 AM on March 22 [10 favorites]
1. Staff members should not be voting members of any boards or committees, etc. Staff members as voting members detracts from being community run.
2. Any minutes should be a simple affair, indicating general discussion topics but specifics of any motions and votes. A staff member should take the minutes. they should go out before the next meeting, and amendments are made at the meeting, and they are voted on and finalized then.
posted by NotLost at 11:23 AM on March 22 [10 favorites]
My person suggestions are above, so willing to help with setting up a form, tracking data, participating in discussions and reviews.
Did you catch the part where I and lapis said the Racism Tracker was not a good idea? Or are you more attached to your idea because you proposed it and therefore will not consider any other feedback?
Who is in charge? Where is the board? This requires systemic change - ok so where are the people running the system who will be the people responsible for implementing this change?
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:56 PM on March 22 [9 favorites]
Did you catch the part where I and lapis said the Racism Tracker was not a good idea? Or are you more attached to your idea because you proposed it and therefore will not consider any other feedback?
Who is in charge? Where is the board? This requires systemic change - ok so where are the people running the system who will be the people responsible for implementing this change?
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:56 PM on March 22 [9 favorites]
No one’s doing anything, creatrixtiara.
posted by Vatnesine at 3:56 PM on March 22 [3 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 3:56 PM on March 22 [3 favorites]
Or are you more attached to your idea because you proposed it and therefore will not consider any other feedback?
It’s this. It’s always been this.
posted by donnagirl at 5:10 PM on March 22 [10 favorites]
It’s this. It’s always been this.
posted by donnagirl at 5:10 PM on March 22 [10 favorites]
MetaFilter's history of handling minority issues is abysmal. Be they BIPOC, trans or Jewish (I recently attempted to post on the Grey about antisemitism, and the entire post was "disappeared" with nary a word), the mods repeatedly fail to take action or provide support despite a monthly four-mod cost of about $20k.
From that vantage point, the embarrassing failure of the BIPOC Board is to be expected.
posted by Violet Blue at 6:39 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
From that vantage point, the embarrassing failure of the BIPOC Board is to be expected.
posted by Violet Blue at 6:39 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
No one’s doing anything, creatrixtiara.
See this is where I am confused.
The point of a board - BIPOC or otherwise - is to govern over and advise the leadership of a particular organization.
Who is the leadership currently?
I know there's an interim board happening but who are they managing? Has anyone been appointed Director - not Director of the Board, but Director of Metafilter the organization? Who are the mods reporting to? Who is the BIPOC board advising?
This is not meant to be a slight on the mods but I'm trying to figure out the balance of power here. It feels a bit like the mods are the directors here, with Brandon as Head Mod? And also somehow defacto Metafilter Director because he's been the most proactive, whether or not we agree with his actions?
Maybe the mods have more agency than I realized to set up their own projects and plans, which is fine, but who are they reporting to? What's the hierarchy like?
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:51 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
See this is where I am confused.
The point of a board - BIPOC or otherwise - is to govern over and advise the leadership of a particular organization.
Who is the leadership currently?
I know there's an interim board happening but who are they managing? Has anyone been appointed Director - not Director of the Board, but Director of Metafilter the organization? Who are the mods reporting to? Who is the BIPOC board advising?
This is not meant to be a slight on the mods but I'm trying to figure out the balance of power here. It feels a bit like the mods are the directors here, with Brandon as Head Mod? And also somehow defacto Metafilter Director because he's been the most proactive, whether or not we agree with his actions?
Maybe the mods have more agency than I realized to set up their own projects and plans, which is fine, but who are they reporting to? What's the hierarchy like?
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:51 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
I thought posts on MeTa weren't supposed to be getting disappeared out of the queue without posting anymore? But it sounds like yet another one has been?
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:12 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:12 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
This is not meant to be a slight on the mods but I'm trying to figure out the balance of power here. It feels a bit like the mods are the directors here, with Brandon as Head Mod? And also somehow defacto Metafilter Director because he's been the most proactive, whether or not we agree with his actions?
I have been asking similar questions for quite a while and have come to the same conclusion. There's an interim board but the moderators don't seem to be reporting to them. The interim board says they don't want to do anything other than maintain the status quo because they weren't elected, so we need to wait for an elected board, but they are the only ones, legally, who can establish conditions for board elections (because those conditions need to be in the bylaws) and they seem to be just not doing anything with that, or if they are, it's not being communicated to anyone. Brandon says he speaks for the moderators. So yeah, as far as I can tell, Brandon is de facto in charge.
Which is not, as far as I can tell, what anyone (probably also including Brandon) wants, but no one who has the actual ability to change that seems to be doing anything to change it.
posted by lapis at 7:40 PM on March 22 [6 favorites]
I have been asking similar questions for quite a while and have come to the same conclusion. There's an interim board but the moderators don't seem to be reporting to them. The interim board says they don't want to do anything other than maintain the status quo because they weren't elected, so we need to wait for an elected board, but they are the only ones, legally, who can establish conditions for board elections (because those conditions need to be in the bylaws) and they seem to be just not doing anything with that, or if they are, it's not being communicated to anyone. Brandon says he speaks for the moderators. So yeah, as far as I can tell, Brandon is de facto in charge.
Which is not, as far as I can tell, what anyone (probably also including Brandon) wants, but no one who has the actual ability to change that seems to be doing anything to change it.
posted by lapis at 7:40 PM on March 22 [6 favorites]
So if I'm understanding lapis right:
[Chairperson of the Board]
|
|
|
[Board(s)]
|
|
|
[Director of Metafilter, currently non existent, previously would have been occupied by jessamyn/cortex/mathowie if MF was an NFP back then]
|
|
|
[Head Mod Brandon Blatcher, semi-official designation?]
|
|
|
[Other Mods, other staff like kirkaracha]
But due to the power vacuum that is the lack of the Metafilter Director, Brandon is now in charge?
posted by creatrixtiara at 8:36 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
[Chairperson of the Board]
|
|
|
[Board(s)]
|
|
|
[Director of Metafilter, currently non existent, previously would have been occupied by jessamyn/cortex/mathowie if MF was an NFP back then]
|
|
|
[Head Mod Brandon Blatcher, semi-official designation?]
|
|
|
[Other Mods, other staff like kirkaracha]
But due to the power vacuum that is the lack of the Metafilter Director, Brandon is now in charge?
posted by creatrixtiara at 8:36 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
Is Brandon really the head mod? My understanding was the he is the face of the mods but that loup is the admin mod. But possibly I missed a change.
posted by NotLost at 8:50 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
posted by NotLost at 8:50 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
NotLost: according to lapis: "Brandon says he speaks for the moderators."
which is why I've put him in Head Mod level
But I might be wrong! Which is why I want to Khloe what the governance structure actually is.
posted by creatrixtiara at 9:13 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
which is why I've put him in Head Mod level
But I might be wrong! Which is why I want to Khloe what the governance structure actually is.
posted by creatrixtiara at 9:13 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
*know not Khloe, autocorrect plus tired brain is a terrible combo
posted by creatrixtiara at 9:20 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
posted by creatrixtiara at 9:20 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
This page says loup does management and Brandon does communications.
posted by NotLost at 9:21 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
posted by NotLost at 9:21 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
Is loup making decisions?
By "de facto in charge," I mean the person who can say "yes" or "no." This came up in the thread about ending the MeTa queue. If the entire userbase (hypothetically) wants something, and Brandon says "no," then what happens? What if Brandon wants something that no one else wants? If Brandon is the last word, then he's in charge.
If loup is making decisions, that's not being communicated in any formal way. Brandon has certainly been presenting himself as the decider. Or when he (or the other mods) say it's not their decision, there's not any follow up that would indicate that someone else could actually enact any decision. Like with the queue -- staff on the site are the only people who can actually change that. Which means, absent any mechanisms by which anyone other than the board can direct the staff to do things, and given that the board refuses to direct anyone, the staff is in charge.
And creatrixtiara, I think it's more just "Board --> Mods/Staff." There aren't any directors or chairs. The idea of user-run was that the Board would be elected, but for now, it's just three (I think?) volunteers.
posted by lapis at 9:43 PM on March 22 [4 favorites]
By "de facto in charge," I mean the person who can say "yes" or "no." This came up in the thread about ending the MeTa queue. If the entire userbase (hypothetically) wants something, and Brandon says "no," then what happens? What if Brandon wants something that no one else wants? If Brandon is the last word, then he's in charge.
If loup is making decisions, that's not being communicated in any formal way. Brandon has certainly been presenting himself as the decider. Or when he (or the other mods) say it's not their decision, there's not any follow up that would indicate that someone else could actually enact any decision. Like with the queue -- staff on the site are the only people who can actually change that. Which means, absent any mechanisms by which anyone other than the board can direct the staff to do things, and given that the board refuses to direct anyone, the staff is in charge.
And creatrixtiara, I think it's more just "Board --> Mods/Staff." There aren't any directors or chairs. The idea of user-run was that the Board would be elected, but for now, it's just three (I think?) volunteers.
posted by lapis at 9:43 PM on March 22 [4 favorites]
Just because Brandon is the mouthpiece, that doesn't mean he's the decider.
posted by NotLost at 10:04 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
posted by NotLost at 10:04 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
But it doesn't bode well that we even need to be trying to figure this out.
posted by NotLost at 10:04 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
posted by NotLost at 10:04 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
Mod note: This page says loup does management and Brandon does communications.
Yep and loup reports to the board, which is currently the Interim Board. All the mods and developers have access to their Slack channel and can bring things up to them.
Creatrixtiara, if there's something in particular you think the staff should do or being in terms of the BiPOC, I'd recommend asking for that thing to be done publicly, like here in this thread. If there's specific tasks you think the Board needs done and you think a mod can assist with, just shoot us an email or make a MeTa with the ask
General purpose goals or discussion might better formal meetings, but that's y'all's call. The bottom line is that staff can and is willing to help, it's just a matter of defining that sort of help the BIPOC board wants
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:43 PM on March 22
Yep and loup reports to the board, which is currently the Interim Board. All the mods and developers have access to their Slack channel and can bring things up to them.
Creatrixtiara, if there's something in particular you think the staff should do or being in terms of the BiPOC, I'd recommend asking for that thing to be done publicly, like here in this thread. If there's specific tasks you think the Board needs done and you think a mod can assist with, just shoot us an email or make a MeTa with the ask
General purpose goals or discussion might better formal meetings, but that's y'all's call. The bottom line is that staff can and is willing to help, it's just a matter of defining that sort of help the BIPOC board wants
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:43 PM on March 22
Maybe The Closer is in charge. At work they're full-time LARPing a covert assassin that is also a ghost from a 90s rom-com set in an office in, like, Topeka or Gainesville, but the character they're LARPing as hasn't ever actually had an office job before going undercover for this one, and that's why they run this place like Steve Martin putting novocaine on his hands while trying to pass as a surgeon in the OR in The Jerk.
On preview: Oops, guess mot.
posted by knucklebones at 10:53 PM on March 22 [3 favorites]
On preview: Oops, guess mot.
posted by knucklebones at 10:53 PM on March 22 [3 favorites]
To my earlier point about the mods not being responsive to issues related to minorities: I posted a thread on antisemitism tonight, with something like 10 links and multiple paragraphs about a surge in US antisemitism thanks to the Trump administration, and with the help of podcasters like Joe Rogan and Theo Von.
The first comment was all about how the conservative Anti-Defamation League (ADL) position on the Palestinian protesters was not helping antisemitism. Nearly every subsequent comment of 24 and counting was about the evils of the ADL, or how wrong I was to criticize the first post. I was not supporting the ADL in the thread. The post was not about the ADL. In fact, it never mentioned it. Yet I got taken to task by one commenter for trying to point out that the comment was verging on anti-semitic and by another for not reading up on the ADL. As in every other thread I've been in — or posted — that's even peripherally about the Palestinians, the pro-Palestinian contingent saw fit to turn the thread into a referendum on matters Palestinian from a point of view that completely and utterly obliterates any other perspective that doesn't whole heartedly agree with them and renders all other Jewish issues unimportant. If that isn't fucking antisemitic I don't know what is. The mods, who ignored a plea for intervention, as usual, should be ashamed.
posted by Violet Blue at 10:56 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
The first comment was all about how the conservative Anti-Defamation League (ADL) position on the Palestinian protesters was not helping antisemitism. Nearly every subsequent comment of 24 and counting was about the evils of the ADL, or how wrong I was to criticize the first post. I was not supporting the ADL in the thread. The post was not about the ADL. In fact, it never mentioned it. Yet I got taken to task by one commenter for trying to point out that the comment was verging on anti-semitic and by another for not reading up on the ADL. As in every other thread I've been in — or posted — that's even peripherally about the Palestinians, the pro-Palestinian contingent saw fit to turn the thread into a referendum on matters Palestinian from a point of view that completely and utterly obliterates any other perspective that doesn't whole heartedly agree with them and renders all other Jewish issues unimportant. If that isn't fucking antisemitic I don't know what is. The mods, who ignored a plea for intervention, as usual, should be ashamed.
posted by Violet Blue at 10:56 PM on March 22 [5 favorites]
Can members of the BIPOC Board get a special-just-for-them button for downvoting comments?
posted by knucklebones at 11:02 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
posted by knucklebones at 11:02 PM on March 22 [2 favorites]
Creatrixtiara, if there's something in particular you think the staff should do or being in terms of the BiPOC, I'd recommend asking for that thing to be done publicly, like here in this thread. If there's specific tasks you think the Board needs done and you think a mod can assist with, just shoot us an email or make a MeTa with the ask
I'm not on the BIPOC board. I think I got offered a spot at one point, during my hiatus? But I'm not on the board and never have been, so I don't think it's my place to speak for them.
I believe that the BIPOC board was set up to address some significant systemic issues with how PoC and non-Americans were treated here in Metafilter, as a result of some intense discussions circa 2019, of which I was an active participant as divabat. For anything they come up with to take effect, they would need to talk to The Person In Charge of Metafilter, who can then actually set some plans in motion.
My concern, which seems to be what this thread is about, is that the BIPOC board seems to be doing nothing. Not necessarily because the board members aren't doing anything of note, but because there is no mechanism for any of their suggestions or concerns to be actioned by Metafilter staff. But also, it's not clear what sort of things they can do. Be an ombudsman figure? Mediate between staff and PoC members if any of them have direct issues with staff? Look at overall trends around PoC in online spaces (esp given the anti-DEI push in politics right now) and come up with ways that Metafilter should be engaging with those current issues?
Or are they just some kind of rubber stamp theatre for Metafilter to say "ok yup see we care about PoC!!" but do nothing else? Like how some people hire sensitivity readers just so they can say they hired sensitivity readers but take in none of their advice (I have been in that situation a few times)?
I keep saying systemic change because the changes Metafilter needs to put in to be more effective with marginalised member bases are deeper than just actions the mods can spin up. It's looking at moderation policy. It's looking at hiring practices. It's looking at how rules around queues or self-linking or whatever affect marginalised groups (sometimes the effects are negligible, but it's worth considering). It would have to be part of the bylaws and constitution created by the Metafilter Foundation.
Are the mods the main staff members tasked with those kinds of systemic decisions then? Should they be?
My last job was in a situation where technically I was meant to report to the Directors and they report to the Board, but there was only 3 of us as staff so all my meetings were with the board and directors anyway and I had a lot of direct interaction with the board Chair. And perhaps Mefi is small enough that this structure makes sense. But it still feels like there is a layer of accountability missing.
So yeah, I'm kinda hesitant to suggest anything the BIPOC board should be doing or what the staff should be doing for the Board because I'm not sure how empowered the BIPOC Board is to be doing much of anything.
posted by creatrixtiara at 11:14 PM on March 22 [20 favorites]
I'm not on the BIPOC board. I think I got offered a spot at one point, during my hiatus? But I'm not on the board and never have been, so I don't think it's my place to speak for them.
I believe that the BIPOC board was set up to address some significant systemic issues with how PoC and non-Americans were treated here in Metafilter, as a result of some intense discussions circa 2019, of which I was an active participant as divabat. For anything they come up with to take effect, they would need to talk to The Person In Charge of Metafilter, who can then actually set some plans in motion.
My concern, which seems to be what this thread is about, is that the BIPOC board seems to be doing nothing. Not necessarily because the board members aren't doing anything of note, but because there is no mechanism for any of their suggestions or concerns to be actioned by Metafilter staff. But also, it's not clear what sort of things they can do. Be an ombudsman figure? Mediate between staff and PoC members if any of them have direct issues with staff? Look at overall trends around PoC in online spaces (esp given the anti-DEI push in politics right now) and come up with ways that Metafilter should be engaging with those current issues?
Or are they just some kind of rubber stamp theatre for Metafilter to say "ok yup see we care about PoC!!" but do nothing else? Like how some people hire sensitivity readers just so they can say they hired sensitivity readers but take in none of their advice (I have been in that situation a few times)?
I keep saying systemic change because the changes Metafilter needs to put in to be more effective with marginalised member bases are deeper than just actions the mods can spin up. It's looking at moderation policy. It's looking at hiring practices. It's looking at how rules around queues or self-linking or whatever affect marginalised groups (sometimes the effects are negligible, but it's worth considering). It would have to be part of the bylaws and constitution created by the Metafilter Foundation.
Are the mods the main staff members tasked with those kinds of systemic decisions then? Should they be?
My last job was in a situation where technically I was meant to report to the Directors and they report to the Board, but there was only 3 of us as staff so all my meetings were with the board and directors anyway and I had a lot of direct interaction with the board Chair. And perhaps Mefi is small enough that this structure makes sense. But it still feels like there is a layer of accountability missing.
So yeah, I'm kinda hesitant to suggest anything the BIPOC board should be doing or what the staff should be doing for the Board because I'm not sure how empowered the BIPOC Board is to be doing much of anything.
posted by creatrixtiara at 11:14 PM on March 22 [20 favorites]
This is the comment is at the start of the thread on antisemitism mentioned above.
When I balked at the implicit argument in the comment, I was rebuked by a commenter. He got 13 likes.
Someone else wrote:
That's how it always goes with the pro Palestinian contingent. They pile on the likes. It's one of the ways they win their arguments. MFM has speculated whether folks like these are big donors. How else to explain the way they are allowed to enter, derail and functionally troll threads on antisemitism by complaining about an organization solely because they don't like how it is impacting pro Palestinian protesters.
posted by Violet Blue at 11:52 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
"It's not helping that ADL is fully abdicating its role, to prioritize targeting anti genocide protestors and crush Columbia rather than stand up to the Musk and CPAC."ADL's political values are *very* relevant to the pro-Palestinian contingent, and not particular relevant to the average Jewish person who will likely have no influence over their actions anyway, though some may actively dislike them. The comment got 27 favorites and counting, but all but silenced everything on antisemitism that came before it.
When I balked at the implicit argument in the comment, I was rebuked by a commenter. He got 13 likes.
Someone else wrote:
I am Jewish and will say with absolute certainty that the ADL has lost all credibility in my eyes. Fuck that phony ass organization and fuck Jonathan Greenblatt, and Abe Foxman before him. They don't just fail to meet their mandate, they expressly suck and contribute to the problem by trying to spread dangerous right wing nonsense about how anti-Israel speech is antisemitism. Not only does it not help, it deliberately harms. They can eat shit.They got 27 likes too. Hmm, I wonder from whom.
That's how it always goes with the pro Palestinian contingent. They pile on the likes. It's one of the ways they win their arguments. MFM has speculated whether folks like these are big donors. How else to explain the way they are allowed to enter, derail and functionally troll threads on antisemitism by complaining about an organization solely because they don't like how it is impacting pro Palestinian protesters.
posted by Violet Blue at 11:52 PM on March 22 [1 favorite]
And now, let's see.
posted by cendawanita at 11:59 PM on March 22 [4 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 11:59 PM on March 22 [4 favorites]
Violet Blue, I'm sorry that your original Metatalk post got removed, but this feels like a derail.
posted by creatrixtiara at 12:00 AM on March 23 [6 favorites]
posted by creatrixtiara at 12:00 AM on March 23 [6 favorites]
Yes, that's what happened to my thread too!
posted by Violet Blue at 12:02 AM on March 23
posted by Violet Blue at 12:02 AM on March 23
I would just like to state for the record that i have never given any money to MetaFilter beyond my $5 signup fee, and in fact i have no fucking money whatsoever, being both underemployed and the sole earner for a household of two people and two cats.
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:12 AM on March 23
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:12 AM on March 23
Sometimes an old post comes in quite handy.
posted by knucklebones at 12:22 AM on March 23 [11 favorites]
posted by knucklebones at 12:22 AM on March 23 [11 favorites]
And sometimes it's just an asshole move.
posted by Violet Blue at 1:49 AM on March 23
posted by Violet Blue at 1:49 AM on March 23
I'm sorry, what is the asshole move here? To say that a comment about how pro-Palestine members are "trolling" threads about anti-Semitism, with some bizarre claims about how they're able to get away with it because they're "big donors" (to who? Metafilter? The site that famously would not allow posts about I/P until the last couple of years because "we don't do it well"?), is derailing a thread about whether the BIPOC Board has actually been effective in its goals?
Like again, I'm sorry that your initial attempt to make a Metatalk thread about it didn't go so well and I'm not sure why that happened. But I don't think this thread is the avenue for it.
It feels especially egregious because there has been a pattern (everywhere, not pointing this at Metafilter in the specific) where pro-Palestine PoC in general have been accused of being "antisemitic pro-terrorists" to a degree that White pro-Palestine folk do not get, especially if they present as vaguely Muslim or Middle Eastern, because suddenly we're all for radical Islam or some shit. I'm not saying the PoC userbase here or even the BIPOC Board are all pro-Palestine, nor are they all necessarily good around antisemitism (I'm originally from a country that has anti-Semitism baked into its core so I get that there's plenty to judge). But posting this in this specific thread, especially with insinuations that those of us who are pro Palestine somehow paid off the moderators to be able to "derail and troll threads" and farm likes in the process, feels like a ton of dogwhistles going off at once.
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:26 AM on March 23 [22 favorites]
Like again, I'm sorry that your initial attempt to make a Metatalk thread about it didn't go so well and I'm not sure why that happened. But I don't think this thread is the avenue for it.
It feels especially egregious because there has been a pattern (everywhere, not pointing this at Metafilter in the specific) where pro-Palestine PoC in general have been accused of being "antisemitic pro-terrorists" to a degree that White pro-Palestine folk do not get, especially if they present as vaguely Muslim or Middle Eastern, because suddenly we're all for radical Islam or some shit. I'm not saying the PoC userbase here or even the BIPOC Board are all pro-Palestine, nor are they all necessarily good around antisemitism (I'm originally from a country that has anti-Semitism baked into its core so I get that there's plenty to judge). But posting this in this specific thread, especially with insinuations that those of us who are pro Palestine somehow paid off the moderators to be able to "derail and troll threads" and farm likes in the process, feels like a ton of dogwhistles going off at once.
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:26 AM on March 23 [22 favorites]
For the avoidance of doubt, "pro-Palestinian" and "Jewish" are not disjoint sets.
Also I'm pretty sure that at least three of the commenters who are criticizing the ADL in that thread are Jewish.
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:32 AM on March 23 [16 favorites]
Also I'm pretty sure that at least three of the commenters who are criticizing the ADL in that thread are Jewish.
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:32 AM on March 23 [16 favorites]
There is no thread for it. That's the point.
posted by Violet Blue at 2:48 AM on March 23
posted by Violet Blue at 2:48 AM on March 23
This poster has a track record of speaking for (and over) marginalized groups they don't belong to, then positioning themself and their allyship as the Real Victim Here as soon as actual members of those groups point out how that behavior isn't cool.
Not unrelatedly, there are many antizionist, pro-Palestinian Jews (in the US media their voices are platformed speaking out against genocide nearly as frequently as Palestinians are), but perhaps the Chief Rabbinate of Metafilter has determined we are not really Jewish.
posted by knucklebones at 2:49 AM on March 23 [15 favorites]
Not unrelatedly, there are many antizionist, pro-Palestinian Jews (in the US media their voices are platformed speaking out against genocide nearly as frequently as Palestinians are), but perhaps the Chief Rabbinate of Metafilter has determined we are not really Jewish.
posted by knucklebones at 2:49 AM on March 23 [15 favorites]
There is no thread for it. That's the point.
Ok, so why post about it in this thread in particular? Again, that your original post got removed sucks, but I don't see why this thread should now be the avenue for that discussion, especially with this insinuation about "big donors". It feels targeted.
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:55 AM on March 23 [12 favorites]
Ok, so why post about it in this thread in particular? Again, that your original post got removed sucks, but I don't see why this thread should now be the avenue for that discussion, especially with this insinuation about "big donors". It feels targeted.
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:55 AM on March 23 [12 favorites]
She lost her MetaTalk thread so we lose ours. Zionist logic.
posted by ftrtts at 3:49 AM on March 23 [7 favorites]
posted by ftrtts at 3:49 AM on March 23 [7 favorites]
Oh, get off your high horse VioletBlue. You started an I/P thread and immediately derailed it and now you're complaining about what, that you got silenced all your life?
I'm not particularly a fan of the MeTa queue but in this case, I fail to see what the point of it would be. "People don't agree with me and they're wrong" is not the winning argument you seem to think it is.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:33 AM on March 23 [8 favorites]
I'm not particularly a fan of the MeTa queue but in this case, I fail to see what the point of it would be. "People don't agree with me and they're wrong" is not the winning argument you seem to think it is.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:33 AM on March 23 [8 favorites]
Can you make a clearer connection between your deleted thread and the BIPOC board? It would help relate your comments to this thread.
posted by Vatnesine at 8:31 AM on March 23 [5 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 8:31 AM on March 23 [5 favorites]
They got 27 likes too. Hmm, I wonder from whom.
If you tap on the number in "[27 favorites +]" you can see who favorited the comment.
If you were saying that rhetorically, then I get that you were implying something, but I'm not sure what you were implying.
posted by Bugbread at 8:49 AM on March 23 [4 favorites]
If you tap on the number in "[27 favorites +]" you can see who favorited the comment.
If you were saying that rhetorically, then I get that you were implying something, but I'm not sure what you were implying.
posted by Bugbread at 8:49 AM on March 23 [4 favorites]
Pulling this from my comment on a different MeTa, but it's just as relevant here as it is there. Questions that I think should be answered to understand the scope of the BIPOC committee:
BIPOC:
1.I'll cross-post to the BIPOC thread, but... the BIPOC committee is down to three members? One of them still being an employee? Another employee called on "as needed?" So the BIPOC committee now has 33% - 50% staff representation at any given time? Maybe I am misremembering, but I thought the BIPOC committee was supposed to be an advisory committee to let staff know when they are failing the BIPOC community? That would seem pretty hard to do with so much staff on the committee.
2. Are 2 (or, generously 4) people really enough to represent BIPOC to make substantial changes to Metafilter? Has there been any substantial recruitment efforts to bring that committee back up to size? If so, why is it so low? If not, why not?
These questions are specifically in regards to this update to the FAQ.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 9:34 AM on March 23 [2 favorites]
BIPOC:
1.I'll cross-post to the BIPOC thread, but... the BIPOC committee is down to three members? One of them still being an employee? Another employee called on "as needed?" So the BIPOC committee now has 33% - 50% staff representation at any given time? Maybe I am misremembering, but I thought the BIPOC committee was supposed to be an advisory committee to let staff know when they are failing the BIPOC community? That would seem pretty hard to do with so much staff on the committee.
2. Are 2 (or, generously 4) people really enough to represent BIPOC to make substantial changes to Metafilter? Has there been any substantial recruitment efforts to bring that committee back up to size? If so, why is it so low? If not, why not?
These questions are specifically in regards to this update to the FAQ.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 9:34 AM on March 23 [2 favorites]
Mods should probably comment on the accusation that people who don't agree with V.B.'s regressive views are paying the mods off to allow them to bully V.B. by disagreeing with her
Or on the ongoing campaign to by V.B. to limit the range of acceptable opinions on MeFi by accusing basically everyone who interacts with them of "bullying", "derailing", paying off the mods, being a mob who follows her around favoriting comments she dislikes, making no true Scotsman arguments about which opinions are valid...
One or the other!
posted by sagc at 9:35 AM on March 23 [7 favorites]
Or on the ongoing campaign to by V.B. to limit the range of acceptable opinions on MeFi by accusing basically everyone who interacts with them of "bullying", "derailing", paying off the mods, being a mob who follows her around favoriting comments she dislikes, making no true Scotsman arguments about which opinions are valid...
One or the other!
posted by sagc at 9:35 AM on March 23 [7 favorites]
I think the situation is pretty clear without mods needing to weigh in, tbh.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:14 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:14 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
The n-p buttoning and related blowups were the moment for a BIPOC board to do or say something and it didn't happen. In fact, some of the most harmful actions were done by a moderator/member of the board with no indication they consulted the board before taking those actions.
I agree there's no point to the BIPOC board as it stands; it seems to exist only to generate ridiculously granular minutes over a year later. If people are volunteering their time and emotional labor to serve on such a board, they deserve better, and so does the community.
posted by Threeve at 10:22 AM on March 23 [6 favorites]
I agree there's no point to the BIPOC board as it stands; it seems to exist only to generate ridiculously granular minutes over a year later. If people are volunteering their time and emotional labor to serve on such a board, they deserve better, and so does the community.
posted by Threeve at 10:22 AM on March 23 [6 favorites]
Why are you so upset that you weren't allowed to control the conversation in your thread about antisemitism? Are you even Jewish? I'm Jewish and I can't imagine having an honest conversation about antisemitism in the US without ADL and our betrayal by other similar large organizations coming to top of mind. Who do you imagine you're speaking for, do you think we're not present?
posted by dusty potato at 11:01 AM on March 23 [9 favorites]
posted by dusty potato at 11:01 AM on March 23 [9 favorites]
“Are you even Jewish” lol this is now an official derail, can we please not succumb to the temptation of an I/P fight in this thread? Take it elsewhere please.
posted by Vatnesine at 11:21 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 11:21 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
It's not an I/P fight, it's an excellent question to which I would love to hear VioletBlue's answer.
I mean, yeah, it's a derail but here we are, so let's see what she has to say.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:24 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
I mean, yeah, it's a derail but here we are, so let's see what she has to say.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:24 AM on March 23 [3 favorites]
MetaFilter's history of handling minority issues is abysmal. Be they BIPOC, trans or Jewish (I recently attempted to post on the Grey about antisemitism, and the entire post was "disappeared" with nary a word)
For the record, I think Violet Blue was threadshitting in their post. At the same time... there was a post submitted to MeTa about the issue? And itgot memory holed was disappeared? I thought mods were generally allowing almost anything through nowadays.
I feel this discussion would have better stayed on course with that separate post about anti-semitism. Just as we were told mods would do rather than removing the queue altogether. Have we gotten data about how keeping the "NEW! IMPROVED!!!" queue is going? It doesn't seem like it is working as revised.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 12:39 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
For the record, I think Violet Blue was threadshitting in their post. At the same time... there was a post submitted to MeTa about the issue? And it
I feel this discussion would have better stayed on course with that separate post about anti-semitism. Just as we were told mods would do rather than removing the queue altogether. Have we gotten data about how keeping the "NEW! IMPROVED!!!" queue is going? It doesn't seem like it is working as revised.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 12:39 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
The “everything gets through the queue” was always a lie, which is why virtually everyone wanted to get rid of it.
posted by bowbeacon at 1:12 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 1:12 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
Hi all. Today's the start of my work week so I'm finally taking the time to read through this thread and hopefully try and address some things.
To start off, I'm seeing a lot of speculation around why minutes aren't up, so I'd like to provide a timeline/summary of the pending meeting minutes situation and the status of them now.
I've tried to explain before that we had a minute-editing procedure many months ago that was highly-detailed and context-heavy. Those minutes were worked on by myself and a previous member. It was a format I personally did not feel was effective for us long-term (I struggled with the format due to my own processing/executive dysfunction, so having a board member volunteer to collaborate on them was extremely helpful and appreciated).
Once the member who was spearheading a lot of the minute-editing process left the board, I struggled to maintain that level of detail in our minutes. I brought this up to the board when we met, and the board was open to considering a new format to speed up the process of getting them edited and published since what we were doing was clearly not working. Some members also felt the previous format was an accessibility issue so we overall realized it wasn't working for any of us.
Before we could put a new minutes process in place that would simplify things, I went through a traumatic life event and simultaneous cross-country move. When I returned to work, it was with very low capacity and unpredictable mental and physical health. The board members at that time were graciously patient with me in getting things sorted out.
By the time we had our next meeting, we had to dedicate time to working out the new meeting minutes procedure. Once we adopted said format/procedure and before we could start publishing any pending minutes, we had to get approval from ex-members who had been present at those meetings. It has taken time to get them edited, partially because we meet once a month so when the last cycle of edits we collaborated on were sent out to ex-members, there were still several weeks of back-and-forth to get them right for everyone involved. The final edits needed to get at least 3 of the documents out came in this weekend (yay and thank you to this particular member!) so I just submitted those to frimble for publication today.
Please note that Minutes #26 & #27 are pending an ex member's approval. We gave them 4 weeks from the date of notification - that deadline is March 25th. After March 25th, I will be able to submit them for publication.
Status of the minutes starting with Meeting #23:
1. Meeting Minutes #23 (February 2024) - PUBLISHED HERE
2. Meeting Minutes #24 (March 2024): Final edits from ex-member came in this weekend when I was off duty, I submitted to frimble for publication today.
3. Meeting Minutes #25 (April 2024): Final edits from ex-member came in this weekend, I submitted to frimble for publication today.
4. Meeting Minutes #26 (October 2024): Waiting for publication deadline on March 25th
5. Meeting Minutes #27 (November 2024): Waiting for publication deadline on March 25th
6. Meeting Minutes #28 (December 2024) PUBLISHED HERE
7. Meeting Minutes #29 (February 2025) PUBLISHED HERE
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 2:21 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
To start off, I'm seeing a lot of speculation around why minutes aren't up, so I'd like to provide a timeline/summary of the pending meeting minutes situation and the status of them now.
I've tried to explain before that we had a minute-editing procedure many months ago that was highly-detailed and context-heavy. Those minutes were worked on by myself and a previous member. It was a format I personally did not feel was effective for us long-term (I struggled with the format due to my own processing/executive dysfunction, so having a board member volunteer to collaborate on them was extremely helpful and appreciated).
Once the member who was spearheading a lot of the minute-editing process left the board, I struggled to maintain that level of detail in our minutes. I brought this up to the board when we met, and the board was open to considering a new format to speed up the process of getting them edited and published since what we were doing was clearly not working. Some members also felt the previous format was an accessibility issue so we overall realized it wasn't working for any of us.
Before we could put a new minutes process in place that would simplify things, I went through a traumatic life event and simultaneous cross-country move. When I returned to work, it was with very low capacity and unpredictable mental and physical health. The board members at that time were graciously patient with me in getting things sorted out.
By the time we had our next meeting, we had to dedicate time to working out the new meeting minutes procedure. Once we adopted said format/procedure and before we could start publishing any pending minutes, we had to get approval from ex-members who had been present at those meetings. It has taken time to get them edited, partially because we meet once a month so when the last cycle of edits we collaborated on were sent out to ex-members, there were still several weeks of back-and-forth to get them right for everyone involved. The final edits needed to get at least 3 of the documents out came in this weekend (yay and thank you to this particular member!) so I just submitted those to frimble for publication today.
Please note that Minutes #26 & #27 are pending an ex member's approval. We gave them 4 weeks from the date of notification - that deadline is March 25th. After March 25th, I will be able to submit them for publication.
Status of the minutes starting with Meeting #23:
1. Meeting Minutes #23 (February 2024) - PUBLISHED HERE
2. Meeting Minutes #24 (March 2024): Final edits from ex-member came in this weekend when I was off duty, I submitted to frimble for publication today.
3. Meeting Minutes #25 (April 2024): Final edits from ex-member came in this weekend, I submitted to frimble for publication today.
4. Meeting Minutes #26 (October 2024): Waiting for publication deadline on March 25th
5. Meeting Minutes #27 (November 2024): Waiting for publication deadline on March 25th
6. Meeting Minutes #28 (December 2024) PUBLISHED HERE
7. Meeting Minutes #29 (February 2025) PUBLISHED HERE
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 2:21 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
As for what the board is doing, there are currently two users and myself. There are no other staff members involved. We've discussed the lack of users on the board, and I am working on some ideas to get more BIPOC users on the board, even if it's for "drop-in" participation.
At our last two meetings, we've been exploring the function of the board and how the board can function as a place to address modding decisions and advise mods when they've made bad modding decisions - as this is a big part of why BIPOC users do not participate, feel unwelcome and unheard by mods.
In the past, ex board members had other desires when it came to what the scope of the board looked like. For this particular board, it's been important for them to get down to assessing the impact of mod decisions that then discourage and harm BIPOC participation, so we are currently exploring a process for actually addressing moments when mods have made bad decisions. In the minutes from our meeting last month, the group decided it would be good to use board time to share feedback/experiences directly related to threads where BIPOC members (and themselves) were impacted negatively by moderation choices.
My personal intention for our next meeting is to introduce a process that takes such feedback that's been shared to the mod team to implement points of awareness, things to look out for, and procedures to prevent the sort of harmful modding that's taken place in the past. We're in the early stages of these conversations but that's currently what the meetings are dedicated to.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 2:37 PM on March 23 [4 favorites]
At our last two meetings, we've been exploring the function of the board and how the board can function as a place to address modding decisions and advise mods when they've made bad modding decisions - as this is a big part of why BIPOC users do not participate, feel unwelcome and unheard by mods.
In the past, ex board members had other desires when it came to what the scope of the board looked like. For this particular board, it's been important for them to get down to assessing the impact of mod decisions that then discourage and harm BIPOC participation, so we are currently exploring a process for actually addressing moments when mods have made bad decisions. In the minutes from our meeting last month, the group decided it would be good to use board time to share feedback/experiences directly related to threads where BIPOC members (and themselves) were impacted negatively by moderation choices.
My personal intention for our next meeting is to introduce a process that takes such feedback that's been shared to the mod team to implement points of awareness, things to look out for, and procedures to prevent the sort of harmful modding that's taken place in the past. We're in the early stages of these conversations but that's currently what the meetings are dedicated to.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 2:37 PM on March 23 [4 favorites]
Thanks, travelingthyme, for all that catching up. I am sympathetic about your move, crash and aftermath.
The latest minutes, from February 2025, looks like the content is much more streamlined than in the past.
Can you clarify whether there is a new procedure for the minutes, and what that is?
posted by NotLost at 3:33 PM on March 23 [2 favorites]
The latest minutes, from February 2025, looks like the content is much more streamlined than in the past.
Can you clarify whether there is a new procedure for the minutes, and what that is?
posted by NotLost at 3:33 PM on March 23 [2 favorites]
i'm still extremely confused about why people who are no longer members of a Board (any Board, not just this one) somehow have revision and veto power over the official recordkeeping of that body? That's really not how this is supposed to work at all.
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:52 PM on March 23 [12 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:52 PM on March 23 [12 favorites]
Exactly, minutes are approved by the current board (usually at the next meeting), not by whoever happened to be present at the meeting that the minutes are for. The minutes belong to the board, not the individuals.
posted by ssg at 4:06 PM on March 23 [8 favorites]
posted by ssg at 4:06 PM on March 23 [8 favorites]
i'm still extremely confused about why people who are no longer members of a Board (any Board, not just this one) somehow have revision and veto power over the official recordkeeping of that body? That's really not how this is supposed to work at all.
It's like a cargo cult of how effective committees work. People were put on the board for a purpose, and part of being an effective committee includes being able to track the decisions that were made and identify what needs to be followed up on so that the committee's work is completed.
The BIPOC committee feels like something that was established begrudgingly from the beginning and was never given any clear support from staff, just promises of support which is actually worse in terms of accomplishing the work they were asked to do.
I mean, let's just talk about it in practical terms. At this point, is it going to be useful in any way to have notes from a meeting that happened a whole year ago? probably not. Did anything important happen or were any useful things discussed for the good of the community? Who the fuck knows, we don't have any information about it other than various people popping up to say this and that.
I'm increasingly leaning toward the idea that the BIPOC committee should just be dissolved until the bigger issues of who is in charge gets resolved. Is it Brandon? Some other staff person? An executive board which writes down the stuff they talk about and decide so that we, the members of the community can know what's going on? No one with the actual ability to answer this question has... answered this question. So I don't know, I guess I'll just sit over here and roll my eyes. At this point Metafilter is just... such a parody of itself.
I do usually try to make my comments in MeTa focused on a goal: "I want to build the argument that...", or "I want to make it more likely that Thing X gets done," and so on. But I don't even know what I'm looking for here. Just... who is even in charge and what is their general plan. That does not seem like an unreasonable request.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:03 PM on March 23 [11 favorites]
It's like a cargo cult of how effective committees work. People were put on the board for a purpose, and part of being an effective committee includes being able to track the decisions that were made and identify what needs to be followed up on so that the committee's work is completed.
The BIPOC committee feels like something that was established begrudgingly from the beginning and was never given any clear support from staff, just promises of support which is actually worse in terms of accomplishing the work they were asked to do.
I mean, let's just talk about it in practical terms. At this point, is it going to be useful in any way to have notes from a meeting that happened a whole year ago? probably not. Did anything important happen or were any useful things discussed for the good of the community? Who the fuck knows, we don't have any information about it other than various people popping up to say this and that.
I'm increasingly leaning toward the idea that the BIPOC committee should just be dissolved until the bigger issues of who is in charge gets resolved. Is it Brandon? Some other staff person? An executive board which writes down the stuff they talk about and decide so that we, the members of the community can know what's going on? No one with the actual ability to answer this question has... answered this question. So I don't know, I guess I'll just sit over here and roll my eyes. At this point Metafilter is just... such a parody of itself.
I do usually try to make my comments in MeTa focused on a goal: "I want to build the argument that...", or "I want to make it more likely that Thing X gets done," and so on. But I don't even know what I'm looking for here. Just... who is even in charge and what is their general plan. That does not seem like an unreasonable request.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:03 PM on March 23 [11 favorites]
If the BIPOC Board is silent and invisible then the anti-racism work that it does is invisible and may as well not have happened.
This work is getting more important, as society degrades around us. Our board should be noticeable - making posts, counseling mods, commenting, etc. We have a semi-regular Free Thread on the Blue, what if we had a semi-regular Anti-Racist Thread?
I mean I’m glad to hear what happened to the minutes, (waiting on activity from people who walked away, ok) but ultimately they’re not the goal.
posted by Vatnesine at 5:13 PM on March 23 [8 favorites]
This work is getting more important, as society degrades around us. Our board should be noticeable - making posts, counseling mods, commenting, etc. We have a semi-regular Free Thread on the Blue, what if we had a semi-regular Anti-Racist Thread?
I mean I’m glad to hear what happened to the minutes, (waiting on activity from people who walked away, ok) but ultimately they’re not the goal.
posted by Vatnesine at 5:13 PM on March 23 [8 favorites]
Yeah, as thyme alluded, that's something in discussion, but the stress of just being a minority doesn't become alleviated just because we're on the board. Because the nature of what I'm hearing people want is to have the equivalent of Facebook Kenyan contractors to be the first line of having to view then review instances of racist acts, but because of our respective tethers are now short (for me just because of the Blue, for the other because of the Grey as well) what we do see is belated, while no one ever pings me (for example) on anything except side DMs to ask what's up with the mods/board (true story), so at best I get is just allusions and potshots unless I'm lucky enough to remember there's a subreddit who keeps links, if they do. This is especially ironic because the two of us even got here because of mod behaviour so it's not like we're coming in with full tanks of patience unspent on micro aggressions.
posted by cendawanita at 5:19 PM on March 23 [13 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 5:19 PM on March 23 [13 favorites]
Yes, that's my sense of how things went down. I'm sorry. It's a shitty position to be put in, I appreciate your (and the other BIPOC board members') willingness to stand up and volunteer for this, and I wish things had been handled better.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:28 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:28 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Maybe criteria for the incoming members is: "extremely interested and committed to forum politics, with special attention given to not expect any assistance/coordination outside the board, just griefing." But that's just my mood today. Let me revisit that once I've eaten something.
posted by cendawanita at 5:45 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 5:45 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
extremely interested and committed to forum politics
I don't think that needs to be -- or ought to be -- the case, it's just that the vacuum of leadership and communication from staff has been consistently frustrating to MeFites (particularly people of color, the few of us who are still fucking here and willing to have any of these conversations) and so BIPOC committee members feel like you have a responsibility to address things that come up without having the actual authority to make changes.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:56 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
I don't think that needs to be -- or ought to be -- the case, it's just that the vacuum of leadership and communication from staff has been consistently frustrating to MeFites (particularly people of color, the few of us who are still fucking here and willing to have any of these conversations) and so BIPOC committee members feel like you have a responsibility to address things that come up without having the actual authority to make changes.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:56 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
It really is infuriating. Communities do not have to put all the work of addressing racism onto their black and brown members, but that's what Metafilter has consistently done. That is just the reality of the situation. I am an ethnic minority in every other community I'm a part of and I do not witness this level of bullshit in any of them.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:01 PM on March 23 [11 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:01 PM on March 23 [11 favorites]
so BIPOC committee members feel like you have a responsibility to address things that come up without having the actual authority to make changes.
Agree on the last, but that's why we've been having active conversations since December on the mechanics of it (which is where my semi-jocular criteria comes from) because for our own mental health reasons, we don't go to the Grey, and like I said, myself as an example, I don't make a point to venture elsewhere + as I was saying to the board before joining, my tolerance for microaggressions may differ because of my background. But yet there's been undoubted continued instances of tone-deafness FROM THE SITE AS A WHOLE, which I don't believe a mere declarative document will address - so how else to find out, especially when I don't even know what's happening until much later + we meet monthly but the harm has been done, while I would've liked for nonsensical majoritarian moments get pushed back immediately (which goes back to, how come you need to have it done by a BIPOC member who's probably close to losing their temper?).
posted by cendawanita at 6:03 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
Agree on the last, but that's why we've been having active conversations since December on the mechanics of it (which is where my semi-jocular criteria comes from) because for our own mental health reasons, we don't go to the Grey, and like I said, myself as an example, I don't make a point to venture elsewhere + as I was saying to the board before joining, my tolerance for microaggressions may differ because of my background. But yet there's been undoubted continued instances of tone-deafness FROM THE SITE AS A WHOLE, which I don't believe a mere declarative document will address - so how else to find out, especially when I don't even know what's happening until much later + we meet monthly but the harm has been done, while I would've liked for nonsensical majoritarian moments get pushed back immediately (which goes back to, how come you need to have it done by a BIPOC member who's probably close to losing their temper?).
posted by cendawanita at 6:03 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
If it helps, this is my understanding of the reasoning behind the policy of having the final public minutes reviewed and approved by all attendees of the respective meetings (speaking as a previous but not current member of the BIPOC board):
While the board keeps its own internal records, notes and minutes on meetings and discussions, public minutes are treated with more care and sensitivity in consideration of privacy and safety issues, and in the spirit of keeping board meetings a safe space for the discussion of sensitive issues/concerns - especially for non-board members and/or ombuds cases.
Part of the strength in having just BIPOC MeFites on the BIPOC board lies in board members being able to bring their own lived experiences and background to the table when discussing issues, shaping initiatives and formulating responses related to the site. Part of this process also involves BIPOC board members and BIPOC guest attendees / ombuds cases also being able to disclose more personal information and speak more freely about traumatic experiences in relation to the site. From my understanding, the board wanted to provide a safe space for members to talk about issues/concerns, and ensure that anyone interfacing with the board could trust the board with their (often) private and sensitive information. To this end, the board wanted to be careful and considerate about public meeting minutes and what public minutes relayed.
This discussion around confidentiality, privacy and safety began with the board's very first meeting in 2020 - and during my time on the board I believe this guiding principle of prioritizing BIPOC attendees' consent and privacy did help the board navigate some challenging decisions, and served the board's work. At the same time, I hope this principle also doesn't become a blocker to the board's workflow or ability to carry out its work. When I was on the board, the board had the policy of setting deadlines for attendees to review/respond to public minute documents that the board wished to publish. If no response was received by the deadline then the board would come to a decision on how to proceed independent of the attendee. (Based on what Thyme has just relayed above, this still seems to be the policy.) This was meant to strike a workable balance between getting minutes published within a reasonable timeframe while also considering confidentiality/sensitivity issues.
I'm grateful for the current BIPOC board members - that they're still persevering in spite of some significant challenges and changes over the past year, and that, despite their experiences on the site, they're still sticking around to try to make things better. I believe they're trying the best they can with the resources, time and energy they have. Hoping that things will also improve as the larger organization/nonprofit takes shape, with more systems/structures in place to support the board's work.
posted by aielen at 6:11 PM on March 23 [10 favorites]
While the board keeps its own internal records, notes and minutes on meetings and discussions, public minutes are treated with more care and sensitivity in consideration of privacy and safety issues, and in the spirit of keeping board meetings a safe space for the discussion of sensitive issues/concerns - especially for non-board members and/or ombuds cases.
Part of the strength in having just BIPOC MeFites on the BIPOC board lies in board members being able to bring their own lived experiences and background to the table when discussing issues, shaping initiatives and formulating responses related to the site. Part of this process also involves BIPOC board members and BIPOC guest attendees / ombuds cases also being able to disclose more personal information and speak more freely about traumatic experiences in relation to the site. From my understanding, the board wanted to provide a safe space for members to talk about issues/concerns, and ensure that anyone interfacing with the board could trust the board with their (often) private and sensitive information. To this end, the board wanted to be careful and considerate about public meeting minutes and what public minutes relayed.
This discussion around confidentiality, privacy and safety began with the board's very first meeting in 2020 - and during my time on the board I believe this guiding principle of prioritizing BIPOC attendees' consent and privacy did help the board navigate some challenging decisions, and served the board's work. At the same time, I hope this principle also doesn't become a blocker to the board's workflow or ability to carry out its work. When I was on the board, the board had the policy of setting deadlines for attendees to review/respond to public minute documents that the board wished to publish. If no response was received by the deadline then the board would come to a decision on how to proceed independent of the attendee. (Based on what Thyme has just relayed above, this still seems to be the policy.) This was meant to strike a workable balance between getting minutes published within a reasonable timeframe while also considering confidentiality/sensitivity issues.
I'm grateful for the current BIPOC board members - that they're still persevering in spite of some significant challenges and changes over the past year, and that, despite their experiences on the site, they're still sticking around to try to make things better. I believe they're trying the best they can with the resources, time and energy they have. Hoping that things will also improve as the larger organization/nonprofit takes shape, with more systems/structures in place to support the board's work.
posted by aielen at 6:11 PM on March 23 [10 favorites]
That's helpful context, thanks aielen. I want to be very clear that I am not upset about any particular member of the BIPOC committee or about the work it's done as a whole. That being said, I think it's been put in a pretty difficult position which has consistently made it ineffective, and I feel comfortable saying that that's not okay. It is not fair to ask MeFites who are not white to do the work of addressing racism in the MeFi community, and establishing a BIPOC board while not actually giving it the institutional support that it would have needed to address issues of racism is just... some real bullshit from a community that supposedly is a progressive space.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:20 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:20 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
Separately, this bothers me and to be honest, I have conflicting feelings about it:
Part of this process also involves BIPOC board members and BIPOC guest attendees / ombuds cases also being able to disclose more personal information and speak more freely about traumatic experiences in relation to the site. From my understanding, the board wanted to provide a safe space for members to talk about issues/concerns, and ensure that anyone interfacing with the board could trust the board with their (often) private and sensitive information. To this end, the board wanted to be careful and considerate about public meeting minutes and what public minutes relayed.
I think bringing lived experience has to be a part of the work of any group of people who are addressing racism. But on the other hand, it shouldn't be the case that these board meetings are so emotionally and personally fraught that we can't fairly have the proceedings of the meetings published timely without having to... redact information? get everyone who was there to provide their consent? But again, I'm speaking in a vaccum here because I don't have any information about how the BIPOC committee has worked since there are no public minutes. I don't know how to square that circle and I'm increasingly feeling like I don't give a fuck about it: why should I bother to be here?
I probably will continue to be here, I do like being here for the most part. But I want to surface the dynamics that make this community feel really shitty and frustrating for POC, or at least for me.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:33 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
Part of this process also involves BIPOC board members and BIPOC guest attendees / ombuds cases also being able to disclose more personal information and speak more freely about traumatic experiences in relation to the site. From my understanding, the board wanted to provide a safe space for members to talk about issues/concerns, and ensure that anyone interfacing with the board could trust the board with their (often) private and sensitive information. To this end, the board wanted to be careful and considerate about public meeting minutes and what public minutes relayed.
I think bringing lived experience has to be a part of the work of any group of people who are addressing racism. But on the other hand, it shouldn't be the case that these board meetings are so emotionally and personally fraught that we can't fairly have the proceedings of the meetings published timely without having to... redact information? get everyone who was there to provide their consent? But again, I'm speaking in a vaccum here because I don't have any information about how the BIPOC committee has worked since there are no public minutes. I don't know how to square that circle and I'm increasingly feeling like I don't give a fuck about it: why should I bother to be here?
I probably will continue to be here, I do like being here for the most part. But I want to surface the dynamics that make this community feel really shitty and frustrating for POC, or at least for me.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:33 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
I think it's completely appropriate for the BIPOC Board to have confidential conversations. That's partly why I think the notes need to be way less detailed. "Conversation with BIPOC member regarding concerns about site moderation. Follow-up: XYZ will talk to moderators." Or whatever. I think part of the issue is that it looked like the notes became an accountability tool for loup, at least that's what it seemed was happening from the outside, so it looked like they ended up that detailed because otherwise nothing was ever followed up on.
Therapists often keep "psychotherapy notes," which are all the detailed descriptions of things and a place to formulate case conceptualizations and which stay absolutely confidential just with the therapist, and then "progress notes," which are what's actually sent to the insurance company and is generally generic and just a few sentences. "Discussed client's relationship concerns. Used active listening to validate emotions. Taught DBT skills and brainstormed times client could use them. Follow up in one week." Maybe if the Board needs detailed notes, those can stay confidential to the Board?
As a user, I'm less interested in "Here's everything we talked about" and would probably find it more helpful for the Board to post MeTas when needed to say, "This is a problem we've identified. Here are our recommendations." And then let the community do the work of enacting them.
I don't think the work of solving site problems should fall on y'all. It seems like the BIPOC Board should really be more like expert consultants, or a grand jury or something with authority to investigate problems and issue recommendations and expect follow-up from the community and the staff.
posted by lapis at 6:44 PM on March 23 [18 favorites]
Therapists often keep "psychotherapy notes," which are all the detailed descriptions of things and a place to formulate case conceptualizations and which stay absolutely confidential just with the therapist, and then "progress notes," which are what's actually sent to the insurance company and is generally generic and just a few sentences. "Discussed client's relationship concerns. Used active listening to validate emotions. Taught DBT skills and brainstormed times client could use them. Follow up in one week." Maybe if the Board needs detailed notes, those can stay confidential to the Board?
As a user, I'm less interested in "Here's everything we talked about" and would probably find it more helpful for the Board to post MeTas when needed to say, "This is a problem we've identified. Here are our recommendations." And then let the community do the work of enacting them.
I don't think the work of solving site problems should fall on y'all. It seems like the BIPOC Board should really be more like expert consultants, or a grand jury or something with authority to investigate problems and issue recommendations and expect follow-up from the community and the staff.
posted by lapis at 6:44 PM on March 23 [18 favorites]
Yeah, regardless of who is speaking and what they are sharing in a private meeting, minutes are a public document! Nobody should need redaction/review powers, because should be concise, action-oriented, and not include any personal info anyway!
- Board member A proposed Action X
-- Guest Y (or, if Guest Y doesn't want to be identified, just "a guest") spoke about their personal experiences
-- Board member Q proposed amendment Z; motion in favor was carried
-- The board resolved to do Action X+Z
That's all that should be in the minutes! Minutes are not a record of the nitty-gritty of a meeting!
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:44 PM on March 23 [10 favorites]
- Board member A proposed Action X
-- Guest Y (or, if Guest Y doesn't want to be identified, just "a guest") spoke about their personal experiences
-- Board member Q proposed amendment Z; motion in favor was carried
-- The board resolved to do Action X+Z
That's all that should be in the minutes! Minutes are not a record of the nitty-gritty of a meeting!
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:44 PM on March 23 [10 favorites]
(I was typing my response before I saw tivalasvegas's, and my comment is not a direct reply to them! Sorry for looking like I'm rudely contradicting you.)
posted by lapis at 6:45 PM on March 23 [1 favorite]
posted by lapis at 6:45 PM on March 23 [1 favorite]
Would there be an issue if we declared a BND for the BIPOC board? Like start over from scratch and not worry about the past minutes?
There could be a summary of the actions the board took in the past in general but moving forward - new meeting new minutes.
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:50 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
There could be a summary of the actions the board took in the past in general but moving forward - new meeting new minutes.
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:50 PM on March 23 [7 favorites]
If a BND for the BIPOC resulted in a clear mandate with a means to achieve that mandate, and demonstrate positive change in this community, then let's do that
posted by ginger.beef at 7:20 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
posted by ginger.beef at 7:20 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
If a BND for the BIPOC resulted in a clear mandate with a means to achieve that mandate, and demonstrate positive change in this community, then let's do that
Seconding the motion!
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:39 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Seconding the motion!
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:39 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Oh yeah, creatrixtiara I think that's the obvious solution at this point. I mean, unless these things actually are ready to go and it's just that no one knows who's allowed to push the "publish" button or whatever.
But as ginger.beef points out, it's useless if there's not a plan to have the cycle not just repeat itself in the next iteration. I think it's probably more important at this point to know who is on the governing board and what the whole situation is there re: their authority and how they are being accountable to the community while we figure out when elections are and how all that's going to work. Which, I haven't looked back at the MeTa where that was being discussed but I don't think it came to any clear conclusion?
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:43 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
But as ginger.beef points out, it's useless if there's not a plan to have the cycle not just repeat itself in the next iteration. I think it's probably more important at this point to know who is on the governing board and what the whole situation is there re: their authority and how they are being accountable to the community while we figure out when elections are and how all that's going to work. Which, I haven't looked back at the MeTa where that was being discussed but I don't think it came to any clear conclusion?
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:43 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
These things *are* ready to go. in two days. Frimble was identified as the person who can publish them.
As far as I can see no one’s in charge and we don’t know how elections will work or who can vote or who is running but they are waiting for the new site to be ready, for an undefined value of “ready”. It could literally be years. This is why I think visible action (really, almost any action) should be a requirement for BIPOC Board version 2.0. The other side is not kneecapping themselves with bureaucracy.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:36 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
As far as I can see no one’s in charge and we don’t know how elections will work or who can vote or who is running but they are waiting for the new site to be ready, for an undefined value of “ready”. It could literally be years. This is why I think visible action (really, almost any action) should be a requirement for BIPOC Board version 2.0. The other side is not kneecapping themselves with bureaucracy.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:36 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
What action can they reasonably take with no authority, no clearly communicated structure for who's in charge of the site who could grant them authority, and no commitment from moderators to even consider their suggestions? I think asking the BIPOC Board to take action in these circumstances is piling them with responsibility with no authority, and re-creating the exact structure of marginalization and tokenism that's underlying the racism on the site.
I'm not speaking ill of anyone on the Board. I just think it's an impossible situation and saying that they should be doing more is putting the blame in the wrong place. The people with actual power on this site should be doing more.
posted by lapis at 10:28 PM on March 23 [10 favorites]
I'm not speaking ill of anyone on the Board. I just think it's an impossible situation and saying that they should be doing more is putting the blame in the wrong place. The people with actual power on this site should be doing more.
posted by lapis at 10:28 PM on March 23 [10 favorites]
Any member can make posts, they can comment on posts, they can use the contact form to talk to mods. Same as anyone. They can send memail to each other, too. I’m not asking anyone to fix racism, I’m asking people to be visible. They could make a cooter clock, they could brigade posts when they turn racist, they could make free threads with suggestions for books to read or politicians to throw pies at. They could track and post a Weekly Microaggression Roundup.
posted by Vatnesine at 5:16 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 5:16 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
Vatnesine, would you like to volunteer to be on the BIPOC board? Let me know, I'll PM you.
posted by cendawanita at 5:19 AM on March 24 [5 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 5:19 AM on March 24 [5 favorites]
I am opposed to any kind of board whose objective is determining whether there is racism or ambiguously reporting "how PoC issues on the site are going."
Everytime, it's because "there was a sort of clusterfucky string of bad luck with how things went" or because "the lack of context in the post resulted in certain questions/themes not landing well and causing harm to other users" or because "this deletion was a bad call [or it] was communicated poorly".
What a shallow response to a decades-long problem.
posted by ftrtts at 6:56 AM on March 24 [6 favorites]
Everytime, it's because "there was a sort of clusterfucky string of bad luck with how things went" or because "the lack of context in the post resulted in certain questions/themes not landing well and causing harm to other users" or because "this deletion was a bad call [or it] was communicated poorly".
What a shallow response to a decades-long problem.
posted by ftrtts at 6:56 AM on March 24 [6 favorites]
So, um, can someone answer some very simple questions:
-Who is on the board? What decisions have they made and how is that information being communicated to MeFites?
-When will proper elections be held, and if that's not decided yet what is the process for making that happen?
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:12 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
-Who is on the board? What decisions have they made and how is that information being communicated to MeFites?
-When will proper elections be held, and if that's not decided yet what is the process for making that happen?
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:12 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
I think the first question was answered elsewhere previously so I can quickly answer that:
- composition: me, yueliang, and travelingthyme.
- decisions: (this is a number of items from the previous composition of members) I believe we had a WIP of the ombudsman role document; internal contributions to the interim board; there was discussion of a board subsite. In terms of communications, my sense is this was where the minutes sufficed (disclaimer: I don't go to Talk). A lot of that got into the backlog mentioned above.
Regarding that ombudsman document and the subsite in particular (for me) - part of the current board's discussion, as thyme said + what I explained earlier on how to take this forward as a mechanism considering our actual engagement level with the forum. In the current draft and practice, what has happened is that impacted mefites were spotted by a board member and invited to speak at a meeting. At some point in the flow of the discussion, they can be invited to be part of the board as well. Previously what has happened is that resolution is bilateral between the user and the mod who acted. The last user and member who came in with this mode is MiraK. But late 2024/25 board is recognizing that this seems untenable as a path to improved (? Sensitized?) site culture hence the objective of the 2025 discussions. But also with all of the RL reasons for the turnover or pauses in 2024, the remaining members aren't the best placed for institutional memory (recall, we came in due to mod action ourselves but not so much placed to volunteer on active tasks). I had thought to do an FPP distribution mapped by region/interests/culture to see what kind of content gets posted but as more instances of microaggressions and/or mod action continued, in the current board we've decided that's makework when what's more important is to make sure that the conversations that do exist can exist well.
- I can't speak at all about elections because I don't recall any such conversations or agenda item ever taking place, nor was it explained that it's something to expect. So I'm not sure if this is something I've overlooked or something ppl assume based on the other parts of the admin work.
posted by cendawanita at 9:13 AM on March 24 [4 favorites]
- composition: me, yueliang, and travelingthyme.
- decisions: (this is a number of items from the previous composition of members) I believe we had a WIP of the ombudsman role document; internal contributions to the interim board; there was discussion of a board subsite. In terms of communications, my sense is this was where the minutes sufficed (disclaimer: I don't go to Talk). A lot of that got into the backlog mentioned above.
Regarding that ombudsman document and the subsite in particular (for me) - part of the current board's discussion, as thyme said + what I explained earlier on how to take this forward as a mechanism considering our actual engagement level with the forum. In the current draft and practice, what has happened is that impacted mefites were spotted by a board member and invited to speak at a meeting. At some point in the flow of the discussion, they can be invited to be part of the board as well. Previously what has happened is that resolution is bilateral between the user and the mod who acted. The last user and member who came in with this mode is MiraK. But late 2024/25 board is recognizing that this seems untenable as a path to improved (? Sensitized?) site culture hence the objective of the 2025 discussions. But also with all of the RL reasons for the turnover or pauses in 2024, the remaining members aren't the best placed for institutional memory (recall, we came in due to mod action ourselves but not so much placed to volunteer on active tasks). I had thought to do an FPP distribution mapped by region/interests/culture to see what kind of content gets posted but as more instances of microaggressions and/or mod action continued, in the current board we've decided that's makework when what's more important is to make sure that the conversations that do exist can exist well.
- I can't speak at all about elections because I don't recall any such conversations or agenda item ever taking place, nor was it explained that it's something to expect. So I'm not sure if this is something I've overlooked or something ppl assume based on the other parts of the admin work.
posted by cendawanita at 9:13 AM on March 24 [4 favorites]
(seriously, feel free to point it out - I'm very not capable on this site administrative stuff. I know that makes me a poor board member, but that's besides the point)
posted by cendawanita at 9:18 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
posted by cendawanita at 9:18 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
I think "Board" is being used ambiguously, here.
posted by bowbeacon at 9:21 AM on March 24 [3 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 9:21 AM on March 24 [3 favorites]
Cendawanita, thanks for the invitation to join but I don’t have the time or patience or background that the job requires.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:23 AM on March 24
posted by Vatnesine at 9:23 AM on March 24
Could be my own idiosyncratic English, but is my usage of "board" ambiguous?
posted by cendawanita at 9:30 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
posted by cendawanita at 9:30 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
You are talking about the BIPOC Board, and I think the "elections" and "who is on the board" question were referring to the non-profit board.
posted by bowbeacon at 9:42 AM on March 24 [5 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 9:42 AM on March 24 [5 favorites]
Oh! I've been low-key panicking that I'd miss something about BIPOC board elections...
posted by cendawanita at 10:17 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 10:17 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
The users on the Community Foundation Board are listed on the gen-info page that Brandon posted about earlier
https://faq.metafilter.com/358/general-info
Current Members (Interim Board): Rhaomi, 1Adam12, Gorgik
That page also lists the members of the BIPOC board and says the Moderation oversight board is being formed.
If you go to the FAQ pages right now, there are no results found for the word "board" and it just sends you to the footer because the BIPOC board is listed there. It doesn't list the current members on the linked page, but it does list travelingthyme as the contact person.
There is another link to the Steering Committee - is that still active or did the interim CF board take over from them?
posted by soelo at 10:21 AM on March 24
https://faq.metafilter.com/358/general-info
Current Members (Interim Board): Rhaomi, 1Adam12, Gorgik
That page also lists the members of the BIPOC board and says the Moderation oversight board is being formed.
If you go to the FAQ pages right now, there are no results found for the word "board" and it just sends you to the footer because the BIPOC board is listed there. It doesn't list the current members on the linked page, but it does list travelingthyme as the contact person.
There is another link to the Steering Committee - is that still active or did the interim CF board take over from them?
posted by soelo at 10:21 AM on March 24
Any member can make posts, they can comment on posts, they can use the contact form to talk to mods. Same as anyone.
Right, then that's not functionally a "board," it's an activist group. I think it's fine to have activist groups, but we shouldn't put the exclusive responsibility for any of that on POC, and we shouldn't pretend there's a "BIPOC board" if they have no more power than any other user.
posted by lapis at 10:45 AM on March 24 [8 favorites]
Right, then that's not functionally a "board," it's an activist group. I think it's fine to have activist groups, but we shouldn't put the exclusive responsibility for any of that on POC, and we shouldn't pretend there's a "BIPOC board" if they have no more power than any other user.
posted by lapis at 10:45 AM on March 24 [8 favorites]
There is another link to the Steering Committee - is that still active or did the interim CF board take over from them?
To my understanding: The Steering Committee was disbanded when a few things came together:
- they posted for more help with a pretty extensive and overwhelming volunteer job description (which was based on the work they had been doing brilliantly)
- the extensiveness of that posting led to questions about the legality of having volunteers work in a for-profit business
- Jessamyn consulted a lawyer who recommended NOT taking volunteer labour like that
- the committee came to a halt and then there was a call for volunteers to oversee the transition to non-profit, which was different because from the start they were "volunteers working to start a non-profit," not "volunteers working for MetaFilter."
That's who is on the interim board now, with various changes and times of entry.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:40 AM on March 24 [3 favorites]
To my understanding: The Steering Committee was disbanded when a few things came together:
- they posted for more help with a pretty extensive and overwhelming volunteer job description (which was based on the work they had been doing brilliantly)
- the extensiveness of that posting led to questions about the legality of having volunteers work in a for-profit business
- Jessamyn consulted a lawyer who recommended NOT taking volunteer labour like that
- the committee came to a halt and then there was a call for volunteers to oversee the transition to non-profit, which was different because from the start they were "volunteers working to start a non-profit," not "volunteers working for MetaFilter."
That's who is on the interim board now, with various changes and times of entry.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:40 AM on March 24 [3 favorites]
IIRC there was a multi-year lag between the steering committee stop and the interim board call.
posted by theclaw at 12:14 PM on March 24 [1 favorite]
posted by theclaw at 12:14 PM on March 24 [1 favorite]
When did the steering committee stop? They were formed in July 2022 and the last update on that page is November 2022. Ah, it was when the lawyer said we can't have people volunteering for the corporation. March 2023.
The interim board took a list of volunteers in Oct 2023. The first post tagged 'interimboard' in Meta was posted January 2024.
posted by soelo at 12:29 PM on March 24
The interim board took a list of volunteers in Oct 2023. The first post tagged 'interimboard' in Meta was posted January 2024.
posted by soelo at 12:29 PM on March 24
The point is that it seems odd to have the Steering Committee still listed in the footer and not the interim board after all this time.
posted by soelo at 12:32 PM on March 24 [4 favorites]
posted by soelo at 12:32 PM on March 24 [4 favorites]
Let's imagine a totally functioning management structure. (Lol, we can dream.) What exactly would a BIPOC board DO???? Someone posts something racist (boo), and then...the board does what exactly?
Right now, when that happens, it either gets deleted, or other users generally call them out, and sometimes there's a MetaTalk about it, and sometimes that turns into a fiasco. The BIPOC board would improve this process in what ways? Do they educate the moderators through...discord-based racial justice training? Memail that user to give them a targeted course in enlightenment? Add more things to the banned-words list? I would love MetaFilter — and ~~ the world ~~ — to be, you know, BETTER, but I'm not clear on how a board of anything would be the way to achieve that. We're reinventing well-meaning but useless HR emails — and squandering the energy and intellect of some of the site's major contributors to do it.
posted by Charity Garfein at 2:09 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
Right now, when that happens, it either gets deleted, or other users generally call them out, and sometimes there's a MetaTalk about it, and sometimes that turns into a fiasco. The BIPOC board would improve this process in what ways? Do they educate the moderators through...discord-based racial justice training? Memail that user to give them a targeted course in enlightenment? Add more things to the banned-words list? I would love MetaFilter — and ~~ the world ~~ — to be, you know, BETTER, but I'm not clear on how a board of anything would be the way to achieve that. We're reinventing well-meaning but useless HR emails — and squandering the energy and intellect of some of the site's major contributors to do it.
posted by Charity Garfein at 2:09 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
They would analyze and discuss with the community and mods on where the thread in question went wrong, and what actions would have made more sense, which would be an improvement.
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:12 PM on March 24
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:12 PM on March 24
Is that not what MetaTalk already is? Can we not all benefit from that discussion?
posted by Charity Garfein at 2:13 PM on March 24
posted by Charity Garfein at 2:13 PM on March 24
I disagree that MetaTalk threads about racism have been meeting anyone's needs.
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:15 PM on March 24 [9 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:15 PM on March 24 [9 favorites]
(When they are even allowed to happen)
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:16 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:16 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
I don't think a Board in an ideal world would be purely reactive. I would hope they'd also have access to policies and procedures and provide consultation on making them more equitable. They'd be aware of problems even if they hadn't exploded and give mod/Board feedback on that. They'd develop strategies for increasing a sense of belonging on the site and make those recommendations. So not just "Stop that!" but also "Start this."
posted by lapis at 2:17 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
posted by lapis at 2:17 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
Yeah, I can imagine a number of ways that a BIPOC board/committee/group could engage with MeFites and staff/leadership under the general rubric of making MeFi a less racist place or however you want to phrase it. For instance, something like (and this is just off the top of my head, for illustrative purposes) a monthly open MeTa to discuss issues around racism that Board members commit to being present in for a few hours and then go back and talk about recommendations for change to present to the community and leadership, that sort of thing.
The problem, to me, is that we don't even have clarity about who is running Metafilter or how the governance structure works so, like... one of the downstream effects here is that we can't really have a conversation about how the BIPOC committee fits into anything since there doesn't really seem to be much for them to fit into.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:21 PM on March 24 [9 favorites]
The problem, to me, is that we don't even have clarity about who is running Metafilter or how the governance structure works so, like... one of the downstream effects here is that we can't really have a conversation about how the BIPOC committee fits into anything since there doesn't really seem to be much for them to fit into.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:21 PM on March 24 [9 favorites]
We can all benefit from a group of people who have a specific role to monitor and give feedback about site polices and moderation practice. The mod oversight committee has that goal, I think. But this group was supposed to be focused on racial bias specifically.
So much feedback here just a huge thread that may or not be read in full by all of the mods. Emotions run high (for good reason) and people argue. It is also just feedback from whoever happens to have time and energy to participate here on that given day. The process really does need more thought and structure. We need these threads, but we also need to have a lot more leadership. If we don't want to burn out a few more people soon, we need to spread that leadership around.
posted by soelo at 2:21 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
So much feedback here just a huge thread that may or not be read in full by all of the mods. Emotions run high (for good reason) and people argue. It is also just feedback from whoever happens to have time and energy to participate here on that given day. The process really does need more thought and structure. We need these threads, but we also need to have a lot more leadership. If we don't want to burn out a few more people soon, we need to spread that leadership around.
posted by soelo at 2:21 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
Hey, warriorqueen explained how she got the Moderation Oversight Committee up and going in this comment. Basically she reached out to the Board, they talked and asked that she work on X instead of Y and they were off and running.
Try reaching out to the Interim Board via gmail at MeFiCoFo@gmail.com and go from there.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:28 PM on March 24
Try reaching out to the Interim Board via gmail at MeFiCoFo@gmail.com and go from there.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:28 PM on March 24
But Brandon. This isn't answering the question of who is in charge. I think it's the Interim Board, in which case -- why are they not either in here explaining their plans or (better) having regular meetings in which they make decisions and put them in writing so that everyone can talk about them?
If anything, you should care about how this works exists more than any of us, since you and the other staff actually rely on Metafilter for your paycheck. I have personally been asking these questions for weeks, and I'm not the only one. Who is in charge, both legally and practically speaking? Who makes decisions? What decisions are they making, and how are they communicating that to the community? Without that information, all of this conversation is meaningless.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:49 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
If anything, you should care about how this works exists more than any of us, since you and the other staff actually rely on Metafilter for your paycheck. I have personally been asking these questions for weeks, and I'm not the only one. Who is in charge, both legally and practically speaking? Who makes decisions? What decisions are they making, and how are they communicating that to the community? Without that information, all of this conversation is meaningless.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:49 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
But Brandon. This isn't answering the question of who is in charge. I think it's the Interim Board, in which case -- why are they not either in here explaining their plans or (better) having regular meetings in which they make decisions and put them in writing so that everyone can talk about them?
What sort of decisions does the BIPOC board need made by the Interim board? They are the ultimate authority here, full stop.
I'm not being flip or coy, just honestly wondering what needs to happen or be done in terms of larger decision making or decisions to help the BIPOC board?
If anything, you should care about how this works exists more than any of us, since you and the other staff actually rely on Metafilter for your paycheck
That's part of why I've been answering questions yesterday and today, two days that I am was not scheduled to work. Plus I actually do care and think people have legit questions so trying to help with answering them, since I can't code (sorry frimble and kirkaracha).
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:16 PM on March 24 [1 favorite]
What sort of decisions does the BIPOC board need made by the Interim board? They are the ultimate authority here, full stop.
I'm not being flip or coy, just honestly wondering what needs to happen or be done in terms of larger decision making or decisions to help the BIPOC board?
If anything, you should care about how this works exists more than any of us, since you and the other staff actually rely on Metafilter for your paycheck
That's part of why I've been answering questions yesterday and today, two days that I am was not scheduled to work. Plus I actually do care and think people have legit questions so trying to help with answering them, since I can't code (sorry frimble and kirkaracha).
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:16 PM on March 24 [1 favorite]
What sort of decisions does the BIPOC board need made by the Interim board? They are the ultimate authority here, full stop.
The BIPOC Board, as far as I can tell, isn't authorized to implement any kind of suggestions they make in terms of how Metafilter is run or modded or structured. Nor should they be. They're more like an advisory body.
They use their lived experience as well as their observation of how BIPoC members are treated here on Mefi to convey their concerns and ideas of how things can be better. Those concerns would be relayed to the Interim Board, or to the non-existent Director, who then come up with methods to put those recommendations into action.
If they are the Ultimate Authority, then you'll be in a situation where the BIPOC Board and the Main Board conflict on something, and now you have competing demands from 2 different bosses.
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:27 PM on March 24 [6 favorites]
The BIPOC Board, as far as I can tell, isn't authorized to implement any kind of suggestions they make in terms of how Metafilter is run or modded or structured. Nor should they be. They're more like an advisory body.
They use their lived experience as well as their observation of how BIPoC members are treated here on Mefi to convey their concerns and ideas of how things can be better. Those concerns would be relayed to the Interim Board, or to the non-existent Director, who then come up with methods to put those recommendations into action.
If they are the Ultimate Authority, then you'll be in a situation where the BIPOC Board and the Main Board conflict on something, and now you have competing demands from 2 different bosses.
posted by creatrixtiara at 6:27 PM on March 24 [6 favorites]
Brandon, thanks. And I'm sorry that you're having to answer these questions on your days off. That's not fair to you.
This is one more part of the fundamental problem -- that we don't have any clarity on who is in charge or what decisions are being made and how we are able to participate in those decisions. I think the "who is in charge here" part is the Interim Board, from what you're saying. Great. So what are they talking about, and what decisions are they making, and how are they communicating that to you all as the staff and to us as members of the community?
These are the kind of things that are just hair-pullingly difficult to drag out of everyone and I don't understand why it needs to be this difficult. Bylaws, for instance. Metafilter is a legal entity which has income and expenses, and it's no longer owned by any particular person, so... what are the rules by which Metafilter is owned and managed? What relationship do staff have to the Board? It's just... very basic governance questions to which no one is providing answers.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:29 PM on March 24 [15 favorites]
This is one more part of the fundamental problem -- that we don't have any clarity on who is in charge or what decisions are being made and how we are able to participate in those decisions. I think the "who is in charge here" part is the Interim Board, from what you're saying. Great. So what are they talking about, and what decisions are they making, and how are they communicating that to you all as the staff and to us as members of the community?
These are the kind of things that are just hair-pullingly difficult to drag out of everyone and I don't understand why it needs to be this difficult. Bylaws, for instance. Metafilter is a legal entity which has income and expenses, and it's no longer owned by any particular person, so... what are the rules by which Metafilter is owned and managed? What relationship do staff have to the Board? It's just... very basic governance questions to which no one is providing answers.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:29 PM on March 24 [15 favorites]
It seems likely that the interim board is either overwhelmed or uninterested doing the work it takes to create change. (I do not fault them for either of those things, at least they stepped up) Are they accepting new members to help, or is everything held hostage until either an election is conducted or the money just runs out?
posted by donnagirl at 7:44 PM on March 24 [6 favorites]
posted by donnagirl at 7:44 PM on March 24 [6 favorites]
You could email the board (MeFiCoFo AT gmail.com) and ask them.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 7:07 AM on March 25
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 7:07 AM on March 25
I have, thank you kirkaracha. I think by posing questions here many of us hope to get public answers from the board so that we don’t have to each reach out individually to discover what should be readily available info and also to keep the board from being buried in email.
posted by donnagirl at 8:57 AM on March 25 [8 favorites]
posted by donnagirl at 8:57 AM on March 25 [8 favorites]
Maybe one of you can make a new Metatalk post summarizing the board questions and emails? I’m thinking this topic might be getting overlooked here at the tail end of a long post.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:25 AM on March 25 [1 favorite]
posted by Vatnesine at 9:25 AM on March 25 [1 favorite]
If the board isn’t reading every metatalk comment, they’re being negligent.
posted by bowbeacon at 9:33 AM on March 25 [1 favorite]
posted by bowbeacon at 9:33 AM on March 25 [1 favorite]
Plus, who knows if it would get through the queue?
posted by bowbeacon at 9:34 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 9:34 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
There is a very similar conversation going on in the next thread.
posted by soelo at 9:47 AM on March 25 [1 favorite]
posted by soelo at 9:47 AM on March 25 [1 favorite]
If the board isn’t reading every metatalk comment, they’re being negligent.
I don't think it makes sense to expect the board to read every metatalk comment -- but it would be good to have some line of regular communication. This could be as simple as something like monthly public "meetings" where one or more board members commit to being present for a couple hours in a MeTa thread to answer questions and discuss things. I do want to be sensitive to the fact that this is right now a three-person volunteer committee which does have a lot on its plate and they can't be everywhere all the time.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:19 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
I don't think it makes sense to expect the board to read every metatalk comment -- but it would be good to have some line of regular communication. This could be as simple as something like monthly public "meetings" where one or more board members commit to being present for a couple hours in a MeTa thread to answer questions and discuss things. I do want to be sensitive to the fact that this is right now a three-person volunteer committee which does have a lot on its plate and they can't be everywhere all the time.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:19 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
In the last 5 days, there have been less than 400 comments on Metatalk. It's not a big commitment. The owners of the site should be expected to read the discussions about the site.
posted by bowbeacon at 10:32 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 10:32 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
I feel like there has been some elevation of MetaTalk into an unfathomable argumentdome of millions of comments, but in reality, on most days, there's way less than 50 comments. With three board members, they could each spend 15 minutes every third day reading it, and have read every comment, between them. This is not a significant workload. It's kind of the bare minimum that I would expect out of the people who chose to become owners of the community.
posted by bowbeacon at 10:35 AM on March 25 [6 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 10:35 AM on March 25 [6 favorites]
If the board (or really anyone) were to read every MetaTalk comment the only rational response would probably be to burn the site to the ground and not start again.
MetaFilter is pretty good, AskMeFi is great, FanFare, Projects, Music, Jobs, IRL, I can’t really speak to, I don’t spend much time there.
MetaTalk is where people go to be mean to each other, ask rhetorical questions, and give the least generous possible interpretation of their opponents previous comment. The number of comments isn’t the issue, it’s the quality of the debate and the endless personal attacks against the mods, which will surely extend to the board if/when they actually stick their head(s) in here.
posted by tiamat at 10:40 AM on March 25 [12 favorites]
MetaFilter is pretty good, AskMeFi is great, FanFare, Projects, Music, Jobs, IRL, I can’t really speak to, I don’t spend much time there.
MetaTalk is where people go to be mean to each other, ask rhetorical questions, and give the least generous possible interpretation of their opponents previous comment. The number of comments isn’t the issue, it’s the quality of the debate and the endless personal attacks against the mods, which will surely extend to the board if/when they actually stick their head(s) in here.
posted by tiamat at 10:40 AM on March 25 [12 favorites]
then the board should issue a statement on that
posted by sagc at 10:55 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by sagc at 10:55 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Metafilter: an Unfathomable Argumentdome!
posted by Vatnesine at 10:57 AM on March 25 [3 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 10:57 AM on March 25 [3 favorites]
I don't think it makes sense to expect the board to read every metatalk comment -- but it would be good to have some line of regular communication.
Agreed - perhaps a specific commitment to read and respond in each site update thread or else have a specific monthly board communication thread for public questions and responses.
posted by soelo at 11:09 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Agreed - perhaps a specific commitment to read and respond in each site update thread or else have a specific monthly board communication thread for public questions and responses.
posted by soelo at 11:09 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
MetaTalk is where people go to be mean to each other, ask rhetorical questions, and give the least generous possible interpretation of their opponents previous comment.
Exactly! It’s the vibrant beating heart of Metafilter.
posted by snofoam at 11:13 AM on March 25 [7 favorites]
Exactly! It’s the vibrant beating heart of Metafilter.
posted by snofoam at 11:13 AM on March 25 [7 favorites]
I think that if the interim board were engaging substantively with members in MetaTalk, there would be about 2/3 fewer comments in the long term, because people would understand what's going on, what the timelines are for change, etc and wouldn't need to ask the same questions over and over.
posted by ssg at 11:52 AM on March 25 [11 favorites]
posted by ssg at 11:52 AM on March 25 [11 favorites]
I would guess that as we get a permanent board and/or an ED there will be some work done on better communications channels.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:53 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 11:53 AM on March 25 [2 favorites]
There's a lot in MeTa the board can skip, but when the questions are "Who's in charge here anyway" or "Do we actually have a BIPOC board", it would be nice to hear from the people who legally own the site.
posted by echo target at 12:25 PM on March 25 [8 favorites]
posted by echo target at 12:25 PM on March 25 [8 favorites]
"There's a lot in MeTa the board can skip, but when the questions are "Who's in charge here anyway" or "Do we actually have a BIPOC board", it would be nice to hear from the people who legally own the site."
On the first question, sure, but as for the second question: a BIPOC Board member specifically talked about the BIPOC Board and stated its members in this very thread just yesterday. I don't understand why we need to hear from the site's legal owners that the board exists. There's zero percent chance that Rhaomi, 1Adam12, or Gorgik are going to say "Actually, the BIPOC Board doesn't exist. The minutes are all fake and cendawanita was lying."
posted by Bugbread at 2:30 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
On the first question, sure, but as for the second question: a BIPOC Board member specifically talked about the BIPOC Board and stated its members in this very thread just yesterday. I don't understand why we need to hear from the site's legal owners that the board exists. There's zero percent chance that Rhaomi, 1Adam12, or Gorgik are going to say "Actually, the BIPOC Board doesn't exist. The minutes are all fake and cendawanita was lying."
posted by Bugbread at 2:30 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
I agree we can say it exists. I think the question is what delegated authority it has.
posted by lapis at 2:51 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
posted by lapis at 2:51 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
Right, that makes sense.
Also, I think it's important to note that the official name of the BIPOC Board is (according to the minutes and one mention on the BIPOC Board page) the "Mefi Global BIPOC Advisory Board," which answers one question that has come up from time to time in this thread about whether the BIPOC Board is a board with executive authority or instead is meant to serve an advisory role.
posted by Bugbread at 3:14 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
Also, I think it's important to note that the official name of the BIPOC Board is (according to the minutes and one mention on the BIPOC Board page) the "Mefi Global BIPOC Advisory Board," which answers one question that has come up from time to time in this thread about whether the BIPOC Board is a board with executive authority or instead is meant to serve an advisory role.
posted by Bugbread at 3:14 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
(The question of whether it should be an advisory board or instead should be an executive board is another question, of course.)
posted by Bugbread at 3:17 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
posted by Bugbread at 3:17 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
If, indeed, it’s all our work to stamp out racism, I have a few questions:
Jewish mefites should feel safe to speak their minds on MetaFilter without being harassed by the I/P crowd. At the very least, they should be able to talk about antisemitism in America, and other countries, without the thread being co-opted by the I/P crowd. That they can’t reflects a breathtaking level of antisemitic hypocrisy.
The mods and the people they protect through their failure to moderate — the harassers, the bigots and the antisemites — and the people who ignore how Jews are all too often treated here are a disgrace.
posted by Violet Blue at 4:24 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
- Worldwide, there are Jews of color. Does their BIPOC identity not count on this site?
- My Jewishness has been questioned upthread. Am I to understand people here “do the work of antiracism” by asking for identity bona fides?
- Two of the worst I/P trolls have twice accused me of “moderating” threads. Is that an update on their earlier tactic of accusing people they don’t like of saying [insert outrageous thing] in nonexistent threads that nobody saw but them?
- Are we pretending a pile-on by favorite is not a thing now?
- Is it okay with people that Jewish mefites who have opinions across the spectrum about Jewish issues, I/P issues, and/or how I/P issues impact Jews globally have routinely been silenced, run out of threads and harassed by some in the I/P crowd for years now?
- I only ever visited two or three I/P threads quite a long time ago, made a few comments, including some in accord with the MetaFilter I/P party line, and some not — and I have been periodically harassed ever since, both in subsequent non-IP threads and those with subject matter that was only loosely related.
- In one of the worst instances of harassment, both for me and other mefites, I summarized the many complaints around harassment in the thread it was occurring in. The mods ignored it. Later, I emailed two separate mods. My emails were ignored. Then I was conveniently banned for 24 hours. The mod note sent announcing my day-long ban explained it was for saying something I unequivocally had not said.
- During subsequent site updates, I brought up the issue of harassment two or three times. When the mod in charge could ignore me no longer, I was told to flag or email with complaints.
- Since then, I emailed three times in a row about a longstanding harasser. Twice it was ignored. After I asked the mod to at least “acknowledge” the complaint in the third email, I was told that it was “noted.”
- I have since flagged relevant comments. As far as I can tell, they were all ignored.
- A recent comment in a non-I/P thread struck me as dangerously antisemitic, so I flagged it. As usual, I was ignored. So I later attempted to post a thread on the Grey, entitled “Why is antisemitism permitted on Metafilter?” It was ignored without acknowledgment.
- A couple of days ago, I posted a thread on the Blue. Called Rogan and Von are the Latest to Play Footsie with AntiSemites, it is, counting single lines and extended quotes, about 20 paragraphs long. If you read it you will see: It is not a policy thread. It is not an activist thread. It does not mention Israel at all, or any of the American organizations or hard-right factions that support it. It only briefly references “deporting a Muslim who has committed no crime in the name of Jews” to also describe the practical need for solidarity among minorities who, individually, have much to fear, with Jews now, as in the historical past, being the “canary in the coal mine for global hatred,” a line I quote from a UN page.
- Here is the structure of the thread: Jewish fears come up three times in the first few lines. The entire rest of the thread provides proof, proof, proof, proof and more proof, with a heavy focus on the U.S. president and his supporters. The capsule ending is about the threat to Jews and other minorities.
- Some in the I/P crowd immediately ignored all that. By the time I posted comments upthread about it, I had already flagged several comments in the Rogan thread, and sent an email to the mods. Of course, I was ignored. My comments upthread were less aimed at users here than at the head mod who had posted just above them. Of course, he ignored me.
- To the credit of other Jewish mefites and Jewish allies, the Rogan thread evened out a bit. But if you read through it you will note nearly every comment by a Jewish mefite, Jewish ally and the post itself is somehow “educational.”
Jewish mefites should feel safe to speak their minds on MetaFilter without being harassed by the I/P crowd. At the very least, they should be able to talk about antisemitism in America, and other countries, without the thread being co-opted by the I/P crowd. That they can’t reflects a breathtaking level of antisemitic hypocrisy.
The mods and the people they protect through their failure to moderate — the harassers, the bigots and the antisemites — and the people who ignore how Jews are all too often treated here are a disgrace.
posted by Violet Blue at 4:24 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
leaping right to calling people "I/P trolls" kinda gives the game away, ngl
posted by sagc at 4:34 PM on March 25 [10 favorites]
posted by sagc at 4:34 PM on March 25 [10 favorites]
If the board isn’t reading every metatalk comment, they’re being negligent.
Counterpoint: this page has 22,457 words, 850 sentences, 729 paragraphs, and a ~90 minute reading time. So far. (source)
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 4:51 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
Counterpoint: this page has 22,457 words, 850 sentences, 729 paragraphs, and a ~90 minute reading time. So far. (source)
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 4:51 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
My Jewishness has been questioned upthread.
I wasn't "questioning your Jewishness", I was literally asking if you are Jewish, because I do not know, despite the fact that you seem to want people to believe you are while also only referring to us in third person ever. I wouldn't want to assume that you are seeking attention and centering an agenda by co-opting our identity, so I asked.
posted by dusty potato at 4:51 PM on March 25 [6 favorites]
I wasn't "questioning your Jewishness", I was literally asking if you are Jewish, because I do not know, despite the fact that you seem to want people to believe you are while also only referring to us in third person ever. I wouldn't want to assume that you are seeking attention and centering an agenda by co-opting our identity, so I asked.
posted by dusty potato at 4:51 PM on March 25 [6 favorites]
Kirkaracha, what if you skipped all the off-topic comments though? Probably knocks it down to a breezy 75 minutes.
posted by Vatnesine at 4:58 PM on March 25
posted by Vatnesine at 4:58 PM on March 25
To my understanding:
1) Yes
2) No
3) No
4) No
5) If that's happening, no
Thanks for making them Yes/No questions, that streamlines the process. Though it's probably best to avoid negative questions ("Does X not happen?") because it makes the "yes/no" answer a bit ambiguous/hard to understand at first glance.
posted by Bugbread at 5:08 PM on March 25
1) Yes
2) No
3) No
4) No
5) If that's happening, no
Thanks for making them Yes/No questions, that streamlines the process. Though it's probably best to avoid negative questions ("Does X not happen?") because it makes the "yes/no" answer a bit ambiguous/hard to understand at first glance.
posted by Bugbread at 5:08 PM on March 25
I'm very confused as to what "pile-on by favorite" would even mean. The favorite count is a teeny little number at the end of every comment, and if you don't want to see that number you can turn it off in your settings.
posted by adrienneleigh at 5:13 PM on March 25 [7 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 5:13 PM on March 25 [7 favorites]
From their other comments about favorites, it would appear that they believe that if a lot of people agree with a comment and favorite it, that piles on people who disagree with the comment, and if there are enough favorites, they win the argument.
Also, they claim that MetaFilterMeta has speculated that people who favorite comments that are opposed to Israel are big donors, but I'm on MetaFilterMeta and I can't recall ever seeing speculation like that. There has been speculation about MetaFilter having one or a few big donors keeping the site afloat, but I've never seen that speculation tied to the big donors having some specific position on I/P or any other topic.
Even if there was someone who posted something like that on MetaFilterMeta, it was a single person. Saying "MFM has speculated whether folks like these are big donors" sounds like saying "MetaFilter has opined that self-promotion on websites is good because it made Scott Adams a multi-millionaire, enriched hundreds of people indirectly through his various enterprises, fed his family, and generated lots of tax revenue" when what really happened is that one guy on MetaFilter (Scott Adams) opined that.
posted by Bugbread at 5:26 PM on March 25 [3 favorites]
Also, they claim that MetaFilterMeta has speculated that people who favorite comments that are opposed to Israel are big donors, but I'm on MetaFilterMeta and I can't recall ever seeing speculation like that. There has been speculation about MetaFilter having one or a few big donors keeping the site afloat, but I've never seen that speculation tied to the big donors having some specific position on I/P or any other topic.
Even if there was someone who posted something like that on MetaFilterMeta, it was a single person. Saying "MFM has speculated whether folks like these are big donors" sounds like saying "MetaFilter has opined that self-promotion on websites is good because it made Scott Adams a multi-millionaire, enriched hundreds of people indirectly through his various enterprises, fed his family, and generated lots of tax revenue" when what really happened is that one guy on MetaFilter (Scott Adams) opined that.
posted by Bugbread at 5:26 PM on March 25 [3 favorites]
Mod note: Violet Blue, you're derailing this thread, please stop doing that.
There's a consistent pattern of behavior here where you post a thread on the front page, people have disagreements with you about the subject and then you try to police the thread. When told to stop you begin accusing people of organizing against you and/or contacting the mods to get their comments taken down.
The I/P subject is a complex one with lots of sides and emotions. It is recommended that you stop trying to argue with every single person who disagrees you. It is recommended that you stop accusing others of working in some organized fashion against you. People simply disagree with your take on things and that's perfectly fine.
Please stop posting comments in this thread. If you don't, we'll have to start removing your comments and/or issue temporary bans of increasing length, so please stop.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:31 PM on March 25 [7 favorites]
There's a consistent pattern of behavior here where you post a thread on the front page, people have disagreements with you about the subject and then you try to police the thread. When told to stop you begin accusing people of organizing against you and/or contacting the mods to get their comments taken down.
The I/P subject is a complex one with lots of sides and emotions. It is recommended that you stop trying to argue with every single person who disagrees you. It is recommended that you stop accusing others of working in some organized fashion against you. People simply disagree with your take on things and that's perfectly fine.
Please stop posting comments in this thread. If you don't, we'll have to start removing your comments and/or issue temporary bans of increasing length, so please stop.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:31 PM on March 25 [7 favorites]
I did consider making a MeTa post that was literally just "who is in charge here"
posted by creatrixtiara at 5:31 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by creatrixtiara at 5:31 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Mod note: I did consider making a MeTa post that was literally just "who is in charge here"
Slight update to the General Info FAQ which clarifies the position of the Interim Board (IB) members, and clarifies that loup is in a position over all the moderators.
But for quick reference, here's the Board info:
Rhaomi: President
1Adam12: Treasurer
Gorgik: Secretary
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:35 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Slight update to the General Info FAQ which clarifies the position of the Interim Board (IB) members, and clarifies that loup is in a position over all the moderators.
But for quick reference, here's the Board info:
Rhaomi: President
1Adam12: Treasurer
Gorgik: Secretary
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:35 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Counterpoint: this page has 22,457 words, 850 sentences, 729 paragraphs, and a ~90 minute reading time. So far.
In 5 days. And there are 3 people on the board. Thats 7 minutes per member, per day. And if they had answered anything, there might’ve been less comments.
posted by bowbeacon at 5:36 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
In 5 days. And there are 3 people on the board. Thats 7 minutes per member, per day. And if they had answered anything, there might’ve been less comments.
posted by bowbeacon at 5:36 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
Brandon: what happened to Violet Blue's MeTa thread? As everyone probably knows at this point, i absolutely loathe her, but you assured people barely a month ago that things are, at this point, put through the queue with a minimum of delay or checking, and this is at least the second time in literally a month that you have reneged on those assurances.
If you don't want people to derail MeTa threads, great, i don't either, but a whole lot of this specific derail is your fucking fault.
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:22 PM on March 25 [9 favorites]
If you don't want people to derail MeTa threads, great, i don't either, but a whole lot of this specific derail is your fucking fault.
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:22 PM on March 25 [9 favorites]
With my "i am a moderator at a large and active community elseweb" hat on, i am going to point out, yet again: the entire fucking job of moderators is to enable the community to have conversations they want to have.
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:25 PM on March 25 [5 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:25 PM on March 25 [5 favorites]
leaping right to calling people "I/P trolls" kinda gives the game away, ngl
okay you got me I’ve been buying up patents
posted by atoxyl at 6:49 PM on March 25 [8 favorites]
okay you got me I’ve been buying up patents
posted by atoxyl at 6:49 PM on March 25 [8 favorites]
Agree with adrienneleigh. I don't agree with the way VB has acted, nor do I think a MeTa from her is particularly going to go well (I pretty much agree with Brandon's comment), but my understanding is that she has the right to make a post to the Grey to discuss further if she wants.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:49 PM on March 25 [10 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:49 PM on March 25 [10 favorites]
On the one hand, I also find myself thinking "Yes, VB's comments here are a big derail, but a derail that could have been prevented if it had its own thread."
On the other hand, what BB wrote a month ago, which adrienneleigh linked to, was:
"Since December 24, 2024, the queue has been operating under the premise of just push anything through that isn't hugely fighty."
Going by VB's comments in this post, I can also easily imagine that the MeTa they submitted to the queue was hugely fighty, so there's no inherent contradiction there.
posted by Bugbread at 7:10 PM on March 25
On the other hand, what BB wrote a month ago, which adrienneleigh linked to, was:
"Since December 24, 2024, the queue has been operating under the premise of just push anything through that isn't hugely fighty."
Going by VB's comments in this post, I can also easily imagine that the MeTa they submitted to the queue was hugely fighty, so there's no inherent contradiction there.
posted by Bugbread at 7:10 PM on March 25
Fair enough, though AFAIK that is not the policy as it stands right now.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:13 PM on March 25
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:13 PM on March 25
Frankly, i don't trust the judgment of any of the current moderators one iota on the subject of what is "hugely fighty". (Which is why everyone was asking to just get rid of the fucking queue, before Brandon singlehandedly ruled that that wasn't going to happen.)
If it was, in fact, a hugely fighty MeTa, well, then people would've fought, and possibly someone would've learned something! MetaTalk is supposed to be the "fewer guardrails" area of the site. And again, with my "moderator elseweb" hat on: people do not need to be protected from witnessing conflict.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:15 PM on March 25 [6 favorites]
If it was, in fact, a hugely fighty MeTa, well, then people would've fought, and possibly someone would've learned something! MetaTalk is supposed to be the "fewer guardrails" area of the site. And again, with my "moderator elseweb" hat on: people do not need to be protected from witnessing conflict.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:15 PM on March 25 [6 favorites]
Mod note: Brandon: what happened to Violet Blue's MeTa thread?
Please create a MeTa for that and cease derailing this one. I'm up for a little bit, so it should go through. Yes, people may think it's ridiculous, to create a MeTa about why another MeTa wasn't published, but folks need to stop derailing this post.
I'm up for a while longer, so will send it through.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:17 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Please create a MeTa for that and cease derailing this one. I'm up for a little bit, so it should go through. Yes, people may think it's ridiculous, to create a MeTa about why another MeTa wasn't published, but folks need to stop derailing this post.
I'm up for a while longer, so will send it through.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:17 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Are mods not allowed to make posts on MeTa? This is at least the second time you've asked someone else to make a MeTa post you want made. The last one didn't go very well, so I don't think it's a precedent that should be followed.
posted by lapis at 7:21 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by lapis at 7:21 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Okay, I just posted a MeTa. We'll see if it gets through the queue.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:32 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:32 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Update: it's through the queue: Revisiting posts that disappear from the MeTa queue
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:33 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:33 PM on March 25 [2 favorites]
Thank you for making that.
Otherwise, for this thread, let's avoid derailing it further.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:35 PM on March 25
Otherwise, for this thread, let's avoid derailing it further.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:35 PM on March 25
a hugely fighty MeTa
At this point, a fighty MeTa where we disagree vehemently with each other would be a breath of fresh air instead of the many MeTas where we try to ask the board or the mods what's up and don't seem to get anywhere. It'll be like just like old times!
posted by ssg at 7:39 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
At this point, a fighty MeTa where we disagree vehemently with each other would be a breath of fresh air instead of the many MeTas where we try to ask the board or the mods what's up and don't seem to get anywhere. It'll be like just like old times!
posted by ssg at 7:39 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
can we have pile-driver favourites too
posted by neuromodulator at 7:46 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
posted by neuromodulator at 7:46 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
sorry, i caught up and feel like i’m contributing to a derail - my bad
posted by neuromodulator at 7:51 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
posted by neuromodulator at 7:51 PM on March 25 [4 favorites]
It’s all good, neuromodulator. Here, I’ll re-rail it for you - the two remaining missing BIPOC minutes are available for publication as of yesterday. After those go up we will have a complete set.
posted by Vatnesine at 5:01 AM on March 26 [1 favorite]
posted by Vatnesine at 5:01 AM on March 26 [1 favorite]
and a ~90 minute reading time. So far.
In 5 days. And there are 3 people on the board. Thats 7 minutes per member, per day.
Wait, is this based on the assumption that each Board member would each read just one third of the thread?
And I just want to throw out there that in nonprofit land, Board members are not owners. I’m not saying that the lack of visible leadership hasn’t been demonstratively corrosive to discourse here, it absolutely has. I just think there is space to hold that opinion and also hold the opinion that if you have ownership as your mental model, you may never be satisfied with how this all goes.
posted by solotoro at 1:49 PM on March 26 [2 favorites]
In 5 days. And there are 3 people on the board. Thats 7 minutes per member, per day.
Wait, is this based on the assumption that each Board member would each read just one third of the thread?
And I just want to throw out there that in nonprofit land, Board members are not owners. I’m not saying that the lack of visible leadership hasn’t been demonstratively corrosive to discourse here, it absolutely has. I just think there is space to hold that opinion and also hold the opinion that if you have ownership as your mental model, you may never be satisfied with how this all goes.
posted by solotoro at 1:49 PM on March 26 [2 favorites]
solotoro: "Wait, based assumption Board each one the?"
That's also how I took it.
posted by Bugbread at 2:10 PM on March 26 [1 favorite]
That's also how I took it.
posted by Bugbread at 2:10 PM on March 26 [1 favorite]
Wait, is this based on the assumption that each Board member would each read just one third of the thread?
Yes, and they would report on anything interesting in the slack. My point is, it’s a very small effort.
Meanwhile, the board are the only members of the nonprofit. It’s their thing. Nobody else has any legal stake.
posted by bowbeacon at 2:56 PM on March 26 [4 favorites]
Yes, and they would report on anything interesting in the slack. My point is, it’s a very small effort.
Meanwhile, the board are the only members of the nonprofit. It’s their thing. Nobody else has any legal stake.
posted by bowbeacon at 2:56 PM on March 26 [4 favorites]
BIPOC Board Minutes update on my end: All minutes have been posted except for #26 and #27. Minutes for meetings #26 and #27 have been submitted to frimble and will be up as soon as frimble can get to them! Thanks everyone.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 10:44 AM on March 27 [3 favorites]
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 10:44 AM on March 27 [3 favorites]
The latest minutes, from February 2025, looks like the content is much more streamlined than in the past.
Can you clarify whether there is a new procedure for the minutes, and what that is?
NotLost, I am just now seeing your question about the minutes earlier in the thread.
If I'm understanding your question correctly, we adopted the new format around Meeting #26 in October 2024. We decided to apply that format to all future minutes, (which included February 2025 minutes) as well as the minutes that were still awaiting edits and approvals. The pending minutes at that time were for Meetings #23, #24, and #25.
You'll see that everything after #23 is generally formatted to contain less content, in general, to make it easier to read and allow readers to understand the gist of what's been said/acted on. The new format was intended to relay only actions, short summaries, and motions/suggestions.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 10:58 AM on March 27 [1 favorite]
Can you clarify whether there is a new procedure for the minutes, and what that is?
NotLost, I am just now seeing your question about the minutes earlier in the thread.
If I'm understanding your question correctly, we adopted the new format around Meeting #26 in October 2024. We decided to apply that format to all future minutes, (which included February 2025 minutes) as well as the minutes that were still awaiting edits and approvals. The pending minutes at that time were for Meetings #23, #24, and #25.
You'll see that everything after #23 is generally formatted to contain less content, in general, to make it easier to read and allow readers to understand the gist of what's been said/acted on. The new format was intended to relay only actions, short summaries, and motions/suggestions.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 10:58 AM on March 27 [1 favorite]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:38 AM on March 20 [2 favorites]