Admin: Things we learn heading West
Aug. 17th, 2005 04:03 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
carolyn-claire.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
the_comfy_chairThank you, Moonmoth, for that great opening post, and thank you to everyone who is participating (keep participating!) in the discussion of Hindsight. It's been a fascinating first discussion with a lot of interesting and opposing views being discussed civilly and intelligently. Only a few bumps in the road, so far, which I'll go over again, here.
* Discussion in this comm is to stay focused on the stories, not the authors, posters or commenters. People's motives in saying and doing what they say and do are not open to speculation or comment; debate the ideas presented and not what you assume are the thoughts behind them. Authors, in particular, are not open for dissection on the board. You may have insight into their thought processes, but this isn't the place to share it because authors are not invited to refute or add to anything said about them, here. Focus on the story itself, as presented, and your reactions to it, when answering the post and other commenters' points.
* The purpose of the comm is to discuss, debate and even argue points about stories we've read. If we were all to agree to disagree and go home to sit quietly with our own thoughts, there would be no comm. That's no fun. *g* We won't come to any conclusions here, will not agree to disagree or accept that everything ever written is perfectly valid and right and has its own place in the universe and its own following. Of course it is, and does, but that's not what we're interested in, here. We're about stating opinions and supporting them, arguing positions, and sharing our thoughts. No generalizations about what we should all bear in mind or accept about stories, please. The fact that we don't accept everything about stories is why we're here.
* All posts to this comm must be self-contained; no linking to previous posts made outside this comm, please. Conversation begun here must stay here. Previously written essays and reviews are very welcome, here, but must be reproduced within the post for response within the comm.
As I said, you guys have done very well, and I'm really pleased with the response to Moonmoth's post. If I swoop in with my Admin icon and correct anyone in the course of discussion, it's only in service to maintaining open, civil discussion in the way I think is best; I'm not out to poop on anyone's head. There will be errors made early on, obviously, as everyone gets used to the rules, and in future as new people join, that's expected, but I will police pretty thoroughly to make sure that rules are followed and things stay orderly. Thanks for understanding.
And, excuse the caps, but this is very important and I don't want it missed: READ THE GUIDELINES THOROUGHLY when you join, all of them. There's info there that's vital to your not getting corrected or even removed from the comm. I really do intend to be fairly strict, so please read them. Also, I'll add people as soon as I've noticed they've joined, but feel free to email me and let me know if you've been waiting. I'm currently working nights and sleeping days, so it may take me a few hours to get to you, or to make an admin correction in a post or comment, if needed. I promise not to sleep any more than absolutely necessary. *g*
Thanks, everyone, and have fun!
* Discussion in this comm is to stay focused on the stories, not the authors, posters or commenters. People's motives in saying and doing what they say and do are not open to speculation or comment; debate the ideas presented and not what you assume are the thoughts behind them. Authors, in particular, are not open for dissection on the board. You may have insight into their thought processes, but this isn't the place to share it because authors are not invited to refute or add to anything said about them, here. Focus on the story itself, as presented, and your reactions to it, when answering the post and other commenters' points.
* The purpose of the comm is to discuss, debate and even argue points about stories we've read. If we were all to agree to disagree and go home to sit quietly with our own thoughts, there would be no comm. That's no fun. *g* We won't come to any conclusions here, will not agree to disagree or accept that everything ever written is perfectly valid and right and has its own place in the universe and its own following. Of course it is, and does, but that's not what we're interested in, here. We're about stating opinions and supporting them, arguing positions, and sharing our thoughts. No generalizations about what we should all bear in mind or accept about stories, please. The fact that we don't accept everything about stories is why we're here.
* All posts to this comm must be self-contained; no linking to previous posts made outside this comm, please. Conversation begun here must stay here. Previously written essays and reviews are very welcome, here, but must be reproduced within the post for response within the comm.
As I said, you guys have done very well, and I'm really pleased with the response to Moonmoth's post. If I swoop in with my Admin icon and correct anyone in the course of discussion, it's only in service to maintaining open, civil discussion in the way I think is best; I'm not out to poop on anyone's head. There will be errors made early on, obviously, as everyone gets used to the rules, and in future as new people join, that's expected, but I will police pretty thoroughly to make sure that rules are followed and things stay orderly. Thanks for understanding.
And, excuse the caps, but this is very important and I don't want it missed: READ THE GUIDELINES THOROUGHLY when you join, all of them. There's info there that's vital to your not getting corrected or even removed from the comm. I really do intend to be fairly strict, so please read them. Also, I'll add people as soon as I've noticed they've joined, but feel free to email me and let me know if you've been waiting. I'm currently working nights and sleeping days, so it may take me a few hours to get to you, or to make an admin correction in a post or comment, if needed. I promise not to sleep any more than absolutely necessary. *g*
Thanks, everyone, and have fun!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-08-23 01:19 am (UTC)I say this because I think it would probably be easier, as a writer, to watch a discussion forming, and have the choice to read or not read, than to come across it afterwards, or to be completely unprepared for it.
This is not giving the author any kind of veto power, just letting them know it's coming. I'd see it as a courtesy, giving me some choice as to how I would respond.
There was some fairly blunt public criticism of vids in the Vid Review panel at VVC this weekend; but that comes out of a community that historically has participated in that sort of dissection. And everyone who submits a vid to Premieres knows it's going to happen, and has time to prepare themselves. While everyone who puts a story up on the internet hopes people will talk about it, it's not the same as knowing your work will be subjected to an intense, and public, scrutiny. While some of us may want this to be common, and accepted, it's not the reality for much of fandom, and so many people are unprepared for the experience and their own response.
Additionally, I must say that many of the commenters are unprepared to participate in such a forum appropriately. Fandom isn't the same as English class, and I do think we err by trying to make it so. It's more, and it's less, and it's different. Dickens is dead, but I'm not, and I'm only one or two LJ clicks away from whoever starts the thread critiquing my Teyla characterization.
Additionally, the number of participants in any given conversation on LJ is nearly infinite; this is less of an issue on a mailing list (or a locked post), and I've seen people engage in "pile-on" behavior on LJ that wouldn't happen on a list because the list (or filter) has a finite number of members, and once they've had their say, the discussion moves on. On the other hand, I have no way to fix that, so.
Just a few thoughts, none of which are intended to question your ownership of the community or your right to make these decisions; I'm mostly thinking out loud about how to make such a discussion work without hurting too many feelings.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-23 02:40 am (UTC)I think something I haven't made clear, that I tried to in the most recent post, is that if people WANT to ask permission or inform writers of reviews, they can. I don't forbid that, I just don't care if people do or don't. I'm not going to demand it, and I certainly don't want to have to enforce it. Can you imagine the blow-up if I did demand it, and someone claimed to have followed the rules, but didn't? I don't want to be responsible for that. If people want to check with authors, they can. It's okay with me.