BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Policy & Help >

Entry-level concepts

  
 
Cat Chant
08:52 / 28.05.04
Spinning off this thread.

If we do think it's a good idea to have a mini-archive of "entry-level concepts" in the Head Shop in order to avoid constant arguments:

(1) how will the archive work - locked threads in the Headshop? The wiki? I think the wiki is more democratic, but locked threads are prettier/easier to link to.

(2) who is going to write them? We could just select a post/a couple of posts from existing threads and cut and paste them (with links for context), maybe - I'm thinking of Flyboy's and BiP's recent very good summaries of the "nigger" debate, and I know there were some good posts on that in a thread on immigrant labour & fruit-picking in the Switchboard which used the word "wog". So it would be like a "Greatest Hits" compilation around certain recurring themes. (I really like this idea.)

(3) Which concepts are "entry level"? I want to be really cautious and transparent here, because I can already feel myself tempted to propose a couple of things that are actually still up for debate here, much as I think they shouldn't be (I haven't listed any of those here). The ones I think would be handy to have a quick guide to would be:

* Political Correctness

* Reclaimed language (eg 'nigga') and the rights (or not) of different groups to use it.

* ?Feminism? (viz. that not all feminisms are about killing all men and instituting a totalitarian matriarchy)

* Not speaking for everyone in your (identity) group. This has only happened a couple of times - new posters who assume that all their interlocutors are, f'rex, straight and take on the role of speaking for all non-straight people - and actually they've always stopped doing that immediately some other non-straights (or whatever) have got into the conversation, so this one isn't particularly important. Forget I said it.

* Possibly something summing up the discussions that arose from the anti-semitic thread/debate or Rage's art - viz. that there are some questions which in the mode of their framing are not simply ingenuous discussion-starters but engage a whole range of assumptions and arguments that some/most people here do not want engaged?

And just to finish - I'm not starting this thread to be prescriptive, but because I think if we are going to have little beginner's-guide summaries of recurring debates we do have to be cautious and transparent about it, since I bet everyone here has at least one ongoing argument that they wish was an entry-level concept.
 
 
Cat Chant
08:57 / 28.05.04
Oh - I also wanted to say that "entry-level" concepts is a bit of a misleading/lazy shorthand, sorry. I just mean that there are some arguments that we have had a ton of times here and it would spare older/frustrated posters from reiterating them if we could link to a good, short, example which lays out the arguments clearly, rather than prescribing a particular belief. Also, if a new poster is given an indication that a particular phrase ("political correctness") has been argued to death already, they won't be so confused if/when they get jumped on for it.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
09:12 / 28.05.04
I would prefer that the threads be locked, if we aren't talking in them at the moment, and they be linked to from the wiki, with a warning that should anyone try to start a new 'nigga' thread (for example) there will probably be some scorn and the thread possibly will get deleted if it's just treading the same old ground. I don't think anyone should be writing anything new because that will imply consensus where there isn't necessarily.

However, as I was offended and irritated by Flyboy's original comment that started this all off, I'm not sure I agree that there is a need for this to be done... there's been a general retreat from theory bitchery in the last month or so in the face of an influx of new posters which I think has been good for dicussion rather than bad.
 
 
Cat Chant
09:30 / 28.05.04
Yeah - I'm a bit ambivalent because (a) I think implying consensus would be a very bad thing, but (b) links to posts on certain recurring topics would (hopefully) be useful in stopping old posters from throwing their rage about inappropriately *and* warning new posters that they are pressing buttons they might not have known they were there. I suppose that's what I'd like to talk about in this thread.
 
 
Lord Morgue
10:50 / 28.05.04
Consensus sucks. Upon my recent perusal by the Living Tribunal, I felt like Terrance Stamp trapped inside some kind of executive desk toy being menaced by the giant disembodied head of Marlon Brando.
Perhaps if the summary presented both sides of the debate, we could avoid treading over old ground until someone has something new to say. You know, the thesis and the antithesis and the... hippopotamathesis.

I like swords.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:51 / 28.05.04
Which comment was that, Our Shortened Lady? Any particular reason you didn't air your grievances at the time?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:58 / 28.05.04
Lord Morgue, you're welcome to your opinion that consensus sucks, and it's often a good point, but I think it's generally agreed that in the past one of the things people have found valid about Barbelith is that there are some very broad principles that, should anyone really object to, they would find it hard to feel comfortable here. For example, someone who believed homosexuality to be a sinful abomination in the eyes of the Lord would probably not enjoy themselves here, as you yourself have clearly understood, or you would not have started a thread devoted to (quite deservedly) mocking such an opinion.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:07 / 28.05.04
there's been a general retreat from theory bitchery in the last month or so in the face of an influx of new posters which I think has been good for dicussion rather than bad.

Hmmm.. I think I disagree with that statement. Quite strongly, and on a number of levels.

However, on this - in a way, I am cautious of creating new content on these. There are already some statements, about e.g. political correctness, in the wiki, and we could add to those with some suggestions about e.g. speaking for one's entire identity group, calling people feminazis and so on. That could also contain links to threads in which it has been previously discussed, and a handy quote, which could then be put into other threads if necessary if it was clear that an excited contributor had not read the wiki. So, for example, people talking about PC can be directed to Barbe-lexicon (although I think there is a whole and fascinating discussion to be had about the uses of the term, which is another issue).

It's a bit mechanistic, and it might get repetitive, but it would mean we wouldn't have to craft a response to these pretty basic bits of nonthink every time...
 
 
Lord Morgue
12:08 / 28.05.04
It's only a sinful abomination if it lands in my eyes so I can't see. Pinkeye!
Eh, just a quick summary and a link should do, with a caution not to cast Raise Dead Thread unless you have something new and insightful and sparkly to say. No need to lock off/ kill the conversation if it's potentially still going somewhere, just so a late starter knows where they can get up to speed on where everyone else is. After all, open debate is good, I can feed off the negative energ- I mean, (cough) it's, um, productive.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
16:45 / 28.05.04
Flyboy and the Neon Fever Which comment was that, Our Shortened Lady? Any particular reason you didn't air your grievances at the time?

It was something about complaining about how poor the conversations in the Head Shop had become, I didn't read the thread for a couple of days so by the time I did you'd apologised and the conversation had moved on that if I brought it up it would have derailed things. So I sat and glowered until now. It's okay now, I've worked out my anger by kicking kittens.
 
 
grant
17:40 / 28.05.04
OK, instead of framing this as "entry level concepts" which is going to sound either pedantic, elitist or both to the newbie, try "recurring debates."

As such, having a nest of links, maybe organized under subject headings but with little or no other text, would probably be handy in the wiki.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
20:49 / 28.05.04
OK, instead of framing this as "entry level concepts" which is going to sound either pedantic, elitist or both to the newbie, try "recurring debates."

agree wholeheartedly with this. I think the point that Deva's raised, that of figuring out a strategy/response to this recurring issue, is a very important one, but like Grant, am wary of "entry level concepts" being used as a general category.

To me, entry level concepts isn't patronising/pedantic if used to discuss specific theoretical constructs that are often invoked, a la the Lexicon.

Buuuut if taken as an overall term for 'stuff people don't know' it runs the risk of being, as Grant says, extremely annoying/off-putting of any debate.

A code of conduct/wiki entry on things that will not be tolerated/baselines, eg racism/homophobia etc is another kind of declaration of 'entry level concepts', in that such a document/list is a list of values that must be shared by posters in this community, or at least must be reflected in their identities/interactions here...


So how about making these such a statement closely linked to the lexicon and wiki, so for eg links from the wiki to the lexicon and summary of 'baselines'/code of conduct and vice versa...
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
20:54 / 28.05.04
there's been a general retreat from theory bitchery in the last month or so in the face of an influx of new posters which I think has been good for dicussion rather than bad.

Is this maybe another thread, about the nature of the head shop? (which I'm guessing is the 'where' from where there's been a 'general retreat from theory bitchery') as I think I also disagree pretty strongly with this statement in all sorts of ways, but don't really want to derail this one....
 
 
Olulabelle
23:24 / 28.05.04
Okaaay...

I hear what you're all saying, and I agree that the same recurring debate can be dull and demoralising for 'older/longer standing/more active' posters. But I also think that 'new' people should be allowed the chance to figure out their own opinions and get the chance to feel their way through 'difficult but frequently discussed' issues that they have obviously been thinking about and wish to debate.

It's just no good to go, "Well, we've all been alive for a while now and we've been posting on this board for almost all that time and we've had these discussions already, so let's just agree that we're all right and you should learn from us."

That's akin to parents saying to teenagers, "Honestly, it's a bad idea, don't do it. I did it, it was wrong and I don't want you to make the same mistakes I made."

Given that the influx of new people is growing everyday, and that lots of those people will be just beginning to search through their political opinions and ideals and philosophies, wouldn't it be a far better idea for long standing posters to ignore threads that are debates which have occurred over and over again, and let the new people talk about it amongst themselves?

We/you don't have to contribute to a thread about a subject if we feel it's been discussed before, and surely just letting it go on amongst new people who do wish to discuss it and who haven't already done so is better than saying, "Sorry, we've already talked about this, shhhhh."

For every new poster using the term Feminazi (or whatever) there is another willing to argue against it, and say why it's not acceptable. Are they not allowed their own chances to do that?

Obviously I am not advocating that threads which are obviously problematic be left unchecked - I just mean that the same-old, same-old threads which bore people who have been here a while since it's all been said, but which are not unacceptable to Barbelith should be left to run their course without the intrusion of 'older' members pointing out that we've already talked about it several times.

If we do that sooner or later there will be nothing left to talk about since every thread that ever gets started will find someone holding up the red card saying, "No can do, we talked about that on the 24th of last month in the year a long time ago."
 
 
Lord Morgue
03:53 / 29.05.04
All good points, but I feel that we should not neglect the hazing of new recruits. I suggest the ancient and honourable Australian ritual, "The Dance Of The Flaming Arseholes", where the individual in question completes a complete circuit of the yard with a burning funnel of newspaper inserted down the back of his pants.
This sounds like an event worthy of the next Barbemeet!
With posted pictures and a short movie, of course.
And so, we have come full circle, through the entire spectrum of possible action, right back to "do nothing". I think that is very Taoist. We may have done nothing, but we have done it CREATIVELY. That is very Subgenius. And is it not the end of the journey, but the path we take? Is that not Zen? As a militant Taoist, I would advise you all to do LESS, in fact, lie on the floor and remain calm. That's Discordian. That was Zen, this is Tao, and I think my Karma ran over my Dogma. Signing off, M-Dogg in the hizzy on Barbelizzy.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
12:43 / 29.05.04
You need to get some Imodium for that condition, Lord.

wouldn't it be a far better idea for long standing posters to ignore threads that are debates which have occurred over and over again, and let the new people talk about it amongst themselves?

But... but... Then they might come to conclusions which are wrong!

I'm only half joking.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
14:57 / 29.05.04
I've been wary of jumping in on this one, cos I couldn't think of how to phrase it (well, that and the fact that Freeserve seemed to disappear up its own wazoo for the last 24 hours making the internet inaccessible for me) but I think olulabelle's said pretty much everything I was going to. So I won't, other than to say that I agree with hir post.
 
 
Loomis
15:40 / 29.05.04
Yeah I agree with olulabelle too. Not that I'm totally against "recurring debates", but as ze points out, it could drastically curtail life on Barbelith. e.g. new poster comes along to the Head Shop and wants to start a thread on x. Being a good newbie, ze does a search and finds a thread on that topic already there with 7 pages. Newbie reads through it, sees that all has been said, so packs up and goes home. Tumbleweeds blow across the main street of the headshop.

An essential part of Barbelith or indeed any message board is the interaction itself rather than the comments themselves or the conclusion reached. Otheriwse there exists a danger that we'll get to a point where Everything Important has been said (if it hasn't already) and the only really active fora are the conversation and the gathering.
 
 
Cat Chant
09:52 / 31.05.04
Yes, I agree on that too, olulabelle stoatie & loomis - it's not that I don't want to have these debates again, just that I would like to avoid moments like this, when an older poster's frustration - and a newer poster's lack of awareness that this issue might have been left out of the thread not because no-one's thought of it, but because many people are bored of it and consider it a done deal - threaten to derail the thread.

Basically, if there's no way to set this up that wouldn't make it easier for both old and new posters to have better discussions, then it's not worth doing. But I know whenever I've joined an online community there have been issues, unsuspected by me, that I innocently got into and then felt like I'd stood on a mine: if there's a way we can flag those to newer posters and save older posters from having to be patient, that would be good.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:24 / 31.05.04

I hear what you're all saying, and I agree that the same recurring debate can be dull and demoralising for 'older/longer standing/more active' posters. But I also think that 'new' people should be allowed the chance to figure out their own opinions and get the chance to feel their way through 'difficult but frequently discussed' issues that they have obviously been thinking about and wish to debate.

Hmmm. That's only one part of the discussion though, isn't it? You say that for every new member using a term like "feminazi", there is another new user to challenge it, but is that actually the case? For comparison, there were the (now largely deleted) threads about or involving anti-Semitism. One of the things I found startling about those was the number of people asking "good question - *d* the Jews run the world?/*are* the Protocols of the Elders of Zion fake?"

That is, I'm not sure the only function of a set of easy-start guides would be to tell people what Barbelith had already discussed - it could also lay out some examples of positions that we are not interested in providing a platform for... "PC" would fall into the former category, the international Jewish conspiracy into the latter...
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
15:52 / 31.05.04
The Haus of baby field voles One of the things I found startling about those was the number of people asking "good question - *d* the Jews run the world?/*are* the Protocols of the Elders of Zion fake?"

Really? Was that the Magic thread or the Switchboard thread? I paid more attention to the latter but from what I remember both were fairly full of people saying "you're talking bollocks you silly Anti-Semitic sausage".

Anyway, on the matter at hand, if we had a search function on this board that was actually any good we could expect more that newbies would read before posting.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:33 / 31.05.04
Flowers - mainly the Magic thread, although the surviving Policy thread here is a pretty good example.
 
  
Add Your Reply