Great idean/t

Address the REAL issue.I was trying to stay as out of this as possible, but this is infuriating.
This wasn’t about people upset about being moderated, it was about completely ignoring an outcry brought on by moderating the wrong people.  I don’t care how much you talk about “weaponization” and “civility,” the underlying problem was that one person tried derailing a conversation by saying he was offended by common language used by trans people to refer to people who are not trans.  It was obvious that the real issue was not that “cisgender” is a problematic word, but that somebody was uncomfortably challenged.  It has been described as such by not only trans people, but cis allies.  And congratulations, everybody at the Blend apparently fell for it.
Autumn was rightfully criticized for trying to pacify somebody who in the situation was privileged.  But rather than take that criticism gracefully, she instead went on a rampage against people who were trying to explain something to a privilege-blind individual.
Without modding, what the hell do you hope to prove?  That we were wrong all along and that the world would be better if we’d just let you pander to cisgender interests?  Because that’s exactly what happened.  There was no “weaponization” of anything, and you all know it.

I’m glad you are willing to experiment PamAllowing back people who feel they were silenced, is courageous and humble action. I hope it works out for the best.
I’m reminded of the fight with KRXQ attacking trans kids.
That crossed the line, say what you will to ADULTS, we are big boys and girls, and won’t internalize that garbage, and we also may tell someone to go F*CK themselves. Kids can’t cope that way, and so adults intervened for them.
I’ve seen many times where groups may splinter and disapprove of one another, Civil Rights pacifists didn’t like the Panthers, lavender womyn left NOW, Gay Rights leaders told AIDS activists not to rock the boat, or be rude at CDC news briefings. Even withing the AIDS community I recall a button, “F*CK the red ribbon, find a cure”, this happened as PWAs had been trying to get straight allies to care, yet it demonstrated the frustration of the glacial pace, while we were dying.

Terrible idea.Now you’re just like most of the rest of the sites out there.

a little nervous, thoughI’m one of the lurkers, and I’ve been following some of the comments regarding Autumn’s entrys and there are a handful of people with very negative viewpoints and a great deal of hostility towards everyone. This will be very interesting, but it does make me a bit nervous.

IAWTC.This is a good summary of the issue. I hope Autumn and Pam are listening.

Thank goodnessVery good Pam.  My respect for this site has just been reestablished.
What went on earlier upset me, and I’m thankful you are working to solve the problem.

You can’t be Cis serious ?  lol some people need to have a Cis ence of humor.
I feel bad that so many can’t behave and act like spoiled brats throwing temper tantrums over nit pickin details that they spoil a really wonderful thing.
If i was queen of the universe or at least the rabbit hole i would say off with their heads..  

that was the ideaIt’s only for a week, and those who felt silenced can say whatever they wish, as well as those who may have a different view of their opinions. I didn’t say I preferred this, but without offering it up, the current model of moderation would never be seen acceptable to folks since it is seen that the judgment of those moderating is tainted and biased.
That said, no one in the other thread has come up with a viable moderating model that will work to create a virtual, civil, coffeehouse model that doesn’t involve the impossible — someone monitoring 24/7 who hasn’t any flaws, never errs,  or offends anyone. A very tall order.

AgreeI’ve stayed quiet about this, but this is essentially it. There is nothing offensive about cisgendered other than the fact that it deprives cisgendered people of the term “normal” in discussions about trans issues.
I’ve seen sites without moderation and I have no interest in reading one. Going entirely without moderation strikes me, in all honestly, as a bit of a tantrum. The problem is not moderation, it’s that a mistake was made in what to moderate. It happens. I’ve certainly done it. I’ve also been told I did by people I respect and I’ve backed off then even if thought I was right.

Address the issue pleaseModeration has been used as a weapon to support a specific political agenda. There have been times when classic ts have been ousted from here supposedly for hijacking a thread.
If you are going to push an agenda then be honest about it, okay.

Moderation in moderationI do agree there are things like threats and publishing information that clearly can’t be tollerated.
The idea of this forum being a coffeehouse, shouldn’t exclude the concept the chatroom might be the needed back alley, when folks are gonna fight no matter what reasonable folks say to them, and just tell them to turn out the lights when they’re done. I also think a temporary banning of three days to a week, might let tempers cool, but it lets the person know the next time is permanant.

Gresham’s LawI am sorry that you have decided to not moderate the comments on this blog.  One of the reasons I have enjoyed being here so much is the tone of civility that you have encouraged.  And, as a survivor of physical and emotional abuse, the flaming that is typical on many blogs brings back too many bad memories and bad feelings; I am concerned that I will now have to re-experience them as I read comments here.  I hope that I will be able to continue to visit here.

I’ll be back July 9thI didn’t like that silly incident and don’t really care to re-live it.  
You know, I don’t remember a parallel incident when someone in here expressed offense over a term, often used in an endearing way, commonly used to refer to T people.  What I remember is that people accepted that and just stopped using the term.  But then I may not have read every word of every thread.  
And, FWIW, Pam and barristas, I think you’ve been doing just fine all along.  

Thank whoever or whatever that the damned ratings system is gone!My free advice: NEVER bring it back.  I always ignored it, but it was a bad idea to begin with and it was impossible to ignore how it was being wildly abused during the recent brouhaha.
I haven’t commented about any of this yet, but I’m sincerely sorry for what a small handful of people have put you through and I wish they hadn’t hijacked your blog.  I don’t blame you if you turn off comments completely, because you don’t need this grief.
However, except for the ratings system, I never had a problem with how your site was operated before the hijacking.  I think giving into the hijackers is a terrible idea and I think changing your site because of them would be a worse idea.
What you’ll end up with is losing a lot of your regulars and then losing all of the hijackers once they can no longer create conflict here.  Then what will you have?
Don’t let your site be destroyed by destructive people who wouldn’t have ever posted here under any other circumstance other than seizing an opportunity to destroy your site.

the site won’t be destroyedThe free-speech zone is only for a week, and for the first time, the light will shine on the responsibility of the commenters to own their space. Most of the dialogue has been about what powers a moderator has, the choices they make, their responsibility to the various communities, etc., but not much has been laid at the feet where the arguments spin out of control in the first place.
My space is above the fold, and I invite people here to join in the dialogue, or to contribute their own diaries. That’s why the experiment has been launched — those who felt silenced can speak their piece. Free speech goes both ways, as does respect between commenters. Those who are banned are now free to write diaries about whatever they want and comment however they wish. Moderation will return, but it’s clear it may have a different form with different mechanisms and rules attached.

Well, from what I saw,There wasn’t that much common sense used in the moderating in question.  The conversation was derailed because, all efforts aside, somebody wasn’t checking his own privilege and made comments which reflected that.  When other people essentially corrected him, he still refused to check his own privilege.  That’s a common occurrence, but the “solution” to it was to warn and subsequently ban everyone who challenged him rather than address the person who originally derailed the conversation.  The way it was handled was essentially designed to appease that one guy and the few people who share his propensity for ignoring his societally-standard gender identity.  That said, it is absolutely no shock to me that trans people felt betrayed in that situation, yet the response on Autumn’s part was to chide them for their reaction without even looking at why people reacted that way and accusing them of attacking somebody just because he felt attacked.  I guess that would be normal in a lot of environments in which calling out privilege is viewed as “reverse discrimination,” but it’s not right: this is a blog which has built its reputation on advocacy for the marginalized, not on maintaining privilege, even as people continue to lose faith in its ability to actually do so.
That said, there is no need for 24/7 monitoring of everything that goes on or some legion of super-mods who keep a dictator-like watch on everything under a strict code of good and evil, but a free-for-all would be equally irresponsible.  And no, it doesn’t mean making a safe environment for people to bash commenters who happen to be members of privileged groups, either.  Just make sure that moderating is done in the interests of people and not privilege, is that so much to ask?  I have confidence that the mods here can handle this as long as they keep this in mind.

Let’s do the time warp again…Ok, let’s jump back in time to the 1930s.
“Heterosexual,” had been coined, so had “bisexual,” but mostly these were terms from biology. Pants and snails were bisexual.
Homosexuals were better known as faggots, inverts, and sodomites. They were, in the language of the psychology of the time, mentally ill, feminine, or psychologically undeveloped. Lesbians were almost universally understood to be masculine women who preyed on the sexual insecurities of feminine women.
“Straight” was slang within the gay community, to describe gay men who went back into the closet.
Then, things change. After WWII the gay rights movement comes out of the closet. Kinsey publishes his famous scale, that puts homosexuals and heterosexuals on the same descriptive plane. Straight people object to the new model of human sexual diversity that develops, because they are no longer the default. They are called “straight” and “heterosexual” to much protest, and they protest again when homosexuality is no longer a mental illness.
The revolution in gay rights started when homosexual people claimed, in the face of much resistance, that homosexuality and heterosexuality were different and equal parts of a spectrum of human sexuality. And during that early revolution straight people objected tooth and nail to no longer having the privilege of the default.  

Subjectivity makes it a tall order

Just make sure that moderating is done in the interests of people and not privilege, is that so much to ask?

At times, yes. A lot of this is subjective; saying that privilege examination should be the first order of business for a moderator without asking for the same of commenters is quite bold. We’re all products of the same culture and works in progress. All moderation and commenting are colored by our own experiences. The larger question is why, if everyone receives the same TOS when they join, do the comments need a moderator at all? Because they are human. And they should treat each other with the same respect with which they should be treated. At what point will those who join accept that fellow commenters may stumble out of ignorance, and in response someone should step forward not in a defensive position, but to extend a hand to find mutual understanding.
People too quickly abandon a discussion or lash out because they feel insulted or that the other person “should know better” about an ignorant statement that was made, and want the moderator to solve the problem by bans or suspension, rather than take it in the chat room or offline. People need to fess up to the desire to play uncivilly in public space to gain ally support rather than engage on a one-to-one basis and hold their own. That is human nature, but most won’t admit it.  

I’m really amazedby people who think that PHB is mismanaged.  I can think of a different major Democratic messageboard that has purged almost 20 GLBT voices in the last 6 weeks because they’re not cheering hard enough for President Fierce.
Is it perfect?  No.  No blog/messageboard/public forum could be.  But at least here, my experience has been that people could assume that the animus isn’t based on trans status.  There may even be occasional problems, but it isn’t like what I’ve observed elsewhere.  On this issue, Pam and Autumn at least seem willing to talk and find common ground.  
If people really think this place is going to be dead, then I hope they find what they really want.  I know that in regard to the Other Place Not To Be Named, I’m sure the Obamapologistas and competitive Cheersquads will be happy without having to share their Democratic Party with anyone GLBT who forgot their pompoms on the way to rationality.

My tuppenceI like the Blend as it has always been. This has been a successful blog because of the civility which is maintained for the most part. I always prefer to read here rather than on DailyKos or some of the others because I dislike it when discourse degenerates into hurling insults; at least on the Blend you get the feeling you are among civilized folk.
When I come to the Blend, I am usually educated in some way–not that long ago I knew only a very little about transgendered folk and what their lives are like. I’m glad to be educated and one of the ways people learn about other people is to check your privilege at the door and make it a point to remember that not every discussion is centered around you and your feelings. Why should a person who is not PoC or transgendered or disabled or any other minority be the one to tell those people how they should feel or what terms they should feel comfortable with?
It’s taken me (white, lesbian) a while to even understand the concept of privilege and how easily it is twisted. When you are a part of group that is not the majority, you sometimes feel that what you think is  easily translated into how someone of another persecuted minority  thinks.
It’s not.
Learning about it is not an easy thing; no one wishes to believe they are racist, bigoted or ignorant but everyone is to one degree or another. The trick of it is to do your best to learn how not to be any of those things and to understand that sometimes an apology and a little humility will take you a long way in shedding all those things that you don’t like to hear/think about yourself.
Vive L’experimente–I just hope it turns out to be another learning opportunity and not a free-for-all.
 

One thing hasn’t been mentionedPam created this space, and anyone who thinks a different alternative space is a better idea…fine, go create it yourself.

Another agreement.I also agree that this post is completely bewildering and infuriating.  
Moderation in and of itself had nothing to do with this.  The point was that moderation had been used in a completely inappropriate way, and in a way that effectively silenced a lot of trans voices.  A simple apology and commitment to be more careful in the future would have sufficed for 95% of the people who are upset.  
Instead, we get this – indicating that either they don’t get the point, or they’re just ignoring it.    

Crap. Someone alert the mediaI agree with Petey.

don’t ya hate when that happens

I forgot to mention, Pam is SO generous, she’d help answer questions to get you started

I’m not sure I agreecompletely that your place is above the fold Pam. I think I understand your point, but, from my observations, it’s nothing you need to worry about.  I’ve never seen you try to reroute or remap the way a thread conversation has gone.  Anyone who would claim otherwise can’t be reading the same Blend I am.
The reason I think you do have a place below the fold, and have always considered your present (or potentially present) below the fold, is because I’ve seen you keep the blend a place guided by the ideal of being decent to other people.
The worst a reasonable person would say is that you run a tight ship and have no problems throwing the kids who can’t behave themselves out of the sandbox. Myself? I’d say you’re keeping the place safe. I’ve always admired you for that. I’ve had plenty of disagreements here with people. I’ve never been banned.
Being pissed off, no matter how justified, doesn’t grant someone the right to do harm. Period. The only thing I’ve seen you do is to stop people from being hurtful troublemakers. How is that wrong?
So, yeah, I think the blog is yours. If someone is really distressed about not being able to scream their anger at someone else as extremely as they’d like, a great outlet might be starting their own blog.
And Autumn has pretty much laid herself out there in an attempt to explain the situation and encourage dialog. She received more undue abuse than disagreement from what I read.
I see this coming week as less a free-speech experiment and more as a giving a-holes a quasi anonymous forum to be the a-holes they’ve always longed to be. I’ll be reading, but I doubt I’ll actively be taking the time to argue with people for decency. I’m not up for volunteering to be abused. However, I do think you’re right that it will be illuminating.
I also gotta agree with some others that it’s nice to see the ratings gone.  One interesting system is a system I’ve seen on Craigslist (last time I looked anyway). Everyone gets a certain number of ratings points per day.  Once they’re gone, no more ratings for that day. When I would follow real estate and sports forums, an interesting thing would happen. Often, abusers would show early in the day, use their rating points, and then disappear.

After some of the pissing contests we’ve held?

a week is a good test..…i am curious and open to see what will happen.  for the record i love this site as is.  i am not as hesitant to post here.  i learn and am challenged to think.  as a white person i need to have the viewpoints and knowledge of everyone and i like that i get that variety, unfiltered, here.

Oh, let’s give it a tryIt’s a lot easier on the site admin to not be moderating, so maybe we can make their lives easier.  
People for the most part seem reasonable enough, and I’ve seen other blogs where the community is robust enough to respect some widely different groups of people.  Even if there are a few people who want to be a$$hats, there’s enough good people to hopefully call them on it.  Maybe it’ll work that way here, too.  Here’s hoping…

please notethat Pam said this is to be a one week experiment, not a permanent change in policy.

I agree 100000% about ratings!Screw the rating system, it was just one big pissing contest.
Leave it off, that way.. if you don’t agree with someone’s comment, you can RESPOND!  The only way this free speech thing will work is if we talk.. not just clicking a rating from one to five.  We can voice our opinion, put more gusto into our conversations and everyone can win.
I really hope they leave the ratings out after this reboot.

I like this ideaI think we can moderate ourselves better, if things get heated.. it’s a good idea to exchange some contact info.. discuss things in private too.  That way complete flamewars, if started, can be kept to yourselves.
I think if the moderation becomes more lax, the contributors to this blog can have more time to work on their posts.  More time = more in depth reporting.  Not saying they’re doing a bad job, but less time policing will lead to more chances to cover an issue that is very important to our community!

maybe they meant more to you than me?I don’t recall what any were about, but I have a lousy memory these days.
So, tap, tap, tap,….and wash your hands when you’re done.

This was tried in 1956 – as you can see, it went very well…I knew I had seen this before…
Motivated by the relaxation of strict communist controls in the Soviet Union that accompanied Nikita Khrushchev’s denunciation of the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin in February 1956, the Chinese chief of state Mao Zedong invited criticism of the Chinese Communist Party’s policies, even by noncommunist intellectuals, with a famous slogan from Chinese classical history, “Let a hundred flowers bloom, and a hundred schools of thought contend.”
Criticism was slow in developing, but other party leaders continued to echo Mao’s theme in speeches during the next year. Not until the spring of 1957 did articulate members of society begin to criticize communist policies openly; within a few weeks the party became subjected to an ever-increasing volume of criticism. Wall posters denounced every aspect of the government, and students and professors criticized party members.
In June-with the publication of an amended version of a speech Mao had given in February, “On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People”-the party began to signal that the criticism had gone too far.
By early July an antirightists’ campaign was under way in which the recent critics of the regime were subjected to severe retribution; most of them lost their jobs and were forced to do manual labour in the country, and some were sent to prison.

@Snookyserious?
Are you afraid Miss Pam is allowing you to vent anything you want, but secretly is gonna put your family in slave labor camps?
back away from the bong…sweetie

Not mismanaged, just made a mistakeIt’s not mismanaged. It is one mistake and one that’s very alienating to transpeople. Overall though, this was considered a very safe place. One that I recommended without hesitation.
But this was a major major major mistake.

LOL[Brockman]Well, I for one welcome our new alien overlords![/Brockman]
Really, comparing PHB to 1950s China? Hyperbole much?

forget Blogstremist…that’s 5 minutes agoMao ZePAM……ROFLMQAO!
   

Here ya go!I’m off to look for super-sized ant traps at MegaloMart…
http://www.mypartypost.com/wat…

hehah kent brockman!!

If it please the court…I submit the following rebuttal:

ThisJackson, I think she’s trying to “prove” that those stupid trans people don’t know what they’re asking for and if they complain about the unfair moderation, then fine, Pam will just not moderate ANYONE.

There’s a power differentialPam, you write:

A lot of this is subjective; saying that privilege examination should be the first order of business for a moderator without asking for the same of commenters is quite bold.

No, I’m sorry, I expect far more from you or Autumn than I do from Fritz or Lane or kevinchi.
Why?
Because none of them can ban me based on their unchecked privilege.

The rating system was not “being abused”People keep insisting this, but no, it isn’t true.
That said, I’m not a big fan of it.

Do you ever get a noseblleedfrom that high dudgeon? Cause it’s awfully high. I wouldn’t want you to fall and break anything.

RebootGood luck with this Gurl… there are a lot of nuts out there!

Personally,I don’t think you’ve particularly helped.  You seem to have done nothing but personally antagonize Autumn since this whole mess started.

Honestly…Honestly, you’re the only thing making the overmoderation look good. Sometimes a little silence is golden.

Alas, no ratingsbut that deserves a “4″.  

This isn’t all a personality cult.I think just that there are people out there having a pity party over this isn’t an excuse for ignoring that they had legitimate criticisms which were ignored throughout the entire time Autumn focused entirely on how trans people were treating white gay men when no accountability was given to people who completely derailed the conversation with the typical “but we’re not all like that!” excuse.
I think it’s a problem that you assume that this is all about people wanting to play uncivilly.  I perceived it as people trying to make a point to people who won’t listen and who did not check their privilege.  This sort of thing happens all the time in diverse situations.  And it’s just that: People not checking their privilege, sticking to not checking their privilege, and crying “meanie” when people get frustrated.
That doesn’t mean I support writing nasty things to people.  But what I’m seeing implied over and over is that the trans people commenting on these things should be treating others the way they want to be treated and yadda yadda yadda… when the same is not explicitly expressed with others.  Why are we being told how disappointing we have been but there is nothing about the other people involved checking their privilege?
The problem wasn’t that people were being moderated, and I don’t even have a problem necessarily with that topic being moderated, it was just very clearly unbalanced and that’s why so many trans people viewed it as trans-silencing.  Of course it looked like trans-silencing.  The entire burden was placed on us.
My problem right now is that this “free-speech” experiment comes off as just saying “screw it, have it your way” without looking at the real issues taking place.

I’m going to DC for the 4th and a few extra days, so I probably won’t be logging in much anyway during the trial period.
But for what it’s worth, I fall on the side of preferring moderating and banning those few who commit egregious abuse.  Everyone here, except Pam, is a guest and she ( or her chosen representatives) has the right to disinvite guests, without having to provide any justification.  If she asks people to leave/bans people, and does so for the purpose of community comity, most people will (and did, last week) recognize the reasonableness of that action.

The operative comments from Pam’s diary are…

Autumn, Louise, Lurleen, and I can’t be everywhere, monitoring everything. The routine, such as it is, has been piecemeal, as we discover inappropriate comments (a very subjective exercise, as we know all too well), or when they have been brought to our attention.
…People really do want to believe we’re tethered to computers staring at threads all the time, I have no earthly idea why, and are ready to charge that we are purposely “letting someone get away with it.”

We are looking at are looking at the issues.
The threads in question were moderated unevenly and unfairly because I took time off, and other baristas were not aware of the comments being made at The Blend thread in question. Again, as Pam stated, we aren’t tethered to our computers, and we haven’t had the time or energy to read through literally hundreds of comments on particularly active threads.
Perhaps you’ve forgotten that I’m a disabled veteran who frequently mentions I have a 100% VA disability rating, and Pam has been occasionally been mentioning that has multiple medical issues, including the relatively recently diagnosed condition of fibermyalgia. She also has been occasionally mentioning her recent medication issues.
So, how much more work do you expect from medically challeged people here who “work” at The Blend — for no pay whatsoever? Especially given that everyone who comments here has agreed to our TOS when they joined, and that we’ve frequently called for treating people civiliy. Why aren’t the people on this blog’s threads self-monitoring their own comments — self-moderating themselves, especially given our TOS and the calls for civility? Apparently, you personally expect a lot more of us baristas than we can realistically give you.
Seriously, sometimes I feel like some blenders consider us to be inhuman robots — or that Coffeegirl is an actual superhero that works here at The Blend — able to meet every blender expectation, as well as leap a tall building or two in a single bound.
If we moderate, then we’re accused of overmoderating, silencing, and doing moderation too unevenly. If we don’t moderate at all, then it’s a pity party. It’s pretty clear we can’t satisfy all of our critics.

And you will hear that from me.I made that major major major mistake pretty much all on my own, by both ommision and commision.
I made bad decisions, and some were made when I had counted to ten — but still wasn’t operating from a completely temperate place —  and I made a bad decision to walk away from a couple of threads for a couple of days to try to recharge without making sure those “noisy” threads were going to be continued to be reviewed.
And, I didn’t clarify my mistakes quickly enough.
Given all this, I still need a break.
And given all this, the Teish Green Hate Crime Murder Trial is coming upon us extremely soon, and making sure her murder isn’t forgotten by our broad community is going to be a priority for me. Whether or not our community or I am past the cis- issue or not, I still have to move forward and do one of my “jobs,” and make sure this hate crime victim isn’t forgotten.
I need too to pay more attention to the murder of the apparently gay sailor here in San Diego. This cis- issue means I haven’t been able to pay attention to that story as much as I need to — Pam picked up the first story. If I can cover the local courts martial from the courtroom, I’ll need to plan on being there.
Hard days ahead on so many levels, and for so many reasons.

OMG!You, Petey and Louise are keeping me in stiches.
Must be that “gallows humor” in my the deep recesses of my soul that have been tapped.
Thanks folks for the Kent Brockman (I’m a big Simpsons fan!) and Mao references. Appriciated the humor — light touch felt fun.

Also, you blatantly lied……by blaming the whole imbroglio on a comment made a day AFTER the argument started.
When are you going to come clean on that? When are you going to clarify your mistakes? When are you going to cop to your mistakes instead of expecting everyone to feel more sorry for you than for the trans people you silenced and lied about?

Wasn’t it Autumn……who antagonized Kynn by calling her out with a front-page post falsely blaming her for the agreement that started before she ever posted?

just how much of a rebootI’ve been banned from this blog for over a year now basically for refusing to allow others (Autumn) to define me.
Autumn declared “transgender” could only be used in the “inclusive” form and thus, in essence told those who fully transitioned to woman or man often for decades that they are forever “transgenders” regardless of their feeling in the matter.  Now she has once again dictated language use.  Does this reboot restore the right of self identity at the Blend?
One of the words banned back then was hermaphrodite, presumably because SOME intersexed people object to it.  The fact of the matter is, some are born hermaphrodites….I was one of them and the word that best describes my condition at birth was declared “off limits”.  My gender never trans but was consistent my entire life but despite my correcting my own body and over a decade of living as a woman, I was told I am a “transgender” and objecting to that against the TOS here.  This is defining others against their will.  This is the ultimate in disrespect of others and their lives.
After I was banned, and the extraordinary step of the complete erasure of every word I wrote, every comment I made and every reply by others to those words I was called a racist on the front page of this blog by Autumn, who is lily white.  My copy written picture and contact information was part of that front page smear.  Naturally, the only place I could respond was on lesser known and read blogs.  When others objected strongly to what was being done on the comments, the comments were cut off.
The whole issue now and then is one no one seems to want to address…..no one person should or should even attempt to speak for a very diverse groups….and Autumn has done that here over and over.  This is not a new issue, it’s an ongoing one.  You cannot encourage and respect diversity when you silence it.  I always gave Pam the benefit of the doubt in all this.  And for the record I asked before I rejoined, told I could but my original nick and email address are still banned here and my ability to write a diary turned off……message received and I won’t bother to respond further other than to direct questions.  My blog addy is on my profile here.

STAY FOCUSED!!!I am rapidly loosing interest in this blog because the focus has shifted from real issues with real meaning to crap like auto ads and fast food ads.
This is what I care about…
* Marriage Equality
* Immigration Equality (I fear my intelligent Lawyer girlfriend may be asked to leave the United States)
* Repeal DADT
* Repeal DOMA
* Pass Hate Crimes
* Pass ENDA
* Reveal Homophobia in Law Enforcement and Government.
Things I don’t give a rat’s ass about…
* Funny Auto Ads
* Funny Fast Food Ads
* nonsensical ramblings.
You wanted honesty.  This is as brutally honest as I can get.
~Becca

Uneven is the worstOf the three alternatives–(1) no moderation, (2) consistently aggressive moderation, and (3) uneven, arbitrary moderation–the third is, by far, the worst. That there are understandable reasons for it doesn’t make it any less uneven or arbitrary. If consistency isn’t possible, then no moderation is the best policy.

First, and probably last commentHi. I self identify as gender-queer, having a non-standard gender identity.
I’m sorry, but your actions on this issue do not make me feel this would be a safe place for me, and this is likely to be my first and last post.
I am, in particular, deeply upset by the apparent scape goating of Kynn on this. It is readly apparent that Kynn did not, in any way or form, ‘Start this off’ as she was accused of. It was improper, and abusive, to have made that accusation. Simple examination of the time stamps on the comments showed her comments came only after Autumn had already made multiple declarations on the issue.
Autumn’s behaviour towards Kynn has been ridiculous, frankly petty and vindictive, and an attempt to throw blame on someone who is easy to goad into anger.
Refusing to address the issue that Autumn had flat lied about the sequence of events, and made false accusations against Kynn, she refused to make a public reply on the issued that Kynn had requested. She emailed Kynn, including a demand to keep that email confidential that Kynn had been given no option to accept. In fact, Kynn has always made it well known, on her LJ profile and other places that use of her email address to contact her would be on her terms, not yours, and that she reserved right to publish any email sent to her.
As a third party, my opinion of this is such… There is no legitimate assumption of privacy when you email someone you have made a Public Personal Attack on. It is inane to believe there could be. There is no legitimate reason to have scape goated Kynn. It was disrespectful, and abusive to present false evidence that Kynn had ‘started’ the trouble. It was disrespectful and abusive to attempt to deflect blame and aggression onto Kynn. That action went beyond the pale, and at this point can only be resolved by the resignation of Autumn.
Now, to the original root of the matter. ‘Cisgender’.
The attempt to ban use of the word ‘Cisgender’ was wrong footed from the start. It would be like banning ‘Straight’ or ‘Hetrosexual’ because a ‘non-gay person’ didn’t like their use and thought they should get to be called ‘normal’ instead. The general community response was pretty clear. Cisgender is an appropriate term, there is no rational reason to think it is insulting, it is an attempt to neutralise gender identity language.
Failure to listen to the community would be a disaster for a site like this. And yet this is a prime example of doing so.
Again, for these two reasons, I can not accept this site would be a safe place to be. I hope you repair these mistakes.

YESAmen to that.  I’m physically male, and mentally and spiritually happy that way… and not AT ALL offended by the term “cisgender”.  It’s simply an adjective that denotes my status.  Same as “transgender” is for trans people.
I’m really sad to see us attack one another on here.  Let’s send the venom outward, to those who really deserve it… the anti-GLBT bastards all over this country.

PersonallyI would have preferred that it was I who was accused of weaponizing and my words used as th example rather than someone who didn’t start posting until after I had been banned.
I realize she was looking through a long thread relatively quickly to find an example on which to lay the case out by which she defended  her mistake, but that’s no excuse to make another mistake.
So let me go ahead and take this all on myself, the bitch who insulted and shits on doorsteps, the immaculate weaponizer.
It was me.  It was all my fault.  I did it.  I’m the bad girl.
write on my facebook wall, send me nasty emails, ban me from the site, make yourself feel happy or whatever.
Seriously.
Autumn just got back from a place where they did an apology the right way.
She didn’t do one the right way.
Let it be my fault that she screwed up — I am not the great and powerful Dyssonance of Oz. I’m just one little girl pissed off about being pissed on and I’ve gone to my window and shouted I’m mad as hell and not going to take it any longer.
Might as well tell ya to give me the gun now, too.
At least then other people will not be dragged into defamation by one woman who overreacted and can’t accept responsibility.
I’ll be over at a safe place for transfolks.  This one isn’t.  It’s still trans affirming, but at this point, affirming is not enough to do the job that needs to be done.
Dyssonance
Antonia Elle D’orsay (“Toni”)
http://www.dyssonance.com
http://www.thespectrumcafe.com

all new registrant diary writing is off for one dayAll new registrants cannot write a diary on the first day. It’s to reduce the number of spam diaries by people who come to shill some product or scam. And even then, some persistent ones come back and post them.
The first banning issue deleting your comments was a Soapblox technical issue. You don’t have to believe me, you can go query at Soapblox.net. We didn’t want to delete your posts. There were two features, one that preserves the profile and comments and one that deletes the profile and all comments. We had had a recent software upgrade and the preserve option was not available. I emailed the admin and it was later restored on a patch. No conspiracy, just bad timing.
Re: the diversity issue and moderation. The original TOS attempts to balance the ridiculously subjective “widely offensive” against free speech. Clearly unless we enumerate everything we believe is “widely offensive” someone will inevitably say “why this” or “why not this”. There’s no way to be “fair”. If we decide to strip all qualifications for what is widely offensive to any particular group, all we’re left with is the definitive “at the discretion of Pam Spaulding and her agents” — so then I decide, and for whatever reason at any time. Or, we decide it’s totally moderation free and you all, the commenters, can determine the level of civility, troll feeding and engagement you’re willing to tolerate.

I disagreeJackson wrote, “It was obvious that the real issue was not that “cisgender” is a problematic word, but that somebody was uncomfortably challenged.”
Having found the thread in question and reread the conversation that took place there, it was clear to me that “Travellingman”  was offended, at first, because of the demeaning context in which “cisgender” was used in several previous posts. Since the word was new to him, he assumed it was intended as an insult. The responses that followed his initial complaint weren’t very nice– They included actual insults, and were rather pedantic and lengthy, such that they came off as lectures. It’s no wonder he became increasingly angry.
I wish my fellow trans people had handled him differently. I’ve been working a lot of hours lately and haven’t had time to read everything of interest to me here.
Anyway, just saying.

Seems to me you need to be around more to educate cisgender peopleIt’s easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, not so easy to make your words count for anything.
I’m just saying.

InterestingYou seem to show both more honor, and more respect for the truth, than this Sandeen person.
No wonder you were banned.

except…There had been a robust discussion about the word transgender and the opposition to enforced inclusion by many women of operate history on this blog prior to Sandeen’s “pronouncement” from on high.  It was beyond clear that a significant number of women of transsexual history, particularly those long transitioned, objected strongly to that use towards themselves and considered it “widely offensive” ourselves.  I even wrote to you personally about it because one diary entry was promoted to the front page and yet had a Sandeen “warning” added after the fact to it along with the announcement that our position would never again be allowed on the front page.  Comments were “disappeared” precisely when wider internet discussion as a direct result began.  Coming from the long term transitioned (up to four decades) elders of the trans communities, consideration should have been given to our opinions and objections if diversity and respect were actually the goals.  Instead we were attacked openly in violation of the then TOS without any reaction from the staff over and over and over and then we were systematically, starting with me, banned one by one…..for our expressed opinions NOT violations of the original TOS.  Then as now this was a matter of Sandeen acting to suppress an entire point of view.  I even wrote you personally the day before I was banned and asked directly if I were allowed to disagree with Sandeen here and you answered yes.
And you did not address the direct attack on me personally on your front page AFTER I had been banned that included my contact information and my picture.  The one that to this day shows up when someone googles me calling me a racist.
To be perfectly clear: I was involved actively in the Civil Rights movement in the sixties, then the Anti War movement, the Women’s movement, Pagan rights and eventually trans civil rights.  I founded or co-founded a number of national and state trans rights groups including NTAC and the Ohio chapter of It’s Time America.  I re-established the major historic religion that was totally transsexual inclusive, I lobbied both the federal and states governments for trans civil rights for years on poverty level pink collar wages.  I established a housing cooperative project for newly transitioned women and, along with Ethan St. Pierre, personally raised and disbursed funds to aid LGBt Katrina victims, the only known such effort btw…..while Autumn wrote opinion blogs and self promoted, I was changing lives.
Under the circumstances the timing of the upgrade issue, which has never been mentioned before, is highly suspect.
I more than paid my dues many times over, continue to this day to head a woman’s spiritual community, hostess trans and intersexed support groups at our home.  I did nothing to deserve the banning or especially the trashing, I received at Sandeen’s hands.  I more than earned the right to express the knowledge I gained over the years……and have done so since 2001 with chronic, disabling back injuries as a direct result of workplace discrimination…..and my cat answers me when I ask him direct questions to boot.  

To Whom It May Concern:“Sir, you are an apogenous, bovaristic, coprolalial, dasypygal, excerebrose, facinorous, gnathonic, hircine, ithyphallic, jumentous, kyphotic, labrose, mephitic, napiform, oligophrenial, papuliferous, quisquilian, rebarbative, saponaceous, thersitical, unguinous, ventripotent, wlatsome, xylocephalous, yirning zoophyte.”
Trouble is, I have no-one to address this insult to.
Seriously though, I hope that I’m not held to a standard of perfection when it comes to comment moderation. I have screwed up in the past, I will no doubt screw up again in the future. I try very hard to keep those occasions to a minimum, but I reserve the right to be human. Hence fallible.
Sometimes you have to retain a sense of humour, a sense of proportion, and know when NOT to stand up for your rights. That can be difficult when not standing up usually gets you used as a doormat. You have to recognise who it’s safe to trust, and not to sweat the small stuff.
Now feel free to flame – but please do so with courtesy. This is not my blog and politeness has been asked for by the owner.

Wow.I had to look up 7 of those, Zoe.
Its not about perfection in moderation.  Everyone knows people are human.
They just have a hard time admitting that humans make mistakes.
Flame?  Nah.
I like ya too damn much.  

The best advice I can giveIf you carry too many grudges, especially after someone has attempted to apologize several times, you can find the load becomes awful heavy awful fast.

Some of the reporting on ads is about cultural acceptance of institutionalized homophobiaThat cultural acceptance allows the law enforcement and government abuses we have seen:  all members of law enforcement and government are part of the culture and experience everything the rest of us do.  If all they see are negative portrayals of LGBT people, then they internalize that the negative portrayals represent reality.  Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes truth.

Humorwhen does right, is a gift that keeps giving, can be infectious- and can be healing.

Have a great time!We watch the DC fireworks on PBS and they look astounding- hope you get a good view!

Add Me to the voices of womenWho were borne with a birth condition that found the resources and courage to correct that birth condition.
I don’t and won’t identify as “trans anything”
Some may find comfort in that label but Don’t stick that label on me, I am and always have been Female.
I have the right and will exercise that right to label myself. I get to do that nobody else does.
To quote a bumper sticker I saw a very long time ago.

Do Your Thing BUT NOT ON ME.

WowThis is brilliant.
I think…
Okay, you got me. I got lost after “an”!
But if we ever have an online Scrabble challenge, I claim ZoeB first!!

Thanks for making a sincere effort to sort out this dispute.I’ve had experiences moderating both online and real-life discussions and I’ve often found it difficult to handle people who were expressing ideas I personally objected to in an antagonistic manner. I tended to be very strict with people whose opinions I didn’t respect, and more lenient with people I liked.
One thing I learned quickly, however, was not to attempt to moderate a discussion I was already personally embroiled in. I could see trouble brewing here as soon as Autumn took sides with those who found the cis-words offensive. (And I was annoyed because it just served to make overuse of the “cis-” prefix into a cause celebre.)
IME, it’s a lot safer for a moderator to recuse herself from moderating her own discussion topics. Banning a poster is always going to be controversial, but it’s radioactive to do that when you’re involved in the dispute yourself. I always asked for other moderators’ opinions first, even in cases where I had no personal stake in a particular discussion.
Also, I’d be happy to never see the rating numbers again.

like thiscomment. I hadn’t really thought about the moderator vs. contributor conflict in detail b4. I’ve been the author of things on the web where it’s probably good that I didn’t have moderator powers (and that’s strictly a comment about yours truly, not anyone here!). I wonder if I’d be more mature now.

Yes, but none of us get to choose what mainstream society calls us.I’m fine with everyone having the indisputable right to define your own personal identity, in both gender and sexual orientation, and anything else that you feel is essential.
But even if we did find perfectly appropriate terms to refer to each other without causing offense, it won’t make any difference in how other people perceive us. And in real life, if you are detectably gender variant, mainstream people are going to classify you as transgender. They are never going to give us the right to choose how they see us.
And it’s not just for those perceived as trans, but for LGBT folks in general. The core issue is not “cis-privilege”, it’s passing privilege. It’s all a matter of whether you have the ability to blend seamlessly into straight society.
Mainstream is the new white.

History: NOW Expelled UsPeteyP, Actually, lavender women didn’t “leave” NOW, they expelled us.
Minor correction, but important to get the history right.
And many of the more “moderate” advocacy groups are well aware that the more “extremist” groups’ activities push the mainstream to deal with them, so at least some of the agenda is moved forward. Kind of like “good cop, bad cop.”
Not saying it’s a good thing, just that there’s room for a range of approaches, and usually some combo gets things done.
I’d never heard or seen the term “cisgendered,” before here, didn’t take it as an insult, didn’t, until this post, understand why it blew up (and I’m new here — signed on when the DNC fundraising protest happened).

crapMainstream society doesn’t call me a transgender….transgenders do.
AND..I..AM..NOT..TRANSGENDER
My gender has been consistent my entire life.
End of story other than passing privilege is a myth, something I learned a mere three months into transition many many moons ago.

They call us much worse things when we’re out of hearing range.“Transgender” is what mainstream folks call us when they’re trying to be polite and/or politically correct. I know who I really am and I hear what you’re saying about yourself, but the truth is, our precious personal identities aren’t what really counts in the straight world.
And yes, losing your passing privilege is a bitch.

Well, I appreciate the way that Pam and Autumn are responding to this.A week ago I had never heard the term “cisgendered.” Turns out I’m one. Is the term being used in a complimentary way at times? Not particularly. So what.
Based on what I’ve learned of the ways in which transgender people have been treated, and continue to be treated, in the U.S. and elsewhere, I can understand the anger.
I understand the idea of privilege. As a lesbian, I’ve been treated to rude, dismissive comments (on the internet and in real life) from supposed straight “allies.” It’s not difficult for me to imagine how hurtful and infuriating it must be for transgender people to hear rude, dismissive comments from their supposed gay allies.
Do the wrong individuals get attacked sometimes? Sure. Is it “fair” to make broad brush generalizations about “cis” people being rude and dismissive? No, but in the pantheon of “fair,” getting chewed out by a transgender person who is having a bad day is pretty insignificant compared to the larger problems that we’re all facing. So my sympathy lies with transgender people in this fight – and that includes Autumn! Seems like she may have moderated some comments with an overly heavy hand, and maybe some of the follow up to that was overly heavy handed. But now those banned have been reinstated and Autumn has apologized.
Works for me.  

And the Problem PersistsI think folks are completely missing the actual root of the issue. Autumn made an article about a cis gay man who questioned the very presence of trans people in the “gay movement”. He intentionally denied dissenting opinions in his call for “conversation”. When this same man crows about a (small) victory for trans protections as a (small) win for the GLBT movement – there IS a problem with that. Autumn’s article was a good one.
The issue came when another gay man had an issue with that. He had an issue with a trans woman naming a VERY painful time for trans people (women in particular). When “cis” was used CORRECTLY to identify Ariviois’ status (along with gay and white and man) the SAME Blender and other gay men got ruffled and started to derail.
The problem is that the derailing is not seriously being addressed. The apology goes at great length to point out how and why and to what extent trans women and use of “cis” is the issue. The privileged attitudes that sparked the whole thing are briefly addressed as an afterthought.
Horrible mean nasty trans vs. naughty little gay guys who must be shielded from examining their own place part in this whole mess.
I initially posted this at QT.

Job?Funny, I thought Autumn and Pam volunteered their time to the Blend.

AgreedI was kind of flabbergasted by the idea that a person with a disability should be considered unable to moderate effectively.
I didn’t say anything because it was the PWD herself saying it, and I am sympathetic to the idea that when disability takes its toll, you can’t give 100% to things you’ve committed to do.
But it does seem to be a rather odd tactic to hide behind the disability itself, and insulting to those of us who are disabled in one way or another.

I think we’re talking about disability not as an excuse, just a time factor For me the various illnesses (which have increased in severity and number since launching the blog in 2004) aren’t an excuse, just one of many explanations for a lack of time and availability to moderate. It has nothing to do with making a mistake.
Remember, I didn’t start the blog for an audience, it was a personal platform for expression that happened to have comments. We’re talking about a lack of enough hours to do moderation, period. With the growth of the blog that went from about 300 readers/day to 13K/day and a couple hundred registered users to 8,300+, it’s unrealistic that the following constraints would not have any impact on moderation:
* full time job
* writing content for PHB as well as a local newspaper
* exponential growth of registered commenters
* blog-related travel
* a personal life
* more time at various medical facilities than I want to count
* being flat out sick
I didn’t start the blog to monitor what people are saying below the fold. I did it because, as the community grew, I wanted it to be as welcoming as possible. That’s easy with 300 readers, it’s clearly unmanageable with those above current numbers. Nothing about PHB regarding moderation is required but it is now expected regardless of any of the above; the standard has been set. I’ve said before, it appears that some commenters want to bear zero responsibility for monitoring their own level of civility, others want there to be a 24/7 bouncer at the door to deal with those people, regardless of the number at the moment of offense. That’s unrealistic.
And people can cast aspersions, lies, make baseless charges in the comments and largely they’ll go unanswered not because there’s no interest in responding, but that we’re clueless because there are so many threads and I just can’t read them all.
That’s why readers could do everyone a favor by alerting moderators of problem commenters that violate the TOS by emailing the tips addy. That takes all of a few seconds to post a link to the comment and send it, and if one wants to really participate in the self-policing, post a comment after the offending one to say it’s been reported.
Most of the baristas are only here to contribute as they wish, you’ll notice you occasionally see anything from Terrance, Julien, Daimeon or Russ. They aren’t moderators and I’m not asking them to be. Autumn volunteered to help out when I wasn’t available; Louise and Lurleen until recently didn’t even have admin privileges and only posted, not monitored.
And there is no way to avoid mistakes in moderating; most commenters have the luxury of not having their mistakes public with their real names attached to them circulating around the web. It’s something we take on willingly as front pagers, but it doesn’t make us less human. It’s pretty clear from some of the emails I receive and some comments on threads that I’m not seen as a human being just like they are.  

Okay, so we can say whatever we want without fear of “silencing,”so why hasn’t someone started
1.) a “big cis” thread (check your privilege at the door)
2.) a “we’re mad as hell at the moderation, and here’s why” thread
3.) a “if T’s ran this #@$%ing site, this is what it would look like” thread;
4.) a “I’m the cutest girl in the house and I’d like to share my makeup tips” thread (would contain posts only by Dyssonance because no one else could get a word in edgewise)
5.) a “we’re ALL transgendered; get a bigger umbrella” thread

I don’t have a grudge against anyoneI just think that if Autumn is going to claim she came clean and owned up to her mistakes, she should at least do so and explain why she proposed a completely false explanation for what happened.
Why’s that so hard to understand?

I think that’s what’s happening now……since it’s been proven without any shadow of a doubt that PHB is not nearly as trans-friendly as trans people once thought it was.
We’re getting the hint: We’re not wanted here. Okay. Pam’s house, Pam makes the rules.

you don’t have to readThe entries that don’t interest you. There’s plenty of content to go around and we’ve blogged about all the above issues you care about. I blog about what I care about, which you don’t list — like race matters, race-based police brutality, color-aroused homophobia, reproductive freedom, so maybe you skip over those as well. There’s something for everyone.
If you don’t like the ads on the blog (not sure if you were referring to them or content as well), know that I don’t run regular fundraisers asking for support or subscriber access to content because I don’t like asking. The ads pay for me to go to panels or conferences so it doesn’t come out of my family’s budget.

I’m pretty sure it’s because trans people gave up on this siteAny of those threads would immediately make the trans person a target, and without any moderation, you’d soon have angry cis people engaging in wholesale trans bashing.
Trans people know the score — this is not a trans-friendly site, and it’s full of hostile cis people. Trans people will have those discussions elsewhere, where they’ll be productive.
You, of course, are free to start any conversations you wish.

Still about the ‘job’?And the ‘job description’ is where?  
This whole thread is about how moderation should work and what our expectations should be.  Autumn reminds us that the people volunteering their time do not have unlimited time because, among other things, certain medical conditions and/or disabilities.  Autumn poses a question, how much do you expect from the baristas given the circumstances?
And you jump on her for playing a disability card?
It’s quite clear that you have very high expecations with regard to the baristas.  Unrealistic, I would say.

You’ve got the wrong focus, as usual for many “name” bloggersMileHighDawg got it right — this was about the transphobic and homophobic television ads that were the topics of debate here recently, not about whether or not you make enough money to keep up your demicelebrity status.
You probably want to avoid such slips — it tips your hand by accurately showing your view of what the Blend really means to you. (Same with your statement about how much traffic is up, and that’s why trans folks have to not offend cis people.)

Can you name them?Pam, you wrote:

I’ve said before, it appears that some commenters want to bear zero responsibility for monitoring their own level of civility, others want there to be a 24/7 bouncer at the door to deal with those people, regardless of the number at the moment of offense. That’s unrealistic.

I’ve never heard anyone ask for this, but I’ve seen both you and Autumn repeating this as if it’s fact.
Can you name who those people are and give a link to the comments where they make those demands?

And people can cast aspersions, lies, make baseless charges in the comments and largely they’ll go unanswered not because there’s no interest in responding, but that we’re clueless because there are so many threads and I just can’t read them all.

I’m wondering about the threads you have been reading and participating in. In multiple threads, Autumn has been asked to explain exactly why she called out Kynn as the cause of the “cis” argument, even though Kynn’s post was one day after Autumn had already decided “cis” was inappropriate and banned discussion advocating its use.
Autumn has yet to respond to this; you, who approved the post and made it front-page after reviewing it, have not responded either. Can you explain why exactly you and Autumn are reading the threads but deliberately ignoring the accusation — be it true or false — that Autumn has unfairly scapegoated the wrong person?

And there is no way to avoid mistakes in moderating; most commenters have the luxury of not having their mistakes public with their real names attached to them circulating around the web.

Except one of the most prominent commenters — the one you banned — has already has her real name circulating around the web after being unfairly singled out by Autumn. Kynn posted under her real name, and you and Autumn had no problem with condemning her for what “mistakes” you feel she made.

Does Autumn’s disability affect her perception of time?You are correct, Burnsey — Autumn is trying to use her disability as an excuse.
The complaint has never been “Autumn isn’t doing enough!” but rather “Autumn isn’t doing it right!” You may disagree with the complaint, but we both do agree that the disability issue is a dodge and an excuse.
Certainly there are few disabilities which could be blamed for Autumn banning arguments for “cis”; surely there are no disabilities which would make Autumn’s timeline of the “cis” arguments anything other than a scapegoating fiction.
By using her disability as a shield, Autumn implies that people with disabilities are not just prone to make mistakes (as is everyone) or to have limited time, but that something about being disabled means that it’s unreasonable to expect her to do a “good job” when she does have the time and spoons to moderate.
Autumn is, as you say, using this to gain sympathy and deflect, in a way which is pretty insulting to people with disabilities.

It’s not about the time or the “job”If you prefer, mentally edit Burnsey’s comment to read “task” instead.
She chose to take on the task of moderation. Some people objected to the way she did that — you can agree (as I do) with those people, or disagree (as Burnsey does) — but the argument here is not about whether she had time to moderate, but what she did when she chose to moderate.
She’s definitely “playing a disability card” here, as a way of dodging the actual issue and playing for sympathy. Lots of people involved in this argument likely have disabilities, you know.
Unless Autumn’s disability affects her decision-making abilities — you know, the crux of the debate — then it’s just a dodge, and an insulting one. As Burnsey has noted, Autumn and Pam aren’t the only ones here with disabilities.
And if Autumn’s disability does impact her ability to moderate? Maybe she should rethink taking on that task.

“And in real life, if you are detectably gender variant, mainstream people are going to classify you as transgender.”I thought the word they usually applied in that case is, queer or homosexual or faggot or dyke.

Speak for yourselfYou’re no more qualified to speak for trans people in general than I am.
In my view, the “cis versus trans” distinction is only relevant to a person’s inner psychology. A person who isn’t trans will take their gender identity for granted in a way that trans people cannot.
In terms of social privilege, what really counts is not whether a person is in fact trans or not, but whether you are perceived as trans. Passing privilege is the core issue that isolates trans people in mainstream society, either externally for those who do not pass, or internally for those able to maintain stealth.

You so bad.

Right, that’s when they don’t care to be polite about it.Nowadays, most people have heard that you’re supposed to say “transgender” instead.

Oh, it’s a job… lolI’m an admin at trueselves.com Moderation is a job, a pretty crappy and difficult one. But oh boy is it work. I’ve been employed several times and had to do less work than modding requires.

Lateisha GreenReminding the world of Lateisha Green’s murder isn’t something you are doing on your own. There are a lot of other trans activists whose names you might not know, because they do a different style of low-personal-profile, community-focused activism, but they’ve been talking and raising consciousness about her murder for a long time. Trans women of colour have been speaking about this, too, but their voices are often drowned out by white folks like you and me.
Also, her full name is Lateisha, not “Teish.” She used that with friends and family, but I don’t know anyone who knew her in life, so we should err on the side of respect now that she is dead.  

…“Passing privilege” is a complex issue that is not some gold standard for trans lives. To say it is the core issue for trans people is incredibly short-sighted and ignores the systemic nature of transphobia.  

Oh, poor you.Listen kid, I don’t consider this a Pollyanna-friendly site necessarily, but I do consider it a Pollyanna-respectful site most of the time. Too bad you don’t get the difference. As I am wont to say these days, if you want someone to love you, get a dog.
There’s a reason that you just surfed in to insult people and it’s the same reason you’ll check back out when the brick stop flying and the drama level drops.

Sorry I called you “kid”That was pretty dismissive. Everyone sounds like a kid to me these days.

I was only speaking for myselfIn my reply, since my situation was mentioned in the comment.

Stop dodging…This isn’t about moderating. That’s another smokescreen put up to avoid actually taking responsibility here. To suggest, too, that trans women have pushed the situation to this point by being uncivil, loud, threadjacking meanies (and that’s what this is about, this isn’t responding to complaints that trans voices were silenced by moderating against them), feels like dirty pool.
As far as ‘weaponizing,’ if anyone can cite it having been used in the way Autumn continues to reframe its meaning before she coined it, please show me. The first time I ever saw it used was in response to trans women discussing cis* privilege (and then again and again and again and again, etc.). It seems to be a term fabricated to shut us down and portray us as aggressive and violent. For that I won’t ever be able to take PHB seriously as a “progressive” site. Y’all have been watching FOX News for so long you’ve learned their tactics.
This isn’t even about cis/trans anymore… “weaponizing” words is a vile tactic that offends any group marginalized by a dominant group’s privilege.
Talk about racism? Not until you stop weaponizing “white.”
Talk about class? Not until you stop weaponizing “middle class.”
Talk about sexism? Not until you stop weaponizing “men.”
It is very troubling that in an effort to dodge responsibility you’ve created a term to dismantle discussions of equality.  

So what’s the answer then, Lish?Why haven’t trans people started those discussions yet?

How old are you?I’m going to be 41 next month.
You?
(Kind of funny that you’re complaining about dropping insults, and then drop your own on me, isn’t it?)

…what?I don’t even know what you’re trying to say there.

I receive these kinds of emails all the time.

I’ve never heard anyone ask for this, but I’ve seen both you and Autumn repeating this as if it’s fact.

I personally receive emails all the time calling for me to intervene on something that may have occurred one or two days ago and charged that I’m “not doing my job” or “why are you letting X get away with saying Y” monitoring a comment thread. It goes with the territory, along with the hate mail and death threats. I certainly don’t have to go rifling through my emails for readers for the purposes of this discussion.

Autumn has yet to respond to this; you, who approved the post and made it front-page after reviewing it, have not responded either.

I have yet to figure out what you all are talking about. I don’t review or approve or front page Autumn’s posts — she has privileges to do it herself, as do all of the baristas. It’s quite clear in the TOS, the individual front pagers views are those of the author, that would include the responsibility of correcting an error or issuing an apology if it is warranted.  

I think the point is……that is you complain about Autumn, you’re promoting silence over Lateisha Green’s murder.
Or something.
Not that I’m saying Autumn is into self-promotion at the expense of everyone else or anything.

Fine, so when will you be posting the first in a long line of“get that damn umbrella away from me; I’m not transgender” diaries?

I’m talking about Autumn’s “Angry Inch” postWhich she repeatedly has stated she ran past you before posting.
In that front-page post, she said that the “cis” argument started with this comment on June 29.
However, the conversation was ongoing since June 28, before that commenter even showed up, and indeed, by June 28 Autumn had already complained “enough already”, determined that “cisgender” and “cissexual” are problem words, and laid down a ban on defending those terms.
Kynn documents all of those in her post here, with timestamps.
In light of the actual timeline as confirmed by said timestamps, it appears that you were taken in by a front-page post designed by Autumn to deliberately foist the blame on someone who was not responsible for the problem.
Autumn has repeatedly refused to address this when it has been pointed out to her. You are claiming ignorance of the matter here; okay.
But don’t you think that the deliberate front-page libelous deception by one of your “baristas” should at least explain why exactly Kynn posted, on her own site, the email sent to her by said barista about the matter?
You’ve banned Kynn for the way she handled Autumn’s dishonesty and called Kynn a dishonest, unethical person who should not be trusted — and yet you never bothered to investigate the root cause, which is that one of your baristas, to save her own skin, created a lie in order to scapegoat someone else?
Is that what you’re saying, Pam?

PS: I thought we were supposed to mail you?You make it sound like a burden. I thought the accepted method, as stated by at least one of your baristas, was to email you and ask you to intervene.
Is this not the case?

What was that Living Color song?You mean like suggesting because trans women complained about cis* dominance that LGB’s would probably drop trans people from ENDA?
“I just can’t imagine how gay and trans people are going to work together to pass hate crime legislation or a fully inclusive ENDA when we haven’t learned how to walk the earth as brothers and sisters. I think that dropping trans people from civil rights bills is going to seem a bit more palatable now.”
- from Questioning Transphobia
We were being left behind when we shut up, so I don’t think speaking up can make it worse.

History of marginalization =! Civil discourseAnd many of the more “moderate” advocacy groups are well aware that the more “extremist” groups’ activities push the mainstream to deal with them, so at least some of the agenda is moved forward. Kind of like “good cop, bad cop.”
Not saying it’s a good thing, just that there’s room for a range of approaches, and usually some combo gets things done.
Thank you for raising this point. You’d think from reading PHB lately that any attainment of rights by marginalized groups was accomplished by polite, patient, civil conversation. It is a very shortsighted view of the history of minority struggle, and seems to betray a great deal of privilege by those who now have rights (thanks to those folks who weren’t civil in the face of oppressive systems).
That trans women who disagree with PHB’s stance have been declared as uncivil, threadjackers, derailers, who have ‘weaponized’ words (still waiting for an explanation of what that means beyond Autumn inventing a definition to further shut down dissent) shows a clear bias against trans women and some unspoken transphobia, as this hasn’t been done against any other group.
This is at the same time Pam and the site is (rightfully) shitting on the Obama administration for its lack of movement on LGBT rights, and arguing for action (holding back donations) instead of waiting for polite conversation to sort it out.
On the topic of civility, I was originally banned for suggesting this action: http://gudbuytjane.livejournal.com/9562.html Not angry comments full of hate (as Autumn keeps framing how trans women speak here), but a passive protest for trans women and our allies to say “Hey, this isn’t cool.” The point wasn’t civil discourse, though, it never was, it was about a marginalized group being told to shut up to not challenge the privilege of a dominant group.
This was at the point where every thread discussing cis* privilege had been shut down, and the Blend and Autumn were threatening to ban people who brought it up (aka mostly trans women). At that point, hell yes I believe we deserve to engage in political action. Pam could ban us (and she did, some of us), that’s her right, but when you give a community no other voice then don’t be shocked when they look for other avenues to be heard.
If Pam wants us to be ‘civil,’ then treat us with respect, don’t take every opportunity to suggest we’re out of control, dangerous, and irrationally angry.

RememberDIVISION IS THE TOOL OF THE ENEMY.
Self moderation would serve best, IMHO.
If a disagreement arises from an honest misunderstanding a third party could step in to point out the source of misunderstanding.  
If disagreement arises from differing points of view of a topic the third party might mediate, help each see the others point.  Or offer another POV to consider.
If people just want to fight, can a restraining order be implemented in software?  To keep them from commenting to each other?
Some in this thread seem to have no purpose but to attack Autumn.
Remember
DIVISION IS THE TOOL OF THE ENEMY.

Actually;The mainstream calls me what I am a woman, they don’t use the T-Word to describe me.
They reason they don’t is because of my actions.
I act like any other mainstream woman, dress like any other mainstream woman, and I live within society’s boundaries and still maintain a loving lesbian relationship.
Society labels you according to your behavior and presentation in public and in your interactions with other people.
You do get to choose your label.  

What about Autumn’s attacks?Autumn lied about the order of events so she could cast another trans person as the instigator. She refuses to address that or update the record.
Autumn is the one fomenting dissent here. Does that concern you at all, or is your goal simply to tell trans people to shut up in the name of “unity”?
Where is your solidarity with trans women whose voices were silenced because a few cis men felt their privilege being infringed on?
Why do calls for “unity” always equate to preserving the status quo of systemic oppression?

And if you’re volunteering……to be the “third party” mediator, can you please at least try to get an answer from Autumn why she thinks it’s okay to blame the “cis” argument on a post the day AFTER the argument broke out?
In the name of “unity” are you willing to take that stand and work it out, or are you just trying to silence the people who were wronged by Autumn?

One observationThe example given regarding passing privilege (a terminology that is, at its core, deeply insulting, really, but one for which there is no other effective term and something I should render thought on) creates a particular and inapplicable distinction that also includes a binary that’s not accurate.
In the case of the binary (which is what I first noticed), the issue that occurs is one of “pass = stealth” or “not pass = not stealth”.  In crude and unpleasant terms, its the equivalent of saying pretty women are women and ugly women are not.
However, what struck me is that I am considered fairly passable by others (ref pic = http://www.dyssonance.com/wp-c… and yet I am not stealth and I am readily perceived as trans if I so desire it (privilege in action) — what stands out is that I do desire it.
Nor am I isolated from the mainstream, internally.  Indeed, I’m more isolated fro the community internally, and it takes effort on my part to remain engaged (much like it does for anyone to remain engaged in the mainstream).
Furthermore, passing privs do not apply, for example, to many subsets of the gender variant spectrum as a whole.  Indeed, the concept of passing pvis is dependent on a binary that is, to many, quite harmful, regardless of how much or how well I personally might fit into it.
And, I should note, I am personally very binary.
So perhaps the concept of passing privilege is itself a questionable one of value in this discourse, since within the community there are sharp divisions and arguments that could be made regarding the division between those who do not wish to, those who cannot pass, and those who feel that if one doesn’t, you aren’t part of the community and shouldn’t be making suc a big fuss about things.
In the end, all of them are equally valid points and views, and no particular one has greater importance or social need than the other, since the value of passing itself is of a strictly personal value, not a group one.

^^^ that“supposed” is one thing, practical reality is another.
sucks when people fling the wrong slurs at yeah — you sorta have to question their intellectual ability.

And note that I do not call you such.Please.

Talk about insulting!dyssonance wrote:

In crude and unpleasant terms, [to "pass" is] the equivalent of saying pretty women are women and ugly women are not.

Sorry, but your assumption that passing = pretty really misses the point. For transwomen, passing is all about being perceived as unquestionably female, and the social acceptance that brings is what you’ve previously labelled “cis privilege”.
Being pretty certainly brings its own set of social privileges, but it’s no guarantee that you’ll be accepted as a woman. I’ve known plenty of gorgeous drag performers who didn’t come anywhere close to passing as female. And some of the most passable trans women I’ve met made no effort at all to look conventionally pretty.

well…An actual apology would likely be of value for this to be the case.
Let me put this in terms that might be more familiar and recent and reflective of the way the trans community apparently is supposed to work:
First, you piss us off.
Second, you defend your pissing us off and fail miserably, making further mistakes, and generally digging the whole deeper.  (this is where we are right now).
Third, you make an actual, complete apology, and then eveyne goes “oh, ok.  We’re much happier now, thank you.” and limp along and try to regain sponsors/visitors until the short memory of the cisfolk wipes it off the map.
Pointed case in point: KRXQ.
Perhaps you read about that here in June?

This issue isn’t about moderationIt is a symptom of the greater issue here.
The moderation aspect is related to an established pattern by a specific barista.
I happen to agree with Pam.  This will not shut down the Blend.
All it will do is drive away transfolk, who no longer consider it a safe space (reference your earlier note — they made it feel safe.  The key is, “for everyone but trans folk”.)
As a note, I didn’t like the ratings system that much either, and should consider taking it down on TSC for comments.

Oh, agreed.Hence the “crude and unpleasant terms”.
While I agree that I was dramatically oversimplifying the point through use of subjective concepts, its still applicable as an example, albeit more dramatic.
My drag momma is a hell of a lot “more a woman” than I am (and reminds me of it, lol), and so I get exactly what you are saying, having spent too long for my personal comfort in such a situation (i dislike the stage structure and have some inherent cissexist remainders in me that I’m having a hard time rooting out in part because I am quite sexist in my compliance with the binary tht such challenges on an emotive level).
So, given that I used it as an example, and that its now known to have been used as such for the express intent of being dramatic in order to highlight marked difficultis with the argument is was applied to…
…care to keep going on that or should we save that for a place where there’s not as much hostility surrounding it?
I’m not trying to pick a fight — it was a really cool point you were making and I just like to talk about stuff like that.  I learn that way.

hi dyssonanceit will be a shame if the blend is permanently lacking in transfolk. What is it that some of us other Blenders can do to  prevent/reverse that?
I like a lot of different voices. I just don’t want to participate in a place where people feel free to use abusive language/scream in lieu of trying to explain why they’re upset. I really do believe that there’s no excuse for trying to hurt other people no matter how hurt or upset I am myself. And that is NOT targeted at transfolk here at the blend. If you look through my comments on the blend, I’ve always tried to speak up when I’ve seen abuse. I remember one Blender, a while back, who was targeted by another blender and a troll. I hated seeing that happen here and was sad when the abused blender left for good.
I don’t write all of that on the defense (writing about tasers and the police, I’ve learned to have a pretty thick internet skin), but because I really hope that a really important group of people don’t just leave the Blend.

Hey Truth is, at this point, there’s not much that any of us can do.  Its entirely in the hands of Autumn and Pam and the other Baristas.
Despite some questionable framing issues, the hearts of the matter are the issue around the labeling of cis* as “weaponized”, and now Autumn’s actions in failing to apologize and making additional mistakes in trying to defend her actions.
I truly believe that most transfolk would more or less not hold Pam personally culpable (although there is some secondary perceptual culpability), and so she and the blend in general are more or less off the hook — now its sadly come down to Autumn.
At least, that’s my read of the situation, and, sadly, Autumn and I are rather on the outs, so anything I say is perceived as an attack at this time — justly so in some cases.
About the only thing I can think of that would help is Autumn making an apology (similar to the one I just made to Monica Roberts, because I said something that is perceptually tonal and I do, indeed, know better, given it affects me directly).
There will always, however, be trans voices here.  For example, I don’t see Autumn leaving, regardless of the outcome.  There are many other transfolk who have yet to venture this way and others who won’t for a while yet and will come to it fresh and unaffected by current events.
Its one of those things.  Bilerico went through something similar not too long ago, and lost a significant portion of trans voices — yet I am still there myself, albeit less frequently. So it happens — transfolk are used to it, and the only bad part is each time something like this happens we feel diminished, and it creates a sense of mistrust that’s not going to go away for a long long time because its based in something endemic to the discourse.
On a personal note, I have decided to enjoy the time I have left here again on the blend, but it was made very clear with zero ambiguity that I was not welcome here.
I draw an inference as to why, and so in a bit I will likely leave or at least perform a metamorphosis that shows me only once in a while.  Entering hostile territory is bad for the complexion, you see, and I’m getting up there, so need to do waht I can, y’know

Respect…Wow, its been several hours since I read this and for some strange reason that leapt out at me now, lol.
Respect is a crucial component, and part of the issue that’s still affecting things is that there is a persistent sense of disrespect of trans people on the site.

Dear PamThank you for actually responding to my post. I feel honored that you took the time.
Let me clear things up a little and I think we will see eye-to-eye. That would really make me happy because I have respect for you and all you’ve accomplished here and would hate to see it loose it’s focus.
No, I don’t have to read the entries that don’t interest me and I don’t read them.  The problem is that over the past few weeks none of the entries really interested me because I was too turned off by the rantings of some Blenders (not you) that had nothing to do with the issues that your readers come here to discuss and had everything to do with a pity party. Thrown into the mix was one YouTube video of a series of videos from a car manufacturer and the tortured logic that was needed to see it as transphobia. The final straw was the Burger King ad.  
A better way to say this is recently it’s gone from “Pam’s House Blend” to “Autumn’s Rants.”  Trans issues are important to me but let’s focus on important Trans issues.
* ENDA Inclusion
* Medical and Employment protections
* Privacy Rights
* etc.
She did such a wonderful job covering Angie Zapata’s trial and was always a good read, but lately there seems to be some sort of personal crusade to force people to be required to like trans people.  IT AIN’T GONNA HAPPEN!
There are people that will never like me because I’m a Lesbian or because I’m a woman or because I’m an American or because I’m from New York or because I ride a motorcycle or pick anything.  All I can do is make sure that those who don’t like me are not allowed to interfere with my Pursuit of Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness.  That’s what we need to focus on because that’s what we in the LGBT community need and recently the focus here has been an overwhelming barrage of non-issues.  
* A car ad that was in no way transphobic
* A BK ad that was in no may sexist.
* etc.
Finally, I was not referring to the ads on the Blend.  They are fine.  That’s not what I was talking about.  It was the time spent talking about ads like the ones I just mentioned above.
I hope I kinda cleared things up. I know it sounds a little rambly but I just got up and there’s no coffee in my system yet. LOL.
Get back to the hard hitting issues you have always covered so well.  You do on a blog what Michelangelo Signorile does on a radio. Maintain that focus and don’t let this turn into the Jerry Springer show.

I have a burning questionWhat is a “cis” person?

why?Do you miss them?  I write on two different blogs now
http://radicalbitch.wordpress.com and
http://cathrynp.wordpress.com
I have not decided if I’ll write here at all since the likelyhood of my being re-banned at the end of the week seems to approach certainty.

Passing?Passing is what you do when you are trying to deceive someone, or what you do with counterfeit money.
The very use of the term “Pass or to Pass or Passing” implies several negative things.
Here are just a few;
The word implies the person in question is doing something unnatural to them. If you really are a woman or man you don’t need to pass you simply are.
The word implies that the person in question is trying to deceive people. Again if you are a man or woman you don’t need to pass you just need to be.
Using the word as the CDs do implies that presenting as a man or woman is a hobby. While there is certainly nothing with dressing up and going out on weekends I have found TS identified, non gender queer people using the word and on all counts that is simply wrong.
This goes back to my original statement that we do choose our labels by our actions and how we discribe ourselves.  

Not-trans lesbian accuses trans people of “deception”LiZ wrote:

Passing is what you do when you are trying to deceive someone, or what you do with counterfeit money.
…Using the word as the CDs do implies that presenting as a man or woman is a hobby.
…If you really are a woman or man you don’t need to pass you simply are.

In previous posts, LiZ has demanded that we refrain from referring to her as transsexual:

I don’t and won’t identify as “trans anything”
I am and always have been Female.
I act like any other mainstream woman, dress like any other mainstream woman, and I live within society’s boundaries and still maintain a loving lesbian relationship.

Since LiZ has seen fit to distance herself from trans people, I’m going to ask that she refrain from vilifying us as “deceivers” and thereby implying that we are not “really” men and women.
LiZ’s claim that passing is a deceptive practice that only crossdressers would do as a “hobby” is demeaning to trans people of all backgrounds and perpetuates false transphobic dichotomies that have been used to stigmatize us for decades. As LiZ insists that she is not herself trans, she has absolutely no right to label or stereotype trans people in any way whatsoever.
FYI to LiZ and others who harbor suspicions of trans folks’ intentions:
“Passing” is not something that we do to “deceive” other people. It is what happens to us when we are not perceived as trans, but as ordinary members of our true gender. What we notice on those occasions is the absence of transphobic attitudes in the way we are treated by other people. That is why is it such a big fucking deal for so many trans people.

Not volunteering for any thing.Or asking anyone else to.
It takes substantial effort for me to write anything, In the time I wrote the comment you responded to 6 new comments were made in this thread.
Most articles I don’t read below the fold.
I’m largely ignorant, very on T issues, less on L, even less on G, and still some on my own B.  Still we are all the results of our history of thought experiences and relationships with others.  I may on occasion think I can contribute, but will probably come along late, or not recognize the beginning of an argument.  

“passing” is crap..and since it’s free speech week here hold your complaints about LiZ. (whom I am in total agreement with)
You are or you are not….it’s that simple and that’s the lesson I learned personally early into transition.  It’s not the size of your shoulders, hands, feet, whatever for women come in all sizes and shapes imaginable….you either are or you aren’t.  As a wise muppet said in a famous movie…there is no try.
How you can claim this is an insult is frankly beyond my ability to understand.  You just got sage advice from two women long on the other side and you spat on it.  But then I suppose that should not surprise me.

Spoken like a true cis-womanIf I’m not mistaken, CathyrnP, I take it you’d agree with LiZ’s claim that:

I am and always have been Female.

May I also presume that, as in LiZ’s case, the “transition” you underwent was no more than a surgical correction of a congenital birth defect?
If so, I’d have to conclude that both LiZ and CathrynP are self-identified examples of cis-persons who see fit to use their cis-privilege to lecture trans people on how cis-men and cis-women authentically present themselves in mainstream society.
I would like to make it clear, however, that I don’t consider the “sage advice” of LiZ and CathrynP to be representative of cis-people in general. I’ve heard few cis-people express anything like the exquisitely transphobic attitudes LiZ and CathrynP have unveiled here at PHB.

Hostile environment?Been lurking here for awhile and just registered as a result of the recent controversy. From what I have seen and read here Kynn, CathrynP, Dyssonance, Caoimhe, gtj, and others(whom I don’t recall, sorry) would, if this was a workplace, have a case for the creation of a hostile work environment and all the legal hassles that can cause.
I am in management and just recently fired someone who had done less.
Oh wait ENDA has not passed yet, mybad.
(Yes I know this is a blog and the owner/moderators can do anything they please, but the analogy still holds.)

Iam telling you what the word means in regard to the way townsfolk use the word.
I have to say and with the utmost respect search your soul and find out why you have so much trouble coming to terms with the real meaning of that phrase “to pass”
Use another phrase like “living your true self”.
Or “Being Real”.
You have to understand that to say you are passing is demeaning to yourselves as transgender people or transsexuals.
Set your emotions aside for a moment and think about it.  

You have to educate me;I don’t know what all this cis stuff is all about.
If you can do it in a paragraph that would be fine, I don’t have the time to find a book to explain it let alone read the book.
Thank you in advance.  

Cis is the opposite of Trans–both words are LatinCisgender means non-transgender. Cissexual means non-transsexual.

Curiously enough…I don’t feel opposite of anyone.

I’m fine with “Being Real”It’s “being read” (as trans), and the huge difference that makes, that’s the issue I’m confronting here.
I don’t think it’s “demeaning” for me to recognize that people (both “cis” and trans) often treat me very differently depending on whether they perceive me as female or as trans. And it has nothing to do with “living my true self” and everything to do with other people’s transphobia, which happens to be rampant in this society.
So go ahead and continue to insist that I’m responsible for my own marginalization when I use the term passing privilege to identify exactly what concerns me. It’s not like it makes any difference to anyone else what us trans people choose to call ourselves anyway.

realizing there are diffrerent communitiesBetween my work and social life I have the priveledge of having some close trans friends (both men & women). Half of which are young (18-30), urban, of color and are living in a lower socio economic status. As a gay man I have gotten into discussions about what was posted with them. The funny thing is this/these issues being discussed are so divorced from their lives, experience and needs that it held no interest for them. I think it’s important to say that you can’t please everyone and no one will always be happy with everything. As well as speaking for the monolith of anyone w/a Trans experience is immpossible, insulting and inaccurate…one more thing (the social worker in me has to make a reminder..LOL) Please use I statemtents!!  LOL

It certainly is an interesting experiment …Thanks for your courage and trust in going down this path.  Are the results so far what you were expecting?
The resource page on Dealing with hate speech, flaming, and trolls I put together for CFP 2008 has some best practices for moderation policies, and links out to some examples and experiences.  One thing that came up a lot: have a clear description of your moderation policies — and act in accordance with them.  Also, I think the Angry Black Woman has a great idea with her Required Reading List.  This would be particularly useful for concepts like ‘cis/cisgendered/cissexual’, ‘cisgendered privilege’, and ‘weaponized’ that aren’t familiar to a lot of people.
jon

Eachto their own.  

Ahem ….

Romans and Countrymen lend me your ears.

Where’s the nearest Roman bathhouse ?
Thank you.

There are all different kinds of privilege. I’ve been a volunteer moderator on an internet board, and a volunteer for many other organizations, and it is very hard work. Time-consuming. Frustrating. Many times, it is thankless. Pam and her moderators run this board as a service to thousands of anonymous posters like me. I appreciate that. We enjoy the privilege of posting and reading here without any strings attached. We can walk away at any time.
Moderators don’t have that luxury. They make a commitment. Yes, it is a job. Volunteers work hard, long hours and they don’t get paid.
That does not absolve moderators and forum owners from the responsibility to be fair and transparent. However, we’re all only human. People make mistakes. What I’ve seen on this board is that Pam and Autumn and others have willingly admitted some mistakes, apologized, and opened up the forum for reader comment without penalty. That’s fairly unique among large public internet boards. I appreciate it.
 

Civility can’t be regulated, it must come from withinAfter thinking about this post, and what has been discussed and how it has been discussed, and it seems to me that civility has to come from with in.
I have come to believe that there isn’t a more damaged group of people on this earth than the entire LGBTIQ community. From the kicked out homeless transgender youth to “A-Gays”.  Maybe the only difference is how much internal damage is left unrepairable.
I am one of you and damaged as well. When we were younger the damage came from without, but we internalized each to their own degree a lot of it and it shows every time we allow ourselves to lapse into incivility as a defense mechanism.  Is your self worth so low that at the end of the day it really matters what someone calls you?  Maybe yes it does damn it, so why don’t we who know so much why words matter take note when someone says what they personally prefer?  Just because I personally could care less, doesn’t mean no one else does. In the same way, just because you care, doesn’t mean I should mock you because I don’t.  
Along with that tremendous amount of damage from society came a huge price we pay everyday to our own souls, no matter how you define soul.  We automatically assume everyone is out to take another bite out of whatever amount of self esteem we have left.  As a result, what I see, are some folks ready to strike and cut deep at the slightest perceived offense, and some even have decided to attack first to shield themselves from more hurt and pain.  I have often wondered why we, who have felt so much oppression, experienced so much pain turn on our own instead of building each other up and allow all of us to debate our ideas freely without fear of being flamed?
On “our” sites, in our spaces, wherever those spaces are, I think we should all first remember that not every misunderstanding, or perceived slight is an attack.  Shouldn’t we take a breath, ask for clarification and then go from there. If the opinion expressed comes from real prejudice or even ignorance, you aren’t going to change their mind by attacking, but have a better chance with reason.  In the end we are all responsible for our own beliefs, but name calling and insults aren’t going to change anyone’s stance, rather it will guarantee they dig in deeper with their prejudices.
I read somewhere once that like morality, civility cannot be legislated.
It is not a term with any kind of precise definition. You know civility when you experience it, and you can feel its absence. But subjective experience is not the stuff of definitions, and rights of free speech are too precious to place at the mercy of the offended. When it comes to the venom that so often flows online, everywhere, not just here, the real problem is not the absence of rules that punish subjectively-perceived rudeness or bigotry; the problem is a coarse and vitriolic culture that too often celebrates abuse and dismisses the most basic manners as coddling your ideological opponents.
Why are we generating more abuse?  Haven’t we all had enough in our own lives?  Aren’t we fighting for our civil rights to end the abuse?  What are you going to do when we have those rights?  Are you then going to be the master abusers?  Cause like it or not, our full equal rights will be recognized in the not too distant future and then the real work will start, cause the bigotry from outside won’t end then, just ask our brothers and sisters of color about that one.
Why don’t we start helping each other heal, instead of continuing the pain, reopening and infecting each others wounds?
Manners aren’t merely a matter of quaint tradition or someone acting uppity or even someone being timid or weak, it takes real courage to be polite to someone you disagree with. It takes real intelligence to debate someone’s opposite beliefs without attacking them. Manners are a vital aspect of maintaining our society, and once manners are lost no rule can bring them back.

Liz has not distanced herself from anybody.
Just because I don’t wear a TG label doesn’t mean I have distanced myself from anybody.