[Foundation-l] [Wikichix-l] Moderating an open list

[Puppy]

Gatto Nero wrote:
> 2006/12/5, Puppy <puppy at killerchihuahua.com>:
>
>   
>> I read the following:
>>     
>
> (I hope you've read the context, too)
>
>   
>> --
>>  >Oh. My. God. Which will be the next one? WikiNigger? WikiFaggot?
>> --
>> as ridiculing the idea, comparing a list for women (not WikiBitches, not
>> WikiWhores, not WikiCunts, not some derogatory term) with your
>> intentionally offensive terms for blacks and gays.
>>     
>
> With this real phrase, I was not ridiculing the idea - even if (as
> said) I don't think this idea is really useful to fight bias - but I
> was ridiculing the name choosen.
> And this because, in my very very very personal opinion, call a woman
> "chick" is offensive of her intelligence. As offensive as calling a
> black people "Nigger" or a gay "faggot" (and again: I'm gay, just to
> explain the context).
> It could be an italian way to see this word, but if I'd call "Chix" -
> or one of the italian corrispective - a friend of mine (and I have
> plenty of female friends), as minimum I'd receive a slap in the face.
> As minimum (a more reality adherent image is me receiving a kick in my
> balls).
>
>   
>> This has the result
>> of implying that women who perceive the need for this list are "less
>> than" - as calling a black person a "nigger" implies he or she is "less
>> than" and so underlines the bias and bigotry.
>>     
>
> Eh? I've read this phrase twice and more, but I'm not sure of what
> you're saying, maybe cause of language difficulties (I'm italian...
> maybe - if you want - you could try to explain it in a wider way,
> privately too).
> If you're thinking that I'm implying that women are "less than"
> anything, you're totally wrong. I just think that women who perceive
> the need for a new ML are bad-adressing their effort: they should want
> rather *more politeness and respect for women* in THIS mailing list.
>
>   
>> This is trolling.
>>     
>
> I can't get why. Rather a misunderstanding?
>
>   
>> The "Oh.
>> My. God." is clearly expressing contempt for the idea.
>>     
>
> "Contempt"? Astonishment, rather. And worry.
> Because, just as I've said before in this answer, I find (*I*, me
> underline) more offensive this list.
>
>   
>> This is trolling.
>>     
>
> As said, this is an opinion. If express an opinion is trolling, then
> maybe you're not considering some cultural differences which could be
> adressed to different lifestyle, different countries of living,  etc
> (It's difficult to express what I'm trying to say now in english, for
> me)
>
>   
>> A clearly reasoned statement, such as Bryan Tong Minh's post:
>> --
>>     
> [CUT]
>   
>> --
>> is a disagreement without being trolling. Do you see the difference? Or
>> am I being unclear?
>>     
>
> No, you've been clear. But I don't think you're totally right (again:
> an opinion).
> ______________________
>   
As one who has argued against the list from the beginning, I obviously 
share some concerns with you. I think we've had several 
misunderstandings in this sub-thread, which I'm not sure is worth 
pursuing - I am willing to toss concerns about any perceived trolling 
you have done out the window if you're willing to let slide any 
misunderstandings I have had about your intents. Fair enough?
-kc-