Additionally, by locking the thread calling for a vote to remove you as lead host for abusing your power, you further abused your power.

The Feminist group is not your personal fiefdom. This behavior is unacceptable.

On edit: I see you have locked boston bean's thread calling for new hosts too.

At least we found Neoma.

The horror, the horror.

I find this whole series of episodes very distressing. I can't judge right or wrong in all that has transpired and I can not tell who started out in the "right". But, I have no problem stating that the unilateral decisions made by the lead host in removing all other co-hosts IS a grotesque abuse of power.

I urge each of the co-hosts to take this to the admins if the host will not reconsider. This is abhorrent.

I can not judge the host or any of the co-hosts on past actions and will not. But, Neoma, I find this to be a level of dictatorial behavior that just should not be tolerated. I urge you to reconsider. Reinstate your co-hosts and convene an arbitration review with 3 or 4 objective hosts from other forums. I sincerely believe you need outside assistance in clearing the air. To refuse to do so, is to allow the situation to merely continue to fester. Do the right thing.

Somehow I doubt that, but won't explicitly say so for fear of being blocked from the group.

personality conflicts. They set up this forum after years of whiteboarding.

I can advise as well as you can on how to work within the system. but at the end of the day, admins do not pick sides, they work within the system.

I think you know that other groups have had similar problems and a re-vote was necessary. However, neoma, has decided to lock the election thread.

That is an abuse of power. She does not have that kind of power. She should not have that kind of power.

embarrassing. Feminists having to run to the admins....2 dudes for approval for what?

Correct me if I'm wrong but is this to-do over Feminists v. LGBT? Wow.

It's called 'DIVIDE AND CONQUER' people. The patriarchy is laughing at us.

We are to be in alliance against the oppressors of the patriarchy....not fighting amongst us.

I just don't get it.

bit when one concern prevails over another, you can damn well bet it will be the women that speak out that are forced to shut up and thrown under the bus.

on this forum for weeks, but were ignored or called "outsiders" or subject to possible banning. I'm sorry that you seem unable to see this. Perhaps your anger about the situation (which I understand) is making it difficult for you to consider the viewpoints of other people on this forum.

And as for throwing people under the bus, the fact that you declared (when the election was almost over) that only the votes of "regular" posters would count in the election, I would say that was throwing women and feminists under the bus. Especially when it was stated that these so-called "regular" posters didn't even have to be members of the group.

it is evident in every one of your posts to me. it is evident that regardless of what i say, you dont listen to what i say. you ignore it.

so, please, know, that you do not understand.

thank you.

you take care of yourself. i wish the best for you

And I have said that I feel badly about what's happened to you, redqueen, laconicsax, and Crispy Q. I don't agree with Neoma de-hosting you.

But when you say things that I know aren't the full story, I'm going to try to fill in some of the blanks because I believe in transparency. For instance, I was all for an election of new hosts until I found out that not all the votes were going to count. That's one instance of when I disagreed with you.

When you said, in H&M, that the software was the only reason Neoma was lead host, I countered that not only did redqueen, laconicsax and Neoma herself acknowledge that she would be lead host when redqueen stepped down, but that you endorsed Neoma as lead host. That is the simple truth and that's what I stated when I replied to you in that thread.

You are certainly entitled to your opinions, and although I may not agree with all of them, I respect them. All I ask from you is that same respect when I post (with links as evidence) the full story. You don't have to agree with me--far from it. But don't try to invalidate my opinion by saying I don't listen or that I don't understand what's been happening in this group. That is not fair.

I wish you all the best. Truly. And you may certainly put me on ignore if you have no wish to hear my opinions or read my posts.

in your simple truth do you also explain that the reason i was willing to do that is because of the SoP thread adn the continued effort to compromise and appease those that "felt uncomfortable" knowing how much iverglas and i are disliked. so in my saying that she would be the best, it was to once again, try to do right by you and your group, as we promised we would. and as we have yet to have acknowledgment for. that in appeasing, we had a weak SoP and we did not have a strong leader.

is that EVER in your TRUTH. you know, that simple truth.

i stand by 225, lisad. you gave a perfect example of what i was saying.

I've always believed you were trying to do the right thing with the SOP. I absolutely agree that you were very concerned about people's issues with the SOP and listened to them with a fair and open mind. And I commend you for that. I'm sorry that I haven't made that more clear.

I believe you were trying to be inclusive by allowing Neoma to step into the lead host position. It doesn't bother me in the least that you changed your mind about her. What bothers me is that people have blamed the software for her becoming the lead host when the hosts were aware that's what would happen and didn't have a problem with it UNTIL she banned iverglas. So when I mention that link, it's because people may get the wrong idea of exactly how Neoma became lead host. That doesn't mean I endorse her. It means I believe in transparency. I'm sure that you do also, but like me, you probably don't state it in every post you make.

I have never "endorsed" Neoma as lead host. Please link to that post if I am wrong. I didn't vote for her in the election thread either.

I did wish her good luck when she first became host, when she said she wasn't going to resign AT THIS TIME. But when I saw the animosity her posts were causing, I agreed that we should have an election to elect a new host.

You can read boston bean's election thread to see my participation there. I NEVER said we shouldn't have an election for a new host. All I wanted were some rules or parameters about how the election was going to work. I did agree that it might be smart to wait until we could get a list of forum members from the admins, so the votes could be from forum members only. It disturbed me when I heard that some of the votes weren't going to count and that fact was never revealed or explained in the election thread. That DOESN'T mean that I think you were hiding something or doing something bad. It means that I disagreed with how the votes were going to count in that election.

I am not your enemy just because we disagree. Most of the time, I like what you have to say and I think you bring a valuable contribution to this forum and DU.

WE were WRONG and failed the women that trusted us in weakening our SoP and putting in a weak leader to ACCOMMODATE.... you, and the others, that regardless of what we did, it would NEVER be good enough.

do you get this lesson.....

we failed, because we tried to work with you

we FUCKIN FAILED our members, because we tried to take the high road.

what part of that ironically sick fuckin twist do you not get.

so we wouldnt put in protections for the group

never went, dont know the issue, dont care, you just like the entertainment value... quote from ruby

She looks like someone that can't be bullied and their lies the problem.

it doesnt make. the dictatorship.

How did the SOP lead to what's happening now?

And yes, you absolutely listened and worked with people in this group so that the SOP would be inclusive. But I don't understand how working with all the members of the group weakened the SOP or led to the current mess.

Can you please elaborate?

Here's the old SOP:
The purpose of the DU Feminists Group is to provide a safe and non-threatening community where all those interested in discussing and trying to resolve the problems that are inherent to women in society can come and work together free from defending the basic premise that issues do exist which specifically affect and limit women, their rights and their potential.

We believe that women do not start on the same rung as men on the ladder of success; that misogyny and sexism do indeed exist in America circa 2005; and that the progress made for women's rights is being seriously and immediately threatened by this administration.

The goal of this group is to understand the problems (and how they affect women), identify the myriad causes (and how they can limit a woman's vision and opportunity) and propose solutions (and how we can bring those solutions in a meaningful way out into the greater community).

Here's the new SOP:

A safe community where all those interested in discussing and trying to resolve the problems that are inherent to women in society can come and work together, without having to defend the basic premise that issues do exist which specifically affect and limit women, their rights and their potential.

lisad, i am sorry i missed the opportunity to spend more time with you, and listen to what you had to say. one of the things i was looking forward to, in the initial working of SoP was listening to you and a couple others.

now, really, i am done.

take care

Get some rest and re-energize, because as I said before, you are valuable to DU.

With bodyguards even!!!!

I support this decision and know it was not made lightly.

Do tell.

There's a whole forum full of examples of a small clique trying to chase out anybody who might disagree with them about the slightest thing. You can't possibly miss it unless you're trying very hard not to see.

Juries don't hide call outs anymore anyway.

Please cite some examples of redqueen, CrispyQ, seabeyond, and me being bullies.

And before that backing up known trolls in their attacks on lesbians and trans people was definitely bullying behavior, as is the continuing effort to claim that La Lioness Priyanka isn't a real feminist because she also identifies as a lesbian and a person of color.

TYY

I have made no effort to "chase Neoma out of the forum," nor wish her gone.
I have backed no trolls in any attacks on lesbians or trans people.
I have never claimed that La Lioness isn't a real feminist for any reason, least of all because she's a lesbian of color.

How about you, or any of the (currently) 6 people who agree with you pony up and link to a post where I've done any of that. How about any of you link to a post where redqueen has done any of that? How about CrispyQ?

Hell, CrispyQ has barely been on DU for about a week because she's been too busy. How on Earth can she have been trying to "chase Neoma out of the forum" when she's barely been online?

You need to substantiate your claims, or admit that they're false.

I've been falsely accused of some pretty serious things and I'm not going to just let it stand. I have done none of what LeftyMom alleges.

The most I can be accused of is starting a thread calling for an election to determine whether Neoma should be removed as lead host a couple days after she abused her power and refused to discuss the matter with the other hosts. There's nothing improper in that and I stand by my actions. Had she been voted out, I would have been open to her returning as a co host and had she been retained, I would have dropped the matter.

that have been permeating this board.

You could have been a hero by putting a stop to it, but you doubled down against those who would.

You may very well win this and the attacks of the main +socks will continue. Part of me wants that for the entertainment value. Is that your goal as well?

wow

I was too busy to do much of anything last week and I spent much of the little time I did have working with Neoma to try to find a solution to the problem. Four days ago, she brought up one aspect of the problem, I suggested what I thought was the best way to deal with it and she said that she was waiting to hear back from Skinner before doing anything.

That's hardly doubling down against those who would put a stop to it. Sure, I could have come in, guns blazing and tried to force an end to the problems, but I wasn't prepared to act without consulting the other hosts first. There had already been a bunch of animosity over hosts acting unilaterally, and I wasn't going to add to it. The hosts of a group can't do much if they're too busy bickering with each other.

I'm getting really tired of having to defend myself against false accusations.

I noticed you didn't mention her name in your post. And she apparently did so with the approval of the other hosts, as nothing was done about it. A host in this forum decided to wage war against LGBT members and the LGBT forum in this group. There are lesbian feminists who are members of this group and to have this kind of vitriol directed at them in a safe haven got to be too much for too many members, both gay and straight.

And the apparent answer to this problem: the hosts decide to go to an off-site forum and decide who to block/ban from this forum. And the person baiting and insulting LGBT feminists was running that show.

When some of these targeted members thought the answer was to create an additional forum called Feminism & Diversity and brought up the subject in H&M, they were told by some of the hosts of this group that they shouldn't be allowed to use the term Feminism in their group title. And people wonder why some members of this group feel unwelcome? They want examples--when there are posts after deleted posts full of examples.

I can see why the co-hosts and some members of this forum feel outraged by Neoma's actions. I can see why some members of this group say they feel unwelcome. I can also see why Neoma believes she's looking out for feminist members of this forum who have been the target of this vitriol and were unprotected by the other hosts. Add to this mix all of the allegations, half-truths, accusations and insults from all sides, and the truth is buried underneath the pile.

I can see that this whole thing is a shit storm that stinks up the whole place and now everyone involved has some of that stink on them.

I discussed the building feud between this group and LGBT with Neoma by PM before this latest shitstorm started. She suggested removing two hosts who she felt were making matters worse and I agreed that doing so should definitely be considered. She said that she had asked Skinner for advice and was waiting to hear from him before she did anything.

Fast-forward a couple days and she removes ALL hosts and shuts down discussion on adding any new hosts.

And I truly do appreciate how difficult it is to be a host and I believe that most of you are trying your best to do this thankless job.

I think the problem was that it appeared as if nothing was going to be done about it--even if that wasn't the case. The two trolls exacerbated the problem and it looked as if some of the hosts were defending them, which only added more fuel to the fire. And it's been burning out-of-control ever since.

There was an obvious, sustained, concerted effort on the part of a small number of people in this forum to create a feud, not just with LGBT, but with several other groups on DU as well. That's where I came in. I've avoided this group for years precisely because I disliked the dictatorial manner in which it was run and the snooty attitude of its self-appointed leader. I got dragged in when these recent efforts to start a "war" (her words) with LGBT spilled into the Meta forum.

I'm relieved to see that a strong leader is taking control and putting a stop to this pettiness. I don't blame you for anything, laconicsax. As far as I can tell you have stayed out of this mess, and I respect you for that. But don't refer to a "building feud" between two groups when no such feud exists. Let's stop that nonsense once and for all.

we have always been a small group. and from the beginning most men and many women didnt and dont support feminists. and yet still.... they got us the vote.

Nice loaded language, though. Very blamey and victimy, too. Well done.

Also, nice job characterizing the failure to understand the attacks on lesbians and trans people as "backing up known trolls".

nt

The leader of this forum called your bluff, so my suggestion (if this is the direction you choose) is to counter.

Don't be surprised if members you have never heard of speak up in order to stop the toxic waste that this forum has not only become, but spread to other forums here.

us feminists have been living in for the last two weeks.

And you agreed Neoma should be main host. Would you like the link?

and she is honorable. this is the screwed up thinking we have dealt with for a week.

I wonder how our customers would like that as well as their default hold music

would be comfortable in our forum. i know that you and others do not like me and iverglas. i wanted someone neutral, so you and others would be more comfortable. i worked at being INclusive, rather than EXclusive as you suggest.

if you use this as a means to further vilify us, then you would be wrong.

I've got no issue with you other than we don't agree on some things. I don't want to mistake my disagreement with you as not liking you. I often don't agree with you but there's miles between that and not liking.

forum yet did not like iverglas or myself. i thought it would be a positive choice to have someone in there that others did not have issue with.

i know that on this board, having the best of intentions is silly. we need to watch our backs. but continually, i trust in the better person that we are.

foolish. maybe. but i can also say, the intent was for the best.

edit... foolish.... obviously

You and others were asked if it was ok for Neoma to become lead host and you agreed. Your post is right there at that link. Yet you've been posting on this board for days that Neoma is an unelected host who took over through some kind of coup.

Your own words, your own post, prove that that is not true. You DID elect her.

neoma is not capable of doing the job. hindsight is a wonderful thing. i did put forth the effort though. intent counts

You've been posting all over this board for days that Neoma usurped the role of lead host in an unelected power grab and now here is evidence - your own words - that you discussed Neoma's election as lead host and you and others agreed to it.

It follows that the rest of the argument is also proven invalid.

Debate 101.

a good employee. the employer fires the employee.

because i wanted this place to include you is a good thing. because neoma could not handle the job, means we need to look elsewhere. we had an election. this group has chosen redqueen, again.

Interesting.

Which side of this do you want to be on?

She removed a host and blocked her from the group over an off-site argument.

Boston bean started a thread calling for new hosts as an attempt to start cleaning up the group and fixing the problems that have been going on. Neoma was among those nominated and voted for, but she locked it anyway.

I started a thread calling for a vote about whether to remove Neoma as lead host because of her abuses of power. Neoma locked it.

The rest of the hosts are acting like they are 5 years old.

Not only on the topic, but the administration of discussion on the topic.

Thanks - but I like her instincts on this.

I have explained my one unilateral action. It was taken to reverse a previous unilateral action.

Based on the discussions that we had before we even elected hosts, it was agreed that no host would make such decisions.

This was due to the significant amount of worrying that was done about being blocked. People were stating that they were afraid of participating, lest they be blocked. We agreed not to do.

but in all fairness, people were tearing Neoma apart for making one unilateral decision (prior to this whole thing) and yet, you make one (even if it was meant to correct the other) and no one seems upset with you at all.

If unilateral decisions are bad for Neoma, they're bad for you too as I would expect them to be bad for me or any other random person if they were hosting (I've no intentions in that field by the way).

She was harshly criticized, not just for one decision, though.

Apparently she and the other co-hosts were not able to work together, and instead of starting threads here to open up discussion to the group, or in the F&GH forum, she apparently took her problems acting as host to people who don't even participate here for advice.

How do you think that made the people who regularly use this group feel?

Regardless, I don't wish to discuss this issue further.

thank you

People talk about Feminism around our Occupy. It's an important NEW time for women and, hence, feminism, NEW feminism.

There are important things to be done, not this uh, ... whatever it is . . .