Comment Policies
Hello dear readers, my name is Lisa and I’m your friendly neighborhood beneficent tyrant. It is time to do my tyrannical duty and share with you my rules and expectations for conversations within my glorificous domain.
You can (and should) read the basic comment policies here. To sum, you are not welcome to tell us that our beliefs make us stupid nor that our questions make us sinners. Neither do we welcome hackneyed (illogical and personally untrue) anti-feminist tripe, mostly because it’s boring and passé. We so did that in 2004.
There is another practice that is starting to wear my tyrannical nerves thin, thus I hereby establish a new decree: no more passing jabs (or backhanded compliments) implying that fMh isn’t Mormon enough or Christian enough or even feminist enough. You’re welcome to complain about us as much as you like on your own blog, you’re welcome to express to me your concerns via a thoughtful personal email, you’re not welcome to come into my living room, sit on my couch, and then blithely insult my home. That’s just rude, people.
And speaking of rude people. Let’s discuss tone and appropriatness and relationships.
We at fMh have a long history (ancient in blog years) of not erasing comments. As a rule, we’ve let the conversation meander where it may, and left the history of the conversation intact. We nudge the angry and clueless to unpack their manners and tact, and only erase or ban the most egregious violations(ers). On the whole, the respectful tone we’ve set here, and the quality of our commenters has made this policy supportable. But as we grow, the trolls, the clueless, and the jerks, multiply too, crawling out from under their bridges and flinging their snot balls all over our lovely discussions.
While snot flinging can often be entertaining, other times it is not at all appropriate, what with snot germs infecting and sickening entire threads. Action must be taken.
Each of my co-tyrants and I have different tolerance levels for trolls ‘n jerks and the snot they fling, so hereafter we will judge the content and tone of our own posts and erase/edit as we individually see fit. Further, some threads have different purposes than others, some are naturally controversial meant to spark heated debate. Some are personal or spiritual or silly, and heated debate not appropriate. So yes, a comment that may be tolerated on one thread, will not be acceptable on another.
As a (mighty) tyrant of beneficent leanings, I’d like this to feel fair to you, but it may not end up that way. We’ll do our best, and you’re just going to have to deal with it.
As you type, keep in mind that we are Mormon blogging tyrants, we have been raised in a culture of extreme and even excessive Mormon niceness. I’m not saying we’re always nice (not me anyway), or that you always have to be nice here. The internet can be a freeing place were we can shed some of the shackles of culture. However we are real people, with feelings, and if you step in with your snotty fists flailing, and that’s the first and only thing we know about you, you’re not going to get too far.
Spend a little time getting to know us, read our posts, unpack your good manners, approach us with good will, let us get to know you, even if you were born without the tact gene, we’ll probably figure you out and like you very much. And the more we know and like you, the more likely we will be to understand (and not erase) your occasional angry tactless snotty diatribes.
And again, we will do our best to be fair, because we are both most gloriously beneficent and excessively Mormon-nice. But our fairness quotient exists solely in the realm our tyrannical judgments and are not subject to your public complaints or whining (again genuine grievances will be accepted via thoughtful personal emails to the tyrant of your choice).
Respectful relationships, readers, that’s what it’s all about.
be afraid…be terribly, terribly afraid…
actually, this site is one of the favs of this male, chauvinist, priesthood holder.
Comment by larryco_ — December 11, 2008 @ 1:58 pm
It saddens me that you even have to post something like this - that people feel it’s okay to come in and “fling snot” and be vile and hurtful and, well, snotty.
It’s sad we can’t all be adults - disagreeing, maybe, but adults who values other people enough to either say something that contributes in a constructive way or not say something at all.
Comment by Sara — December 11, 2008 @ 2:12 pm
Does this mean we have to stop piling on the jerk trolls, or is this meant to encourage us to pile on even more?
(I’m thinking of a particularly nasty jerk in the “Single Sexuality” thread recently. Only the sheer magnitude of my Christian love prevented me from posting a really, really hostile reply.)
Comment by Bro. Jones — December 11, 2008 @ 2:14 pm
So this is your response to my “is FMH mormon enough” question??
(for the record, I asked about the validity of that question - who gets to determine if FMH is mormon or not…and the competitiveness of some mormons.)
Comment by aerin — December 11, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
Well said, Lisa.
I tried to moderate nicely and avoided deleting comments for years (censorship! gasp!), until I realized that trolls censor a thread and silence thoughtful discussion more effectively the occasional deleting of rude comments.
Comment by JohnR — December 11, 2008 @ 3:00 pm
I completely support this, and well done. You have every right and obligation to set your own rules. Thank you for letting play in your living.
I am so sorry if you ever felt that I implied it wasn’t Mormon enough or feminist enough. Despite not being a housewife, I am so thoroughly and unapologetically the first two that this place feels like my own pair of shoes. Thank you for creating it.
Comment by Katie P. — December 11, 2008 @ 3:12 pm
This reminds me of an old Sugar Beet article “RS Sister makes declarative statement,” and the hubbub that follows. (The declarative statement in question was “There’s no scriptural or doctrinal support for your speculation.” And the sisters went wild.)
I’ve been working to remove qualifiers from my writing - prefaces like “I think,” or “Perhaps,” or “Maybe,” or “In my opinion.” It makes my writing stronger (more declarative, less wordy). It also makes it more masculine-sounding. It probably wouldn’t pass “nice” muster at FMH if I were to persist.
Not to say that your “be nice” admonition isn’t a valid one, just that for women, “being nice” can mean “use weasel words” or “keep sweet.” I don’t object to nice. Nice is good. Straightforward has value, too, and isn’t “mean.”
Comment by Ann — December 11, 2008 @ 3:23 pm
So, you object to posts that do not correspond to your particular viewpoints and beliefs? (however provincial and odd they may seem to others). A bit narrow in thinking, is it not?
Comment by Emily — December 11, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
!@#$%^&*!@@!!#$%@!!!!
Forgive me … I just had to get some “snottiness” out of my system.
That was my attempt at humor.
fMh is asolutely “Mormon enough or Christian enough or even feminist enough” and …Doggone It, People Like It!” (Credit goes to Stuart Smalley for that last comment.)
Comment by Kalola — December 11, 2008 @ 3:31 pm
Emily,
I don’t think that’s what she’s saying at all. I think it’s fine to present your differening viewpoints in a respectful way, i.e. not questioning a person’s righteousness or Mormonness. There are folks on here who aren’t Mormon, but for the most part you can assume that a bunch of the commenters are indeed practicing Mormons and don’t like having others who haven’t met them declare that they can’t possibly be true Mormons.
I guess what I’m trying to say is don’t say things in a tone that is obviously condemning. Assert what you believe without shame. Allow others to do the same.
Comment by Minerva — December 11, 2008 @ 3:38 pm
As someone who routinely expresses opinions that are not exactly in line with the views of many here, I can state unequivocally that FMH is not opposed to differing viewpoints. I love how open this blog is - but I also support the message of this thread whole-heartedly.
I have written posts on various blogs, and the most frustrating thing that can happen is to have the message you are trying to convey (or the question you are posing) get swallowed up in bile and vitriolic excrement. To me, this is a simple matter of respect and common decency. It is a fine line between censorship and common sense editing, and I have seen no signs of abuse of that distinction here.
My support means nothing substantive, but you have it.
Comment by Ray — December 11, 2008 @ 4:10 pm
I’m with Sara (#2). I too think that it is sad that there actually has to be a post to tell people to “play nice”. Don’t condemn, judge or belittle people you don’t know. If you can’t raise a point or contribute to a post with respect, then please refrain. Move on to the next post, or another blog site. It’s that simple.
Comment by Ladybug — December 11, 2008 @ 4:18 pm
#11 “Vitriolic excrement.” What an expressive turn of phrase! I commend the admins here for doing a good enough job at keeping the place clean that I have never inadvertently stepped in any….Good housewifery.
One of the main reasons I read this blog is to see my favorite windbag-ish ideas thoroughly deflated with razor sharp rhetoric. But I have also had my own sensitivity honed by reading people’s expressions of pain over some windbaggery that, though it may not bother me, hurts them. I learn anew how not to trample on others’ feelings. Good feminism.
And the other day I read a reference Spencer Kimball’s advice to spouses in part-member (sorry) marriages, that they should put their spouse ahead of the church in their lives. Very nutritious food for thought. Good Mormonism and good Christianity.
Comment by Mommie Dearest — December 11, 2008 @ 4:35 pm
I rarely comment, but read this blog quite religiously. I think that this is a wonderful idea, because it is so distracting to conversations to have to respond [or not respond] to nasty little sideswipes. I.e. you aren’t good enough [religious, nonreligious, feminist, housewifey enough].
What I love about this blog is that there are people who think enough like I do for there to be room for my thoughts. In my real life, there is no such space. If I want a stridently mormon tone [or an inflexibly 2nd wave feminist one, or a nasty one] there are other blogs out there for me [or, for that matter, conversations going on around me]. When I want a conversation that tries to integrate family, thought, religion, sexuality, and so on in a decent and thoughtful fashion, I come here. Thank you fmhLisa.
Comment by Natasha — December 11, 2008 @ 5:04 pm
It is funny that people question whether this site is Mormon enough. I tend to be much more liberal than the typical postings on here. So I guess that makes me really un-Mormon-enough.
Religion and politics do seem to be two areas where things get rather passionate. That is fine and good. But I did notice some unkind things being said on the sexuality post (by men). We are all welcome to state our opinions. Where it gets irritating for me is when folks directly attack the opinions of others.
Comment by StillConfused — December 11, 2008 @ 5:05 pm
8: “A bit narrow in thinking, is it not?”
I can’t tell if you’re kidding, because I suspect this is the exact kind of comment she’s talking about. The first half of your post was okay, but the last line is accusatory about the original poster. That’s the exact kind of comments that make it impossible to have a variety of ideas, because people are saying and accusing those with whom they suspect they do not agree of terrible things.
My interpretation of her post: More positive assertions of personal belief. Fewer accusations or negative interpretations of others’ beliefs or character.
Comment by Katie P. — December 11, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
Lisa darling, your having referred to yourself as “glorificus” in the post has now firmly entrenched a visual of you as *Buffy’s* evil undergod, Glory. Please do not open a portal to another world and make us dive off of scary urban precipices. (And you are not as a shoe obsessed as Glory, and this is a good thing.) But still, I now want you to add the following line to the well-done and highly visual post: “Bob Barker! We will bring you the limp and beaten body of Bob Barker!”
And for whoever wonders, disagreement is cool, even encouraged inasmuch as cheerleading camp sounds boring. Just disagree whilst using logic rather than cattiness. For ejemplo: “How do you reconcile this with your Mormonism?” could be a fine and useful question, and “I personally am unsure how this would reconcile with Mormonism” dialogue-inspiring comment. “There is no way an intelligent person could ever reconcile this with Mormonism” or “Well, I could never think that because I am a faithful Mormon” not so much.
Comment by Janet — December 11, 2008 @ 7:04 pm
Frankly, I’m glad that people who are bitter and are looking for any reason to be offended won’t be influencing those who aren’t sure which comments really reflect views of the Church. Thanks!
Comment by Michelle Glauser — December 11, 2008 @ 7:13 pm
I don’t know how anyone could say you are not Mormon enough.
Censoring of comments that differ from your own signifies your dedicated following of the examples of our Mormon leadership for the last 100+ years…
Comment by March and Suffer — December 11, 2008 @ 8:44 pm
I heart Lisa.
And Mel, who does so much of the weeding of comments.
And Janet, even though she’s moving to Washington. And ECS, just because.
And Emily, Shelah, Artemis, Spud . . . and even Quimby, bless her twisted little communistic heart.
Damn. Wait. Can I say “twisted little communistic heart” now? Uh oh. I’m in trouble.
Comment by Kaimi — December 11, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
#19. Nice drive by comment
I missed the part where Lisa said that she would be
“Censoring of comments that differ from [her] own.” Care to point it out? Oh, you can’t because she didn’t say anything like that.
Comment by Natasha — December 11, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
p.s. That’s a nice, snazzy, spiffy new blogger-bio’s page y’all have up here now. Nicely done, whoever did that one.
Comment by Kaimi — December 11, 2008 @ 8:53 pm
Kaimi, that’s it, I’m pulling out the marker and crossing off your comment! You’ve just been black-listed, my friend.
Oh wait, now I’m confusing Communism for McCarthyism . . .
Comment by Quimby — December 11, 2008 @ 8:58 pm
Janet I will admit that as I typed it, I fantasized about hordes of sycophantic bewarted minions.
Kaimi,
I think the bios will be nice when we get our acts together and actually, you know, do something with them. But true greatness can not be rushed, or so I like to tell myself when I’m late for everything.
Comment by fMhLisa — December 11, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
#21 - Although I’m guilty of it occasionally, another good rule is, “Don’t feed the trolls.”
Comment by Ray — December 11, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
Lisa,
The vengeful Old Testament God who doesn’t take any crap is my favorite God. He knew how to keep people in line and so do you! That is why you rock (at least in this conversation).
Go get ‘em! And I will try to be nice.
Comment by Eris — December 11, 2008 @ 11:08 pm
#19, that’s funny. but it doesn’t seem like she’s talking about disagreement. she’s talking about judging others. (I think.)
Comment by venus — December 11, 2008 @ 11:21 pm
And by the way, Janet, Lisa is way hotter than Clare Kramer. Also, way more evil.
Comment by Kaimi — December 11, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
If anyone is interested, after reading this post, I decided to post the following:
Forbearance to Inflict Harm: Practical Mercy
Comment by Ray — December 12, 2008 @ 1:23 am
Re #21 re-ing #19 - Nice catch!
I think this is a beautifully stated post and must have come after a lot of thought…. and then continual annoyance hacking at that thought.
Maya Angelou once said, “Never be bitter. Bitterness is like cancer: it eats at the host - it doesn’t do anything to the object of its displeasure.”
While I avoid censorship at all costs, the purpose of this blog is to help people of the same and different denominations progress and understanding. Bitterness and passive agressiveness does nothing to help progression. Thoughtful, probing questions and constructive criticism does.
And, seriously, you’re only really helping the idiots by getting rid of their comments. That way, no one else has to know he or she is an idiot.
P to the S. I love you ladies and gents. You are helping me restore my faith in this church :D.
Comment by Slarue — December 12, 2008 @ 2:17 am
Ummm… speaking of idiot, that was supposed to say “…denominations progress and understand.”
Comment by Slarue — December 12, 2008 @ 2:19 am
Amen #26.
Comment by Janell the Great — December 12, 2008 @ 3:49 am
It’s so sad that the obvious has to be reiterated. It’s fantastic to have this forum where people can discuss the experience, doubts, fears, sadness and differences in viewpoints. It baffles me that anyone even questions that discussions haven’t been open to debate. I am so grateful to be among people who are actually willing to discuss issues. What is so difficult about doing it in a respectful manner?
I’m old enough to remember daily life without PCs and the internet. It’s opened up a whole new world of communication and potential…not all of it positive. I understand that the relative anonymity provides the perfect opportunity to let the worst elements of incivility loose. Yet, if in this particular venue, a person actually disciplines oneself to behave as if the other person is right in front of her, eye to eye, and comments responsibly and respectfully, even if the issue is heated and emotionally charged…I think it’s the epitome of classy behavior.
It’s particularly difficult to convey nuances and subtlety in this environment and I always appreciate the maturity of commenters who take the time to clarify and explain further when there is a miscommunication…and the forbearance of the other commenters while the people in question hash it out.
Ray- thanks for the link. Very nice post. I think we have a lot of very good examples of people who conduct themselves with a lot of class here. You are one of them.
Comment by Kimberly — December 12, 2008 @ 8:16 am
the vengeful god of the old testament? I don’t think killing people for non sabbath observance, etc. is my view of God, personally.
the “punish the unrighteous” attitude is one thing that makes some LDS folks very challenging to those seeking tolerance.
Comment by venus — December 12, 2008 @ 12:30 pm
Yeah, but the OId Testament stories would definitely make the best action movies - lots of blood and fire and brimstone and high body counts. And that is how I judge the quality of any narrative.
See, how I can play nice?
Comment by Eris — December 12, 2008 @ 12:35 pm
Snot flinging…do they realize the type of stains that can leave on the couches? Well, unless you have leather of course, but still, snot flinging makes a big mess.
Thanks for the reminder. I think because it is the internet, a screen, a piece of metal, we don’t realize there are other people, real people, on the other end.
A refresher on manners is needed every once in a while. Thanks again….
Comment by Sunshine — December 12, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
I’m an action-adventure girl myself, but I draw the line at snot flinging.
Comment by Kimberly — December 12, 2008 @ 1:37 pm
I want to echo #14 and express how amazing it was for me to discover FMH. My brother steered me here when I expressed frustration about not understanding why no one felt the same way I did about things. Turns out there are tons of people who feel the same way and I really appreciate the openness and exploration that goes on here, in spite of the “haters.” Thank you so much for helping me see that I didn’t just need to repent of my personal beliefs.
Comment by jen — December 12, 2008 @ 5:44 pm