Regarding any & all disputes with the History of Feminism Group and/or the members thereof:
This discussion thread was locked by Electric Larry (a host of the Men's Group group).
The hosts of both groups have come to a mutual understanding that we believe it would be in all of our best interest, as well as the best interest of DU as a whole, if we could try and put the inter-group feuding behind us.
To this end, the hosts of The Men's Group join with those of the History of Feminism Group to suggest the following guidelines be followed from here on out by members of our respective groups:
One, the primary function of each group is to discuss issues of interest to the group- not to discuss DU or how DU feels or doesn’t feel about those issues. There certainly may be times when the groups are discussing the same topic as is being discussed elsewhere on DU, however, the group should be a place for issue-based discussion, not "what they're saying somewhere else on DU" discussion. On DU2 there was a clause in the rules about not using groups to "rally the troops". We think observing the spirit of that rule would go a long way toward ameliorating many of the inter-group problems that have developed on DU3, not just the ones between TMG and HoF.
Two, perhaps even more importantly, there should be no call-outs, either direct or oblique, of other DU members, inside the groups. Such things belong in meta, as does "complaining about DU". However, the hosts are also intending to take an active role (as much as possible) to keep our respective regular members from perpetuating group feuds in meta as well. We obviously cannot tell anyone what to do in meta, however we are going to ask our respective members, while in meta, to be aware of and respect the spirit of this truce.
Three, in line with not calling out members and not discussing DU as opposed to the issues, we are asking our members to refrain from using well known dog whistles which can be taken as sideswipes against the other group- phrases like "radfems" or "Dworkinite" or "MRA types/talking points".
Four, hosts and the groups at large can’t be responsible for every poster who posts or has posted in our respective groups. Since our groups having been points of friction in the past, they may have attracted folks whose real agenda seems to be not of advancing a particular point of ideology so much as to deliberately foment fighting and strife on DU.
Five, a member block is a tool to halt an ongoing and escalating group disruption, where personal entreaties to the offending poster by host(s) goes unanswered. In the event an active member of either group is blocked, members should respect that there is a mechanism for the blocked member to appeal that block through direct communication with the host(s) of the group and encourage that process to be undertaken and completed.
The experiment that is DU3 is almost a year old. It has involved no small measure of testing, reshuffling, growth, and certainly some friction. At this point I think we all know who is who, and where the boundaries are, and the points of difference as well as what we have in common. We certainly have not been blameless in all of this- for our part. We apologize and pledge to try to do better.
The members of both groups are good committed democrats. We believe the objectives of both groups are to support fairness, freedom and equality. By extension, this requires members of both groups to support reproductive choice, opposition to bigotry, homophobia, misandry, misogyny and all forms of discrimination, violence and hate. On this, we find common ground.
We would like 2013 to see our two groups work harmoniously on the many things - the majority - that we agree on.
= new reply since forum marked as read
With the dissolution of meta, it would appear that "using the groups for what they're saying elsewhere on DU discussion" (and "rallying the troops"
-as per point #1- has been, if not officially, at least de-facto removed from the terms of this "truce".
A quick perusal of threads indicates this to clearly be the case.
As such, any objections to material in TMG on these terms will be considered in light of the "facts on the ground", such as they are.