| 4 Nov 2021 |
 joepie91 🏳️🌈 | realistically, sorting out community health in an existing community properly is always going to be messy and involve conflict, because a lot of implicit views and disagreements are being surfaced, and there are always going to be a handful of people who feel that anything that inconveniences their ability to speak without thought is automatically oppressive without considering the broader community's interests | 09:29:01 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | * realistically, sorting out community health in an existing community properly is always going to be messy and involve conflict, because a lot of implicit previously-unspoken views and disagreements are being surfaced, and there are always going to be a handful of people who feel that anything that inconveniences their ability to speak without thought is automatically oppressive without considering the broader community's interests | 09:29:14 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | and a handful of said people + widespread misbeliefs in the tech world about how moderation should be 'objective' = guaranteed conflict | 09:29:50 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | or to put it differently: the conflict ("drama") caused by this is an indicator that there are problems boiling under the surface that need to be addressed. taking the 'easy conflict-free route' basically just means that you're ignoring those issues, sweeping them under the carpet and just sorta hoping they don't come to a head - which is unlikely to be a successful strategy, in the long term, though most likely that will just manifest as marginalized folks quietly leaving | 09:32:32 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I believe RFC98 even explicitly mentions this, the "this is necessary conflict" point | 09:33:33 |
|  Jonas Chevalier joined the room. | 09:33:38 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | it's very explicitly intended to bring these problems to the surface, discuss them, and ultimately resolve them | 09:33:53 |
 Irenes | thanks so much, @joepie91 <3 | 09:43:34 |
| Irenes | yeah - I take it for granted sometimes that people know how this stuff goes, because I've just seen it all too many times | 09:44:07 |
| Irenes | but this is the time to explain it all, for people who haven't | 09:44:15 |
| Irenes | I don't want hostility | 09:44:21 |
| Irenes | I've tried my best to meet hostility with love, and I will continue doing that | 09:44:40 |
| Irenes | but at some point in any community's history, this stuff has to be talked about so that a shared understanding of it can become the status quo | 09:45:20 |
| Irenes | I do think the discussions have identified some weaknesses in the RFC as it's written | 09:45:38 |
| Irenes | some of which we've addressed, some of which we're still working on | 09:45:45 |
| Irenes | and it will be better for that | 09:45:49 |
 piegames | Maybe we can copy the most important parts of the above into the RFC, as a kind of prelude or something so that more people understand? Although some points are already mentioned within it, it could maybe be made even more clear upfront. | 09:46:35 |
| Irenes | the high-tension stuff only has to happen once, as long as we arrive at a shared understanding that actually embodies justice | 09:46:43 |
| Irenes | thanks @piegames :) yeah that's actually one of the action items right now | 09:46:58 |
| Irenes | if we don't address everything important, and leave an unjust status quo, that will set up the seeds of more stuff down the line, until and unless the people around at that point want to actually finish the work. | 09:48:02 |
| Irenes | it's just literally talking through all this stuff about how everyone comes from different perspectives and wants different things | 09:48:19 |
| Irenes | and figuring out what it takes for everyone to coexist without giving up the stuff that's important to them | 09:48:40 |
| Irenes | that's not the default | 09:48:50 |
| Irenes | because the world in general is not, you know... that work hasn't been done at the world scale | 09:49:09 |
| Irenes | but Nix is a community that's honestly in quite a good place, relatively speaking | 09:49:20 |
