Re: Asexual Advice’s Official Response — Di

This is a reply to AA’s post here, which was itself a response to my list of bad advice examples.

In my last two posts, I answered Kiowa and Filbert.  This is my response to Di.

Standing alone, the blog post itself raises some issues for me in terms of how the criticism of the advice is presented. Very rarely is any timeframe for the posts referenced given, which can be misleading as it does not intuitively indicate where the advice giver may have found growth in the intervening time

That makes it sound like you expect that post to provide a comprehensive review of each individual blog and/or blogger.

The post isn’t about assessing the blogs as entities unto themselves.  It’s about assessing specific pieces of advice.

Do you just want me to add some date notes beside each link, or is there something else you think I should have done as well?

There is very minimal presented to suggest a better way to handle answering the questions being asked

Well, there’s the host of links I placed under the prescriptivism header, as well as the related reading links at the bottom, and I recently wrote this guide on identifying abuse, so… what else do you have questions about?

Additionally, there is only occasionally reference to any discussion that may have already occurred around the relevant ask – for instance, the post referenced by Neth, which was criticized here, is mentioned again, which is fine. However, this is presented without linking to our response here on the blog, found here,

Scroll down on that post of mine and you can find it in the comment section.

Think I should have linked it in the body of the post itself?  You know what, I agree.  My bad.

There.  I went and edited that post, and now it’s linked right up front.

At the peak of productivity on the blog, the number of posts receiving notifications at any one time is overwhelming. It is not only recent posts, but posts from several days, weeks, or even months ago that circulate. To try and keep up with every reblog, every set of comments and tags, to search through all the notifications to find the rare @ mention, would be almost unmanageable

That’s a big problem with the Tumblr platform — it’s terrible for keeping track of discussion.

(I’m not criticizing y’all for being on tumblr, I just hate that so much of ace community activity is focused over there where discussion logistics are a nightmare.  Long-standing complaint of mine.)

So where there is criticism to be discussed, the best way to ensure it is seen is to send us a message.

Through a messaging system as restrictive and unreliable as the Tumblr ask system?  And then have to comb through your posts every day for a reply, or else create an account so that you can reply privately?

I’ll pass.

You know what might be handy, though?  A collective blog email address.  If y’all already have one, can you direct me to where it’s listed?

That being said, when I went to go look at the post, I could not help but look through the rest of Coyote’s blog (theacetheist) because, as I said, I feel that context is important. And unfortunately, the context I found there was more disheartening than encouraging. There was criticism over our lack of a response to the original post, with the caveat assumption that we “don’t pay attention” to them.

It’s true that I had to be reminded about how little time you all have for these things, and that time was the likeliest factor.  Sorry about that.

They used less than kind language in reference to , and they repeatedly emphasized, in a fairly dismissive manner, that they had no expectation that we would respond at all, let alone find any impetus to change the way in which we approach our advice giving.

On me not expecting a reply: That’s partly based on my experience with not being a very widely-read blog, where I feel like I’m rarely heard.  And that expectation was also partly formed by the response Kiowa recently gave Hezekiah for expressing their concern, where I got the impression that she’s willing to ignore people if they criticize her more than once in a way she disagrees with.  It’s pretty cool to find out that’s not true.

On me not expecting change: Well, given how Kiowa’s sticking to the main thing I criticized her for, Filbert stated her agreement with her, and you’re not distancing yourself from any of that… looks like I was right so far?

In which case, what is the point of further slandering us?

I’m going to ignore your interesting use of the word slander to try and answer this, because the point was… well, to communicate with people I regularly communicate with about the state of affairs of the ace-related conversations I involve myself in?  I mean, that’s… a really normal use of my blog for me?  I’m not sure what you were expecting here.

In case you’re interested, it was kind of an addendum to this post, where I expressed surprise (in a positive way!) at the way my post was being received by other ace advice bloggers.  I was thinking about whether I might get a response from y’all only because recent examples from y’all were on there several times — which wasn’t a calculated move or anything, but it was something that stood out to me when I stepped back and looked at the finished post.

Are we not ultimately people too?

You are, ultimately, people too.  I’m not sure why you’re asking that, but yeah.

Shouldn’t we be given a chance to learn and grow?

Ta da!  Here’s one right now.

People claim that these issues have been raised before but do not provide links to where those discussions have previously occurred

I’m guessing you’re referring to Sciatrix’s comment here.

If this comment is your way of saying “I want a link to what she’s talking about”: here’s one.

As for the referenced post itself – it does not exist in a vacuum either, and I find the environment from which it comes to be troubling, because it does not to me speak only of wanting to make a better and stronger community through education.

And you reached this conclusion because… what, because I don’t take attention for granted?  You think I posted that list of examples for some other reason than building a better and stronger community?

Instead of decrying one way of phrasing something, why not offer an alternative that is more favorable, and explain why?

You mean that thing that’s already been done, which I linked to in my original post in the first place?  Or do you have questions about a specific example?  Feel free to post a comment so we can work that out.  You don’t need a WordPress account to post here, by the way — it’ll go into comment moderation at first, but I always approve everything that’s not spam.


7 responses to “Re: Asexual Advice’s Official Response — Di

  • Di

    Hey! Thanks for posting this – I don’t have a response ready yet, in part because I’m at work (which is currently and unfortunately the only place I have Internet) and also because I want to make sure I have a chance to really give you as thorough of a response as I can, since you likewise did me the courtesy. But I wanted you to know that I did see it and do intend to get you a response – it might just take me another day or two until I have wifi at my new apartment.

      • Di

        And then my wifi got all glitchy when I went to submit the comment I wrote, and since it goes to moderation first, not sure if it actually went through or not. D’oh. My suspicion is that it didn’t, since the page I submitted it still says “Posting comment…” but I’ve got it saved if it didn’t – if it did, feel free to just ignore this one. Technology…

      • Di

        Okay, almost CERTAIN now that this didn’t go through the first time, so attempt #2…

        Alright, this might end up being a couple of responses, cause I’m going to try and use as much of my break at work to at least get you a short reply now… mostly just to say that already, there’s some stuff that I probably would have phrased or done differently in my response if I’d had more time, and try to clarify some stuff that I left out.

        I think accountability is really really important, especially in a public forum, and I really appreciate that people are willing to hold others accountable, with the ultimate goal of making the community stronger. I’m not sure I communicated that well enough, and I don’t have any problem with that in the slightest. Where I wanted to try and come at this from was sort of an in between perspective – not neutral, because I don’t think I can be truly neutral because I have very close relationships with the other mods at AA, but the perspective of someone who maybe had a bit more distance. Mostly what struck me was the way in which the information is communicated, because I absolutely believe that you didn’t intend it to be a callout post, but it clearly was, at least in part, and as someone who spends a lot of time in their work having to be very careful and precise about communication, I wanted to try and get a response of my own in to maybe address some of where the miscommunications that I perceived lay, and ways that it could have been clearer.

        I’ll also be the first to admit that, as I said, I’m not truly a neutral party, and I do think that I let some of my emotions get in the way – and also haven’t been in the greatest mental state to begin with the last few days with all of the global unrest (it kicks my anxiety into high gear, unfortunately). So I don’t think I communicated what I was hoping to as well as I intended to, which is why I really appreciate you responding and giving us a chance (you and I) to further the discussion and keep talking. And on that note, one quick thing I will address from your comments – yeah, slander was the wrong word to use there, and that was definitely a case of emotions getting out of check. My bad.

        That being said, in an effort to keep from letting my emotions further impact what I’m trying to say, I’m going to work really hard to just focus on the way in which the messages you were trying to convey, as opposed to the actual content. Especially because I don’t think it’s at all my place to respond to any of it, as it wasn’t directed at me? Let me know if you’d rather discuss it all, and I’ll do my best though.

        Anyway, also apologies for being super long winded and wordy – I tend to do that sometimes, so I’ll just admit to that one upfront as well. I’ll try and be clear and concise as much as I can for both our sakes.

        Still going to try and get you a more comprehensive response later to the various stuff you brought up, but I wanted to get at least this much said sooner rather than later. Hopefully there’s no bad blood here – I really would love to move forward with a discussion on even footing.

        • Coyote

          “Mostly what struck me was the way in which the information is communicated, because I absolutely believe that you didn’t intend it to be a callout post, but it clearly was, at least in part,”

          Um, well, I guess you can take it that way.

          “I’m going to work really hard to just focus on the way in which the messages you were trying to convey, as opposed to the actual content.”

          That pretty much sounds like the opposite of what I’d want you to do.

          “Especially because I don’t think it’s at all my place to respond to any of it, as it wasn’t directed at me? Let me know if you’d rather discuss it all, and I’ll do my best though.”

          Are you talking about my post that has “four days later” as the title? We can talk about it if it’s important to you.

          • Di

            Whoops – sorry, I missed a part of that sentence – it should have read “I absolutely believe that you didn’t intend it to be a callout post, but it clearly was, at least in part, interpreted that way

            And I’m not actually talking about the four days later post – I’m still talking about the original post. As none of that was directed at me or advice I’ve given, but at other moderators for the blog, my intention is to focus more on where I feel there was miscommunication between what I believe the intention of your original post was and how it was perceived, and why I think that disconnect occurred, as that was primarily what I focused on in my inital response, or intended to. But as I mentioned, I can respond to the actual content itself of the first post – I’m just not sure what there is for me to say on that matter.

          • Coyote

            “As none of that was directed at me or advice I’ve given,”

            Ohhh, right, right. Well, I’m open to talking about it with anyone, really. But we don’t have to.

            If you think there was a miscommunication, we can talk about that. It seems like the main difference of interpretation, that I’m fixating on right now at least, is just that Kiowa and I disagree over what counts as prescriptivism.

WP account not required to comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: