Nothing is new or exceptional in these rules, except that they felt the need to broadcast them. They seem embarrassed about the fact that they had a backchannel in the first place. (Because of the cattiness that's seeped out from the little we know about it? Who knows.) And only FTB would say "no rules regulate individual blogs" when of course rules exist for individual blogs; but it just sounds so freethought-y, so they leave it in, even though it means nothing.
- 1. We’re an atheism+social justice+science network…we were Atheism+ before there was an Atheism+. Get used to it. [pre][We iz a libral plase! We wuz in yur atheizm killin' yur godz before you wuz. Go, if u do not want!][/pre]
2. Big picture management is by an executive committee. It’s not democratic, because its job is to just get stuff done. [pre][We do what we likez.][/pre]
3. There is a confidential backchannel to discuss management issues. And gossip. [pre][We talkz.][/pre]
4. No rules to regulate individual blogs. [pre][We let otherz talkz. See, there wuz roolz for indivijul blogz when we pwnd TF and Laden. But itz ok now. Invisibl roolz now.][/pre]
5. You want to join FtB? Don’t call us, we’ll call you. Membership is largely decided democratically, with some mandated vetting procedures and final approval in the hands of the executive committee. [pre][We iz privat and sekret. Shh...][/pre]
6. You want to get kicked off FtB? Act like a raging asshat and the executive committee will oblige you. [pre][Well, yeh, there iz roolz. Wuz kidding about rool #4.][/pre]
So, when some persons object to "equating PZ with FTB," I guess they have a point. PZ is equal to 1/2 of FTB.The Executive Committee has two permanent members: The membership of the committee will consist of: Ed Brayton and PZ Myers
Wow, what if this were the policy for the actual Comments section of blogs like PZ's? What if the purpose of the Comments section of his blog (or even the blog itself?!) were to encourage open communications between members where all discussions would be civil, drama would be frowned upon, and personal abuse would not be tolerated. What a world we might be living in, if only there were but the will.The Network Mailing List
[...] [T]o encourage open communication between members of the network, all discussions must be civil and drama is frowned upon; disagreement and criticism is encouraged, but only in the spirit of constructive improvement of the content of the Network. Other kinds of disagreement must be taken off-list, so that they do not disrupt free and friendly discussion. The mailing list is not to be an arena. Threats, harassment, and personal abuse will not be tolerated on the mailing list.
"Never undertaken casually" = "We really hated you, TF."Dismissal of bloggers from the network
Removal of unsuitable bloggers from the Network is never to be undertaken casually. The criteria for asking that someone be removed are:
[various, obvious reasons omitted]
The following conditions will not be considered valid reasons for expulsion:
* Personal animus
* Disagreement on tactics, style, or focus
* Change in philosophy or religion, unless it actively conflicts with the mission of Freethoughtblogs
As for "personal animus and disagreement on style or focus": this seemed to be close to the reason TF was terminated. If only these rules had been in place-- TF wouldn't've been booted!
I don't mind a blog being dictatorial. It's their blog. They can do what they want. They can have all the backchannel kaffeeklatsch their hearts desire. They can hire and fire whom they wish, when they wish. But they seem to want to have it both ways. Being dictatorial and appearing open and democratic. You are a thug, PZ. Own it!
___
"Oh, yeah, we got rules for FtB - Pharyngula"
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... es-for-ftb
