Skip to main content

View Diary: The NN12 Panel Process (45 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  thanks for putting this diary together (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    glorificus, maggiejean

    it seems to be a very professional selection process.

    Which doesn't mean that sometimes professionals don't  see the forest for the trees and lose their heart and mind to managing the technicalities of being "fair and balanced".

    May be one just can add a completely "unfair" guideline to the selection system ? (Courage, mes amis) Think about giving "famous and longtime and respected writers and co-founders of dailykos" some extra point on your Application forms.

    Don't they do that in Universities of the US, looking at the "extra-curricular" activities that make a candidate "special" and make them "desirable to have" to enhance "diversity"? How about the "extra-curricular" activity of having written 3000 diaries on dailykos, (seems to me everything but "extra" curricular, but what don't you twist with words to make a point) ?

    Call me silly, but I have this image in front of my eyes of some warriors disrupting the slick performance of NN12 with some drums and speeches, as entree to a panel session that I would have liked to listen to.

    It shows that what kossacks hope to see and what is offered might not be matching as much as one would expect after such an elaborate selection process.

    Considering how much work goes into the bringing a panel together and submitting it and into selecting and reducing the submissions, it's kind of sad.

    I have respect for the process and the work of the committees and volunteers. No doubt about that. And I think Adam B and now Nolan have done their best to make us ignorants see all sides of the process. Thank you for that. And I thank you also for handling my emotions expressed in previous diaries "professionally".

    •  You continue to insist (0+ / 0-)

      that the panels that will be presented at Netroots Nations do not reflect "what kossacks hope to see," even though you have no idea what panels will be presented. You further presume that additional qualifications of applicants, such as diversity or their "extracurricular activities," have not been taken into account.

      As I said in the diary you wrote, while I would have liked to see MB and navajo's proposed panel, the fact that it was not accepted as is does not in any way indicate that all of the criteria you propose isn't part of the review process. So instead of continuing to suggest that the process is flawed or even discriminatory because one panel you've heard of—and I defy you to describe any other panel that's been proposed let alone accepted—perhaps you should withhold your judgment and condemnation until you actually know what will be offered this year and can see for yourself what values are reflected in the panel selections.

      •  Well, mimi is a Kossack, and this panel was (0+ / 0-)

        "what [mimi] hope(d) to see," so I think you are being too harsh, Kaili Joy.

        There is widespread ignorance about the Native American community, and MB/navajo's panel might have gone a long way to changing that.

        Really, how many panels on fracking are needed? It's bad, there is little confusion about that. If the panels are just specifying HOW bad, well, Google is your friend.

        I've said before, I'd worry combining panels to get broader viewpoints will cause loss depth on a particular issue.

        And if we just wait until we "actualy know what will be offered this year" it too late to protest.

        If you do not believe that there is an ongoing war on women, then you aren't paying attention. h/t The Pootie Potentate

        by glorificus on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 06:50:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't understand. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Adam B

          You think just because people have no idea what NN will offer is no reason not for them to assume that it's not representing their interests and therefore, they should protest? I think that's pretty silly.

          And since mimi didn't reference what she would like to see, but rather, what "kossacks" would like to see, I addressed that in particular.

          I'm not sure why you ask how many panels on fracking are needed. Do you know how many panels on fracking there will be? Or are you just assuming there will be, in your opinion, too many?

          I understand the disappointment that MB's panel was not selected. What I don't understand is the absurd and inflammatory rush to judgment displayed by so many, in assuming that this is some huge miscarriage of justice, instead of the selection process working as it should. And given some of the jaw-dropping hyperbole that came from the original diarist who raised the issue—including the insistence that the board of directors should kill themselves, for fuck's sake—no, I don't think I'm being too harsh at all.

          •  You know, Kaili Joy Gray, I think I have (0+ / 0-)

            tried to put my wording "kill themselves" in context and apologized for it in the past diary right away, after it happened.

            It was my way of saying to whoever was involved in the decision, which I didn't know yet at the moment I made that comment - it became clear during the comments that evolved later - that "one should be ashamed". (I know I said the DoD, but that was a lapse, because I didn't know who else I should have addressed at that moment).

            Harsh and over the top, yes. A matter of last resort or a tool as the only one at hand, trying to shame people? Yes, I used it. With wording unfamiliar to your ears? Yes.

            Not that big of a deal in my own language, as indicated. I doubt that in Germany people would have gotten outraged and upset because of that wording. They would have either agreed with the sentiment that this was a shameful outcome or they wouldn't have cared at all.

            But I realize that "I am not at home" in this environment and that "we (the non Americans)" have to take any "bad expressions" Americans can shout out toward us, but dare us, if we do as well sometimes.  

            I apologized, yes. I think, I rarely voice my emotions that raw, but sometimes it happens, may be because I am used to have my voice silenced. If other people would be as self-reflective and critical of themselves, as I usually am with myself, it would be nice.

            You have no idea how often I felt it necessary to apologize for something, I think I shouldn't have to, just to satisfy
            sensitivites of people, who are in denial of their own pre-judgemental perceptions.

            So, I hope that really will be my last comment now in this matter.

            •  Give me a break. (0+ / 0-)

              Sorry, mimi, but it's absurd to suggest that telling people to kill themselves because you think (wrongly) they made a decision you don't like is merely a German idiom, and gosh, too bad people are so sensitive about it. (For the record, I happen to be sitting next to my German friend right now who has never heard such an idiom.)

              You leapt to a number of unfounded conclusions, you continued to repeat them even after you were corrected, and despite your "sorry if anyone was offended" "apology," you are still defending how you chose to express yourself instead of taking a step back to consider all the explanations you have been provided so that you can understand the process of which you complain.

              You can continue as long as you like to explain that those who take issue with your "raw emotions" are merely being "pre-judgmental" and "sensitive," but I think that instead of continuing to dig, you ought to take a long hard look at how you've engaged in this conversation.

        •  Yeah, we don't do that kind of panel (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mimi

          It'd have to be some pretty obscure topic for us to do "[X] is bad!" as a panel; our focus is always more towards "okay, what are communities doing about [x] and what is the netroots role?"

          You are right to question the breadth v. depth issue; we confront it all the time.  I think this particular issue made it very difficult -- if we accept only the panel on voter suppression in the [X] community, what do we say to folks who submitted a panel on that issue in [A], [B], or [C] communities?

          We're doing the best we can. We take this very seriously. And we can always do better.

          •  Thank you for your response, Adam. (0+ / 0-)

            Fracking is an important issue, and I apologize for making light of it.

            However, I would be VERY surprised if fracking is not being proposed on a rez somewhere as we speak.

            From what I have read in the other thread, I think voter suppression is only part of MB/navajo's panel. I think you can and should have multiple panels on voter suppression, as voting is how laws get changed in this country.

            You should also have dedicated panels on Native Americans every year.

            Lots of diaries get written about atrocities in Iraq and Iran and Uganda and A-stan when major inequities exist right here at home. Diaries are written about transgender people, homosexuals, the disabled, prisoners, women, African-Americans, et cetera.

            Very little about a native population that also needs help, and has been promised it through many, many treaties.

            As I told you before, I respect you for making impossible decisions you know will not be popular with many. Including me.

            If you do not believe that there is an ongoing war on women, then you aren't paying attention. h/t The Pootie Potentate

            by glorificus on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 12:57:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  I didn't say the process is flawed in my comment, (0+ / 0-)

        contrary I said it is a an elaborate selection process and done with professional attitude and intentions to use your best judgement and fairness. That I used quotation marks around my expression to make a point that despite all the best intentions, I feel one can end up missing out on some rather important issues, doesn't mean I judged or attacked the whole process or any person in particular.

        I also didn't say it is discriminatory process towards the representation of Native American issues by design. I thought that my comment was just to show that the prcoess is not a guarantee that peoples and issues can fall through the cracks. I have understood that this can happen more or less unintentionally. My attempt to show that by making a more or less joking comparison to the college application procedure was made to remind committee members that elsewhere such solutions as to include merits of an applicant are used. If those criteria had been considered, well then I can't help it and just voice my disappointment about the decisions made.

        You ask me to withhold my judgement and condemnation?

        You feel judged and condemnated, because I state my personal observation that issues of one group of people are imo not appropriately represented among others? You prefer I would have been silent?

        What is then this blog for?

        Did you take my comments so personal that you feel you have to ask me to be polite and remain silent? Why?

        Ok, then, that's my last comment in this matter. I said my thing and you said yours. I move one.

        •  No. (0+ / 0-)
          You feel judged and condemnated, because I state my personal observation that issues of one group of people are imo not appropriately represented among others? You prefer I would have been silent?
          I don't feel judged or "condemnated." I think your rush to judgment is misplaced. Because even though this has been explained to you in great detail, you keep insisting that NN is not representing your interests. But how do you know that? You don't know which panels have been selected, so you have no idea whether your interests are represented or not.

          I'm not taking your comments personally. I'm suggesting that you continue to say things that have no basis in fact, no matter how many times you are corrected by those who are actually involved in the process.

          •  ok then, misplaced judgement, sorry, (0+ / 0-)

            I have not even my own interests involved, I am not Native American and am the last person, who could do something to support their interests, as clearly has been shown by now.

            The basis of fact I am relating to is that I heard the panel was dropped. That's it.

            I am really tired of getting involved in that any further. It's annoying. I feel treated like a child and don't think I have to accept you as my parental advisor.

            •  Then perhaps (0+ / 0-)

              in the future you should refrain from making a federal case out of something you don't understand.

              •  shaking my head - thanks for the flowers /nt (0+ / 0-)
              •  Kaili Joy, you are out of line. Very few (0+ / 0-)

                people not directly involved in the selection process knew how the process worked before Adam B's posts last week.

                You do seem unduly harsh and unhelpful to mimi.

                This surprised me, because I generally like your pieces. Now, I'll be better informed about the personality behind the keyboard.

                I really commend and thank mimi for bringing up this topic and alerting us all to the process.

                And yes, I do think this is an example of discrimination. Not necessarily on purpose, it's just easy to ignore the Indians because they are not obviously rioting on the streets.

                Stop making 'a federal case' of mimi's diary and comments.

                If you do not believe that there is an ongoing war on women, then you aren't paying attention. h/t The Pootie Potentate

                by glorificus on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:09:27 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  On the contrary ... (0+ / 0-)

                  I think a number of people who are involved with the selection process have tried to be helpful in explaining to the community how the process works. To suggest that people should actually die because the original poster didn't like a decision (that wasn't even made by them) is, to me, intolerable. That said poster continues to defend such hyperbole is inexcusable. That people continue to insist that NN does not reflect their interests and concerns, when they do not yet know which panels will be presented at NN because those final decisions have not been made, is most unfortunate.

                  You are of course free to make whatever conclusions you wish about my personality, but no, I don't think it's over the line to suggest that someone ought to understand what they're talking about before issuing such criticisms and calls for death.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site