All right, I finally read
the original pie diary.
Through the Looking Glass. Several respected community members had viewpoints that were the opposite of what I would have expected.
But I do have one opinion to share that I haven't seen so far. I think the structure of this site creates disagreements like this. What do I mean?
First, let me just share that I have a bit of a talent for weighing in with my analyses long after the conversation is practically over. It's like the horse tends to die just before I arrive to beat it. Always late. But if I'm the guy that causes the horse to die, maybe that would be a blessing in this case. Eggshell-walking disclaimer: I like horses.
Here's what I mean about the structure of the community. Kos has created a site that has a lot of space for community members to fill. He's also pretty hands off. The site is extremely interactive and community-friendly.
What happens when a bunch of community space is created and people rush to fill it? Well, interestingly enough, communities tend to form.
This means self-generated community mores and standards. This means inside jokes and strong personal connections.
In short this means a whole bunch of community members that feel ownership of the community.
Whether or not this is appropriate is irrelevant to the fact that it is rational. It happens. It is impossible for it not to happen, given how the community is structured. Kos can talk about how it's his site, and people can stay or go as they please if they don't like how he runs it, but believe it or not, it misses the point. If Kos is going to insist on that, which is his right, then it means that he is insisting on a community structure that is going to create this tension over and over again.
Community mores are going to continue to be developed independently of Kos. Community members are going to continue to feel ownership over the community, no matter how "inappropriate" that may be. If the leadership of the site acts in such a way that the community feels conflicts with community standards, then this will keep happening. If Kos dumps the site tomorrow, people are going to feel homeless and betrayed, no matter how "inappropriate" that feeling is.
While reading mcjoan's diary of the other day, someone made an excellent point in comparing this to sexual harrassment in the workplace. Yes I know this is a blatantly false comparison in many ways, but there is one key point to the comparison that I feel holds true. In a job, if a woman doesn't like being the butt of sexual jokes or advances, they can "just" choose to work somewhere else. On Daily Kos, if someone doesn't like the ad policy, they can "just" choose to go somewhere else.
The problem is the false innocuousness of that "just". You create ties to community (or job). It's not as simple as disappearing in a puff of smoke due to the whims of an administrator. Is the most ethical way to handle this to simply not develop any ties to the community, so you can move on at the wave of a hand? The whole point of a community is to develop ties to it. When things like this happen, it is very painful for some community members, and they feel very torn between two principles. I don't think it is fair to put those two principles - Kos' vision, and community bonding - at each other's throats when they are both designed into the structure of this site.
This is mostly why I think many of the arguments put forth by many of our leading members are so off base. Make the ads disappear by buying a membership? The point was never that each person was personally offended, it was that they felt ownership over the community as a whole. If you make it disappear for your eyes only, it's still there. Arguments that it shouldn't be seen as offensive? Completely irrelevant; a too-large number of community members find it offensive, and we don't advocate mind control here. It paying Kos' way? I guess I have a hard time believing that if Kos were to go and ban that particular ad, that he would then have a blank spot on his page for the rest of the time - another ad would fill in the space and the hole in his revenue stream. And if not, I am sure the community would pitch in extra.
I do not believe that Kos is subservient to the community and I do not believe that he has a duty to yield to community whim in these cases. But, I do think that it would be the classy thing to do. The ad is still running, and this whole matter is still a negative drain on the community. That alone should be good enough reason to dump the damn thing. (Honestly, part of me wonders if some members of this site are defending the ad's presence specifically because there is such an outcry against it, "for the principle".)
But the bigger point is that these community standards and mores that are offended by the ad are a direct result of what Kos has created. It isn't fair to create something and then simply call that an undesirable side effect. I think removing the ad would be a welcome gesture to acknowledge the personal investment that everyone else has put into this site to make it a success for Kos.
If it is actually technically impossible for Kos to turn off the ad, then I could see the point - but I've been around a few ad technology sites and I know it's usually a matter of just blocking particular undesirable ad id's. All he'd have to do is log in and block it if so. As long as it isn't trying to bully a site admin to buckle beneath bullying members, I don't think there is anything inappropriate at all with asking. I'm sure people would be willing to pitch in the dough if it came to that.