DG-referee2013

In my referee role, at the 2013 Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund debate between Joel Salatin and Joseph Mercola.

This blog has clearly entered new and uncharted territory.

Beginning with the questions raised about Green Pasture fermented cod liver oil last August, and now with an accusation last week about sexual harassment leveled against a former director of the Weston A. Price Foundation, many people are very upset—angry, resentful, accusatory–on both sides of the aisle.

As I mentioned in comments yesterday, this blog has long been a place where people have felt free to express opinions and ideas that might not be appreciated anywhere else. They’ve also been free to not identify themselves by name; this has been especially important for farmers and activists working in fear of government harassment.

The few instances in the past when commenters became harassing to others, or inappropriate in their language, was usually clear enough to the entire community here that I could step in and either warn the commenter and/or delete an occasional comment, and in a very few cases, ban the commenter.

What makes the territory of the last few months new and uncharted is that the object of controversy has shifted, from the government to a highly regarded organization for many of us, The Weston A. Price Foundation, together with a company that has produced product endorsed by the WAPF—Green Pasture. Ironically, the promise of anonymity has made this blog a refuge for Weston A. Price Foundation members and chapter leaders fearful of reprisals from the organization for expressing their doubts about FCLO.

I’ve been trying real hard since the controversy exploded on us in late August to operate under the few rules that served me well over the previous nearly nine years—minimal interference and people’s own judgment and respect for others. But I have come to realize in the last few days, from any number of comments and feedback—the posted ones from Lynne and Judith McGeary, among others—and the private ones from some trusted friends, that the old rules aren’t working so well.

I have come to realize as well that I have been at fault in some of my blog posts and comments, for getting wrapped up in the heat of the moment. And even though I think of myself as sensitive on matters of sexism and racism, I haven’t communicated my sensitivity and requirements for others to be sensitive well enough. At the same time, I also appreciate that some of the upset with me has to do with me being the messenger of news and info that some people would rather not know about.

A few commenters also mentioned my connection with the new Paleo-Primal-Price Foundation, and wondered if I am going to live up its commitment to be a place of both openness and safety. While my blog isn’t formally connected to the PPP Foundation, I think the points about openness and safety are well taken, So I’m going to try to walk the walk here.

All by way of saying that I am implementing a few policies based on commenters showing respect to other commenters, and I’ll be taking more of the referee role I’m pictured in above. So beginning now, these areas will be off-limits:

•No personal attacks, even if you violently disagree with others, think they are idiots, or worse. No personal attacks. It’s possible to disagree respectfully.

•No hate speech, which are comments that attack a person based on their race, gender, religion, and other such factors.

•No trolling, in other words, posting inflammatory or off-topic messages, and doing it repetitively to distract community members and anger and upset them.

I am immediately putting several individuals on notice for violations of the above: Gordon Watson for racist remarks; Amanda for personal sexist attacks; Kerrie for trolling and personal attacks. One more breach, and they won’t be allowed to comment here.

I will moderate the comments, deleting those that violate the rules. At my discretion, the commenter will be banned from this blog.

If you notice someone violating the rules, and I missed it, please bring it to my attention via a comment or send me an email. Be aware that I may not necessarily agree with your assessment, but I commit to taking a look–I do want to avoid the “tattle-tale” thing from when we were kids.

For now, I’ll continue to allow people to post without revealing their real identities. But that may change if people aren’t able to abide by the policies. The comment policy is subject to change as I see fit.

Once again, it’s fine to disagree with me and with others commenting here. Just keep the disagreements respectful and non-personal.

One final note: The success of these new policies ultimately depend on those of you who value this forum as a place to learn about and discuss issues and events you wouldn’t learn about in the mainstream media, or even on the Internet. I can’t force people to be respectful to each other when they disagree. I can only be a facilitator. Up till now,  it’s always been a responsive community, or I wouldn’t have been doing what I’ve been doing for as long as I’ve been doing it. Thanks in advance.