[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference turris::womannotes-v1

Title:ARCHIVE-- Topics of Interest to Women, Volume 1 --ARCHIVE
Notice:V1 is closed. TURRIS::WOMANNOTES-V5 is open.
Moderator:REGENT::BROOMHEAD
Created:Thu Jan 30 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 30 1995
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:873
Total number of notes:22329

848.0. "POLICY QUESTION: FWO NOTES" by MOSAIC::TARBET () Mon May 16 1988 22:53

    Three-and-a-half months ago, we began experimental trial of a
    proposed policy that would allow women members of our community to
    enter notes requiring that responses be made only by other women.
    The only limitation would be that the succeeding note be reserved
    for general discussion of the same subject.  It was planned that
    this trial period would be followed by a formal vote of guidance
    from the community as to whether the policy should be made
    "permanent". 
    
    It is now time for that vote.
                                                                 
    For those members new to the file, a very brief history might be
    in order.
    
    Peggy Leedberg (we're pretty sure) was the first to start a topic
    that asked for responses from women only, though I cannot now find
    her note (Bonnie reckons it is 594, I thought it was earlier than
    that). As is typical of our community, most men honored her request
    out of courtesy even when they thoroughly disagreed with it. A few,
    though, considered that there was no reasonable basis for any such
    restriction and, to make their point,  promptly entered responses.
    This led to the moderators being asked to delete the offending
    entries and a considerable amount of argument about whether we have
    the ethical or legal right to enforce such a restriction (we appear
    to, btw).  There was even a proposal, which was then voted down,
    that we support an entire FWO file instead of FWO notestrings.  In
    any event, the issue has never gone away and Holly finally proposed
    this trial which, after seeing a very small number of FWO notes (3?
    4?) over the time, is now concluding. 
    
    
    The question to be decided is:        
    
    Should women be allowed to enter "FWO" notes as long as they are
    followed immediately by "FGD" (For General Discussion) notes on the
    same subject? 
    
    
    A "yes" vote means that the experimental conditions will become policy:
    the moderators will enforce FWO requests by women if the FWO string
    is immediately followed by a FGD string.
    
    A "no" note means that FWO requests regardless of topic will no
    longer be enforced by the moderators, and anyone can respond
    essentially anywhere.
                        
                         
                   
    The ballot box will be open (and the registration strings closed)
    from Monday morning 23rd May through Sunday night 29th May, and the
    proposal will be considered to have passed only if 66% or more of
    the total votes are "yes" votes.  Only "yes" or "no" votes will be
    counted toward the total; abstentions may be recorded for
    psychological effect, but will not themselves be counted for any
    purpose. 
    
    As in previous votes, please put your vote and your "registration
    number" (e.g., 2.197) as the title of your note. You can continue to
    add additional responses in argument, but only one response should
    carry your vote in the title.  Persons wishing to change their votes
    may do so by typing 
                   
                    MOD NOT /TIT="the new title"
                    
    MOD NOT /TIT="" will remove the title from the response, if you wish
    to re-think the question and record your vote later. 
    
    					in Sisterhood,
    					=maggie




T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
848.1If you won't be here...MOSAIC::TARBETTue May 17 1988 17:025
    For those members who will be away during the voting period, an
    "absentee ballot" may be lodged via mail (not phone) with any of
    the moderators.
    
    						=maggie
848.2YES (2.167)NEXUS::CONLONMon May 23 1988 12:1014
    	Definitely in favor of For Woman Only notes.  As moderators
    	have mentioned, we have more than ample evidence that FWO will
    	never amount to more than 1 or 2 percent of the total basenotes
    	in the conference, so we're talking about a very small group
    	of notes.  Also, every FWO would have an accompanying general
    	discussion, so there isn't a person in this corporation that
    	would be prevented from voicing an opinion about the subject
    	at hand.
    
    	Personally, I think it is interesting to see how discussions
    	develop among women who are talking to other women.  I don't
    	see how the presence of such discussions (in 1 or 2 percent
    	of the total basenotes) can possibly hurt or inconvenience
    	anyone else.)  My vote is yes.
848.3YES - 2.249SALEM::LUPACCHINOFrom All Walks of Life 6-5-88Mon May 23 1988 12:204
    
    I'll second Suzanne's comments.
    
    am
848.4YES (7.155)SEDOAS::KORMANTGIFMon May 23 1988 12:271
    
848.5NO (7.7)QUARK::LIONELWe all live in a yellow subroutineMon May 23 1988 12:333
    It's wrong and drives away large numbers of potential contributors.
    
    			Steve
848.6<YES> ;7.91 NEW ADDRESS FSTVAX.FSTVAX::ROYERFIDUS AMICUS..Mon May 23 1988 12:407
    
    
    I see no problem with seperatism in notes. Afterall they are not
    set no read.  Read the FWO and Respond in FGD..what is all the
    ruckus.  Still sounds little boyish to respond with a no vote!
    
    Dave
848.7Yes, 2.185KELVIN::WHARTONIs today a holiday?Mon May 23 1988 13:101
    
848.8yes 2.88OURVAX::JEFFRIESthe best is betterMon May 23 1988 13:141
    
848.9YES - 2.144MOSAIC::IANNUZZOCatherine T.Mon May 23 1988 13:230
848.10yes, 2.2073D::CHABOTCalifornia bornMon May 23 1988 13:256
    To be honest, I never would have imagined "yes" would be my vote
    when I started noting here a year ago.  Experience has shown that
    this notesfile _can_ be a viable place for women to communicate,
    and that some men will deliberately attempt to sabotage that.
    Given the promise and the threat, my vote can only be so for the
    best wishes to those this notesfile is really for: women at Digital.
848.11YES, 2.175CUBFAN::STHILAIREIt's a weird life, ya knowMon May 23 1988 13:341
    
848.12yes 2.1MOSAIC::TARBETMon May 23 1988 13:431
    
848.13Yes, 2.169DPDMAI::RESENDEPfollowing the yellow brick road...Mon May 23 1988 13:501
    
848.14yes 2.248COMET::EVANSMMon May 23 1988 13:521
    
848.15Yes 2.197SUPER::HENDRICKSThe only way out is throughMon May 23 1988 14:161
    
848.16yes --- 7.80SPMFG1::CHARBONNDgeneric personal nameMon May 23 1988 14:201
    
848.17Yes 2.146REGENT::BROOMHEADDon't panic -- yet.Mon May 23 1988 14:204
    If you promise to be forgiving if I forget to put in the FGD entry,
    should I ever enter a FWO note.
    
    							Ann B.
848.18Yes 7.11MOIRA::FAIMANOntology Recapitulates PhilologyMon May 23 1988 14:241
    
848.19Yes 2.242/2.89IAMOK::GERRYGo Ahead, make me PURRRR...Mon May 23 1988 14:301
    
848.20YES - 7.147PIECES::WILSONPIn search of the elusive NOTESMon May 23 1988 14:411
    
848.21Yes - 2.53 + 2.226VALKYR::RUSTMon May 23 1988 15:1911
    I really dislike this whole issue, as I dislike anything that smacks of
    protectionism. Ideally, people will discuss what they want to discuss,
    and accept or ignore replies as they choose. If someone requests
    certain restrictions on replies, others should be considerate; they can
    always start their own topic if they don't like the restrictions. 
    
    However, it's obvious that etiquette alone isn't sufficient to restrain
    some people. Therefore I will vote for FWO notes - but if I respond to
    any I plan to use the FGD topic. 

    -b
848.22Yes 7.152COLORS::SARGENTMon May 23 1988 15:202
    
    
848.23yes -- 7.66MYCRFT::PARODIJohn H. ParodiMon May 23 1988 15:350
848.24yes (7.92)WEA::PURMALHefelumps and wooslesMon May 23 1988 15:430
848.25yes -- 2.42MEWVAX::AUGUSTINEPurple power!Mon May 23 1988 15:451
    
848.27Another Yes (2.220)CHEFS::GOUGHMon May 23 1988 16:143
    Yes.  I think it's a good idea.
    
    Helen.
848.28yes, 2.240TALLIS::ROBBINSMon May 23 1988 16:183
    I think it's important to be able to discuss certain issues
    just with other people who have been through the same thing.
    
848.29Yes 2.136PNEUMA::SULLIVANSinging for our livesMon May 23 1988 16:224
    
    
    
    
848.30yes 2.111FRAGLE::TATISTCHEFFLee TMon May 23 1988 16:251
    
848.31No 7.23BOLT::MINOWJe suis marxiste, tendance GrouchoMon May 23 1988 16:316
Separate but equal is not equal, nor is it proper here or in any corresponding
part of Digital.

Martin Minow
    

848.32yes - 2.35GARNET::SULLIVANKaren - 225-4096Mon May 23 1988 16:412
	There are no unequivocal rights and wrongs.  We compromise to
	try and make the world better for all.
848.33yes 2.124VINO::EVANSNever tip the whipperMon May 23 1988 16:431
    
848.34Yes -- 2.32OKEY::GIUNTAMon May 23 1988 16:481
    
848.35No. 7.69 I think??????SALEM::REKI want a world that needs no heros!!!!!!!!!!Mon May 23 1988 16:5219
      Pretty soon we have all sorts of stuff like:
    Only single women who have never been married
    Only divirce males with 2.5 kids 
    Etc get the picture.......
    
      But, the males in here should be considerate of some of the subject
    matter and think first. I mean I can not know how it feels to have
    a life inside of me growing etc. I, for one, do not put in alot
    of relies because I'd rather read and learn. When I have a comment
    or a question I reply. I don't want to start reading every base
    note to see if I'm allowed to reply or not. I'd rather leave this
    conference that be "regulated". I left human_relations and memnotes
    because those two were getting to be too regulated (network police).
    I did not agree with the policies that were set in them so I left.
    My choice to leave. Thats what makes the whole notesfile network
    special, you don't have to write or reply to enjoy. And if you don't
    like what is going on then just quit reading.....
    
                 REK
848.36Yes (2.227)LIONEL::SAISIMon May 23 1988 17:061
    
848.37YES...(2.199/2.243)RUAUU::GARDNERMon May 23 1988 17:300
848.38Yes -- 2.137CADSE::FOXDon't assume ANYTHINGMon May 23 1988 17:576

WOMANSPACE:

	A breath of fresh air in an otherwise constricted 
environment.
848.39Yes, 2.217SHALE::HUXTABLEThe Wind from a Burning WomanMon May 23 1988 18:390
848.40Yes, 7.96ANGORA::BUSHEELiving on Blues PowerMon May 23 1988 18:551
    
848.41YES (2.54)BUFFER::LEEDBERGAn Ancient Multi-hued DragonMon May 23 1988 19:4210
    
    
    I will be nice about this.
    
    _peggy
    
    		(-)
    		 |
    			FWO followed by FGD is more than we got.
    
848.42Yes - 7.111OPHION::KARLTONPhil Karlton, Western Software LabMon May 23 1988 20:061
    
848.44YES - 2.127LEZAH::BOBBITTI sing the body electricMon May 23 1988 20:241
848.45Yes -- 2.30WORDS::KRISTYContents may be habit forming!Mon May 23 1988 20:521
    
848.46I guess so...if it pleases you. (yes, 7.99)RANCHO::HOLTRobert A. HoltMon May 23 1988 20:541
    
848.47no; 2.215SCOTCH::CHELSEAMostly harmless.Mon May 23 1988 21:0719
    If you're going to go against the consensus, you'd better explain
    yourself ....
    
    On the one hand, if a noter requests that only women respond, it's
    only polite to honor that request.  On the other hand, there's nothing
    to stop men from starting a new note and commenting there.  So the
    question becomes whether the men's responses should be gathered in
    a separate place or not.
    
    Pro-separatist position:  What's the big deal?  You can still comment,
    just not in this particular note.
    
    Anti-separatist position:  What's the big deal?  You can ignore
    my note regardless of whether it's separate or intermingled.
    
    So it comes down to whether courtesy should be enforced.  I finally
    decided that, as far as I'm concerned, people have the right to
    act like jerks (and to suffer the consequences of their decision).
               
848.48yes (7.151)AITG::INSINGAAron K. InsingaMon May 23 1988 21:5212
But if I leave my words in the wrong place, please move them gently to the
right place (or mail them back so I can rereply easily), ok?

I don't see what the major difficulty is over replying in one string rather
than another, especially since it has been invoked so very infrequently.
Inconvenient, but infrequent, so it isn't a major hassle.  Better to have
more notes to read, and to reply to a few of them in another string, than
to never read those notes at all.  It lets everyone have their way.  (And
if every topic gets split into FWO & FGD, well, what to do will provide
another big debate, to be sure!  But I don't think it'll happen.)

					- Aron
848.49yes; 7.125MOSAIC::TARBETMon May 23 1988 22:1610
From:	SCRUFF::CONLIFFE     "XCON/XSEL: Parts is parts..." 18-MAY-1988 13:16
To:	MOSAIC::TARBET,CONLIFFE    
Subj:	Absentee Ballot (-wn- vote)

I'm going to be away for the week of the vote, but would like to record
my opinion that I am in favor of the FWO notes. I'm not convinced that 
the FGD parallel note string is required.

				Nigel
				(7.125)
848.50yes; 2.237MOSAIC::TARBETMon May 23 1988 22:178
From:	MOSAIC::LARUE        "IT'S TIME TO FORGE AHEAD" 18-MAY-1988 13:26
To:	VIKING::TARBET
Subj:	absentee ballot

re: fwo notesfiles since I will be out of town:


vote    YES
848.51yes; 2.184MOSAIC::TARBETMon May 23 1988 22:1810
From:	BIMMRO::WARREN       20-MAY-1988 14:56
To:	MOSAIC::TARBET
Subj:	RE: Vote

Thanks.  I vote YES to continue the option of FWO notes, as long as they
are followed by FGD notes.

"See" you next week!

-Tracy
848.53Yes 7.153SKYLRK::OLSONDem bones gonna rise againTue May 24 1988 01:492
    
    DougO
848.54abstain; courteously 7.whateveritwasDECWET::JWHITErule #1Tue May 24 1988 06:133
    
    (I am, however, in favor of the proposal.)
    
848.55yes, 2.82MPGS::TOLLESTue May 24 1988 11:441
    
848.56yes - 2.241AITG::LTSMITHLeslieTue May 24 1988 11:581
848.57yes 2.235SMEGIT::WHITEPat WhiteTue May 24 1988 13:461
    
848.58Yes 2.244AQUA::WALKERTue May 24 1988 14:151
    I encourage the creation of ways for women to communicate.
848.59FWO YES ! 7.154 ~--e--~AERIE::THOMPSONSteven Dana DTN 247-2191Tue May 24 1988 14:3211
	Based on "valuing differences" we must cease this simplistic
    approach that all contributions are equally relevant in all topics.

	When people attempt to exchange ideas and opinions sometimes
    it isn't enough just to be sympathetic to women and their problems
    but indeed to have actual first-hand experience.  When asked for
    specific information, nobody wants to hear a male telling about
    his wife's or his SO's experiences.

   ~--e--~  Eagles_Suggest_Male_Inputs_Aren't_Always_Welcome_or_Relevant_!
            ...Better_Men_Will_Keep_Silent_When_Women_Ask_2_B_Heard_Here_!
848.61Yes -- 7.156HANDY::MALLETTSituation hopeless but not seriousTue May 24 1988 14:5310
    In 1954 the Supreme Court ruled that separate was not equal in
    the case of racially segregated schools.  However, they did not
    say that separate *could* not be equal - just wasn't in the case
    at hand.  To me, FWO's present a case where separate is equal and
    if I feel bad about anything it's that they should become a kind
    of political battleground. . .honoring a FWO request within the
    context of this open conference is, to me, a simple act of courtesy.
    
    S.
    
848.62A few reservations but YES -- 2.224OKYAH::SCOTTBeware the fury of a patient noterTue May 24 1988 15:011
848.63Yes; 7.33VINO::MCARLETONReality; what a concept!Tue May 24 1988 15:081
    					MJC O->
848.65No. 7.5521006::WILLIAMSBut words are things ...Tue May 24 1988 18:161
    	See my response to 850.
848.66Yes -sunny- 2.23ACOMA::JBADERTue May 24 1988 19:081
    
848.67YES 2.229VOLGA::S_LECLAIRWed May 25 1988 11:181
    
848.68yes 2.180CTCADM::TURAJWed May 25 1988 13:543
    
    
    
848.69yes (2.201)TLE::RANDALLI feel a novel coming onWed May 25 1988 13:554
    I think it's been a sensible way to deal with a difficult,
    complicated situation.
    
    --bonnie
848.70YES: 2.214SCOMAN::FOSTERWed May 25 1988 17:0119
    I kinda think its a sad state, and in some cases wish that this
    didn't exclude the sensitive men who share relevant experiences
    of SO's. But its true that "hidden agendas" often lead the notes
    off on tangents. And in the few cases where the author really needs
    the issues to addressed, I think this is the best way.
    
    But the women of the conference should EQUALLY recognize: just being
    a woman doesn't mean that your contribution is more valid if you
    have no more experience than the average male. Let's all recognize
    that the few cases of FWO need to be handled in as constructive
    a manner as possible. And "FWO/FGD" is only a beginning. 
    
    Remember: FGD ain't just for men!!!
              
    
    PS - Special thanks to the moderators who have worked hard to keep
    several notes from digressing on wild tangents. I hope this makes
    it a bit easier.
                    
848.712.71 (Yes)TSG::DOUGHERTYWed May 25 1988 17:334
    Yes.
    
    - Mary
    
848.72Yes - 7.149AQUA::WAGMANQQSVWed May 25 1988 22:3030
A few of the replies to this note have chosen to comment at length, and I think
that the comments have been rather thought provoking.  As some of the "No"
voters have commented, it is useful to encourage a wide range of people to
participate in these conferences.  Some may feel nervous about having notes
which are restricted from men on that basis.

Ordinarily I will be among the first to oppose attempts to limit expression.
But there are two additional factors here:

   1.	In reality no one's expression will be cut off, since men will
	be able to reply to FWO notes in FGD notes.  True, it will make
	it easier to ignore their replies.  But I think no one has a
	right to demand that his or her note be read!

   2.	Much of the basis for WOMMENNOTES existence seems to revolve
	around women feeling secure in a business world which has been
	oriented towards men for many years.  I think it's right to
	encourage this security.  If having notes which (at least nom-
	inally) exclude me helps women to deal with the realities of
	life at Digital and thus become more effective contributors,
	I think a useful purpose will have been served.

I have been a read mostly noter in this conference up to now, and I rather
expect to continue in that mold.  I don't feel excluded because of the
existence of FWO notes.  So on balance, I think we should do it.

Remember, if they turn out to be a problem later on, we can always decide
to do away with them later.

					--Q (Dick Wagman)
848.73Overjoyed Moderator ResponseMOSAIC::TARBETThu May 26 1988 00:2615
848.74yes--2.223FSTVAX::STRATTONRoberta Davidson-StrattonFri May 27 1988 03:101
    
848.75Yes 2.141DECSIM::HALLFri May 27 1988 15:341
    
848.76Yes, 2.34VAXRT::CANNOYDown the river of Night's dreamingFri May 27 1988 15:357
    Reluctantly and grudgingly, I guess I have to vote yes for the sake
    of being able to enjoy this file. I was about to quit reading it,
    because it was very negatively affecting my life, when the experiment
    wass instituted. So for the sake of peace and quiet, I'll vote yes.
    But why does that feel like losing?
    
    Tamzen
848.77no. 7.22TFH::MARSHALLhunting the snarkFri May 27 1988 16:246
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /
    
848.78YES 2.6DAIKON::MASONThe law of KARMA hasn't been repealedFri May 27 1988 16:391
    
848.79OFFICIAL RESULTSMOSAIC::TARBETFri Jun 03 1988 18:2818
    Of 71 votes cast, 24 were from men (34%) and 47 from women (66%)
    
    21% of the men (5) and 2% of the women (1) voted against the policy,
    for a total of 8% AGAINST.
    
    79% of the men (19) and 98% of the women (46) voted in favor of
    the policy for a total of 92% FOR. 
                             
    A clear majority being in favor, the trial FWO policy is made permanent
    and will continue to be enforced. 
    
    Any woman member of the community may request that responses within
    a particular string be made only by women.  To do that, she must
    flag that string with "FWO" in the basenote title and start a parallel
    discussion, flagged "FGD" immediately following. 
    
    						in Sisterhood,
    						=maggie