Sign in or 
Location: Some History
Discussion: The story so far, Part 1
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this
ryking |
The story so far, Part 1
May 3 2009, 3:37 AM EDT
| Post edited: May 3 2009, 3:46 AM EDT
About 3 weeks ago, shoq sent me a DM asking me to look over his proposal for a new tag called p4p, designed to replace p2 as an umbrella tag for progressives of all political stripes on Twitter.Shoq's argument was that there are right-wing and centrist "progressives" on Twitter who would like to be seen as favoring progress, but don't want to be associated with the left-wing term "progressive" or with the p2 tag. I countered, via DMs, that "progress" has various definitions but is associated with left-wingers, not right-wingers or centrists, so his p4p tag was too wide. I also argued that p2 was already in use and growing in popularity, and was also one character shorter than his p4p -- a plus. I apologized for being negative, and shoq stated that "Thoughtful remarks aren't negative. They just are. Most anything good has to respond to criticism and doubt." I refrained from stating outright that his idea wasn't a good one. A few days later, he sent me another DM: "#p4p has the blessing of the Pope of #p2, Jon Pincus (@jdp23). He's workg [sic] on a balcony statement, but already tweeted #p4p." This was a vague statement, and one that I felt was misleading. Shoq also left out any mention the other founder of p2, Tracy Viselli (@MyrnaTheMinx). Do you find this valuable? |
|
ryking |
1. The story so far, Part 2
May 3 2009, 4:00 AM EDT
| Post edited: May 3 2009, 4:39 AM EDT
As I still thought that this was a bad idea and I was wondering who else Shoq had been contacting, I decided to publicly respond to his latest DM, and make a public case for p2. Shoq deeply resented these moves, and our discussion grew tense before I decided to let the matter drop, having said my piece.Minutes later Karoli, of whom I'd never heard, starts arguing in favor of Shoq's case in @ messages to me. I told Karoli that I had no interest in discussing the matter further with people I know, let alone a stranger and, bluntly, told her to "buzz off." Shortly after that, various people send me DMs expressing annoyance at receiving sales pitches from Shoq. Another few days go by. Shoq sends a public tweet stating that Jon Pincus had created a public discussion thread here at Wetpaint for people to weigh-in on p2 vs. p4p. I register with the site and restate my case ( "25. p2 vs. p4p" here: http://is.gd/wjp8). For my trouble, I am subjected to a vicious and personal tirade from Shoq ("34. p2 fails for many reasons, including technically" on the same page ) and I reply in kind. Shoq swears up and down that p2 cannot work as a hash tag for his newly-stated goal of having p2 represent progressives at every social network. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Mickey_X |
2. RE: The story so far, Part 2
May 3 2009, 4:11 AM EDT
imho any discussion about the use of #p2 exclusively should be over. It's done. #p4p is of no consequence to me. #p2 has been logically agreed upon, and that is where it should stand.
1
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
ryking |
3. RE: The story so far, Part 3
May 3 2009, 4:23 AM EDT
| Post edited: May 3 2009, 4:26 AM EDT
Shoq then spends all day Wednesday and most of Thursday personally attacking me, making false accusations about my political views, and generally smearing me. He then does a sudden about face and announces he's dropping his case for p4p and getting behind p2.Hours later, he and I are two among many participants in a downright pleasant tweetchat on Twitter, where a number of people discussed the definition and usage of the p2 tag.Shoq made some points I agreed with and retweeted. It was a great discussion, with the general consensus being that p2 is the "progressive bat-signal," as p2 co-founder Tracy Viselli put it. But then minutes after the chat concluded, Shoq created the pro- #p2 "@p2info" Twitter account to compete with Jon Pincus' "@p2pt0" Twitter account, without consulting anyone. Jon, ever gracious, adds it to the p2pt0 Wetpaint wiki anyway. Then a day-and-a-half later, on Saturday, Shoq announces that he's linked #p2 tweets from Twitter to an Identica account, again without consulting anyone. Do you find this valuable? |
|
ryking |
4. RE: The story so far, Part 2
May 3 2009, 4:24 AM EDT
| Post edited: May 3 2009, 4:27 AM EDT
People need to understand the backstory so they have some sense of why I take issue with Shoq's recent unilateral moves made regarding p2.
Do you find this valuable?
|
bphoon |
5. RE: The story so far, Part 2
May 3 2009, 4:29 AM EDT
(Sigh...I grow weary...) Thx for providing some of the back story, at least from your perspective. I say that since I learned long ago that when you hear two, or three, or four sides to a story, the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle; we all color our observations with our perceptions. I do appreciate being filled in on some of the details as I'm sure others will be.It seems the objective here--from my perspective now--is to enhance organization, streamline our ability to drive policy and, ultimately, get certain candidates into office. Unless I'm off base somehow, this is what all the efforts here boil down to. I think, at least from what i can gather, there is consensus on that. We seem to be getting bogged down in how best to go about it. Again, from my perspective, I see personal agendas as the primary obstacle. I'm not naming names but it appears several folks who are deeply involved here have agenda items that aren't necessarily being shared with the community at large. They seem to be getting in the way of the community being able to move forward in any cohesive manner. As someone who is accustomed to hitting the ground running, this is frustrating to me. There are a lot of really smart people here with a lot of great ideas and a lot to offer all the way around the table. It seems to me a waste of time (which comes at a premium for me) to indulge in promoting unsaid agendas (and I'm not pointing specifically or exclusively at you, ryking) when we should be seeking common ground and finding a way to move forward. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
ryking |
6. RE: The story so far, Part 4
May 3 2009, 4:37 AM EDT
On Saturday evening, I asked that Shoq refrain from taking actions that affect #p2 unless he first consults the #p2 community. This was hardly an unreasonable request, but it was met with Shoq's characteristic hostility and mirrored by a few people who were completely unaware of Shoq's earlier behavior. It appears to me -- and others -- that Shoq is seeking to wrest credit for and control of #p2 from the community by setting himself up as it's de facto keeper. Or maybe he counted on public opposition that would turn people off from using the tag so that he could again make the case for his p4p tag. Only Shoq knows.The issue here is this: If #p2 is for everyone, what right does Shoq have to make decisions that affect how and where it's used without consulting the #p2 community? Do you find this valuable? |
savagemike |
7. RE: The story so far, Part 4
May 3 2009, 5:00 AM EDT
I don't know guys. I'm new here, so I don't want to step on any feet or anything... And I can understand the different points of view... That being said, there is going to be disagreement in any movement. What is important is to not focus on differences here, but find common ground so that all involved can benefit. Allowing a disagreement to divide a movement such as this one would be a tragedy, as I can see this becoming very large indeed. We all witnessed the power of the internet in the 2008 election, & we should harness it's power for the midterms & beyond. Just my 2 cents. Glad to be on board! Do you find this valuable? |
JonPincus |
8. If you're *not* interested in the discussion ...
May 3 2009, 5:06 AM EDT
Mickey_X, I can certainly see why a lot of people aren't interested in following this any more. The best thing to do if you don't want to get notified for updates is to "unwatch" the thread on the wiki.I agree with ryking and others that it's important to discuss this in public so that we can get beyond this issue. Yes, it's unpleasant, and embarassing. however the alternative of *not* disucssing it is even worse. jon 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
ryking |
9. Some added info:
May 3 2009, 5:12 AM EDT
The following are statements from Twitter regarding Saturday night's controversy:davidbadash: Agreed. RT @jdp23: @shoq @karoli and when you make statements like "we are not associated with @p2pt0" it comes across as hostile #p2 (Source: http://is.gd/wjYP) davidbadash: Also hostile. And unnecessarily so. RT @p2info: "It's not a very hard concept." (Source: http://is.gd/wjZa) jdp23: @Karoli @ryking actually @Shoq set up @p2info without consulting anybody. i put up a description on the #p2 wiki at http://is.gd/wdyH (Source: http://is.gd/wjnY) jdp23: @Karoli @ryking i'm not sure what the role of @p2info is with respect to @p2pt0 and hope @Shoq discusses his thinking #p2 (Source: http://is.gd/wjo5) jdp23: @Cody_K i asked @Shoq to set up a discussion on the wiki. it didn't happen. sorry everybody else got dragged into it #p2 (Source: http://is.gd/wjTF) [Shoq is now openly trying to split the #p2 community:] p2pt0: RT @p2info: DISCLAIMER: This p2info name is no way associated with the p2pt0 effort. #p2 (Source: http://is.gd/wjUq) jdp23: i think the idea of @p2info is potentially very good but want to undersand details. will it be a bot? who will tweet from it? etc. #p2 (Source: http://is.gd/wjVd) jdp23: and we decided in the chat to focus our efforts, so i am not sure why @p2info has different brand attributes #p2 (Source: http://is.gd/wjVK) kindlejunkie: @savagemike No. #p2 usage is not being argued. @p2info just popped up and is trying to coopt the community consensus we agreed on on Thurs (Source: http://is.gd/wjW0) 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
bphoon |
10. RE: Some added info:
May 3 2009, 11:17 AM EDT
Yeah, I monitored (and was involved to a certain extent in) that shit storm until 0400 CST this morning. So, the pissing contest continues. I'm going to step back from this argument for now. All I want to do is help organize and coordinate in the interest of driving public policy and promoting progressive issues. I really couldn't give a shit less which vehicle we use or who 'controls' it. Just give me a brand to promote and a communications channel to use and I'll forge ahead, hopefully in concert with other like minded individuals. I've made that abundantly clear in these pages. I'm not aiming this at any specific person but I am aiming this at all who are centrally involved in the current controversy: Sometimes in the interest of moving on larger issues (we do have some of those to deal with these days) someone needs to step up, suck it up and start the process of compromise. I don't see anyone even close to doing that yet. Quite frankly, it's verging on the infantile. So, when y'all get done swinging your dicks at each other, let me know. I'll be around... Do you find this valuable? |
|
ryking |
11. RE: The story so far, Part 4
May 3 2009, 11:41 AM EDT
| Post edited: May 3 2009, 11:42 AM EDT
Here's the thing SavageMike: We HAD common ground.Over two dozen people who'd never heard of this wiki or shoq's initial efforts to scrap p2 came together at Twitter Thursday, April 30th and agreed that p2 is an umbrella tag for all progressive issues. Then we decided to work on how to promote p2 at another tweetchat. But shoq suddenly decided that he's going to promote p2 at various other places, in various ways, without bothering to run it by anyone, let alone waiting for the next chat at Twitter. That's a problem for people, especially since he may want to redefine what the tag means and recruit new people who know nothing about the recent history here. It'd be real easy to take that tag in the direction he wanted for his old p4p tag, elsewhere, then say, "Hey folks, THIS is what p2 means at Identica and Facebook and the other sites I've been using it at, so unless you use it the same way, you look really silly. Change your tune. Start playing MY song. Thanks." That's the issue here: Shoq doing whatever the hell he wants without any consideration for the group. Do you find this valuable? |
|
ryking |
12. RE: Some added info:
May 3 2009, 11:44 AM EDT
bphoon, I'm not swinging my dick at anybody. I'm saying: "#p2 is for everyone, so shoq has no right to decide for the rest of us how it should be promoted and where it should be promoted."
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
JonPincus |
13. How I see it (part 1)
May 3 2009, 1:04 PM EDT
We have some major disagreements, and. ryking, Shoq and I are all advocating our positions intently. Given our styles it certainly *looks* like dickswinging. So let me take a step back ...Shoq came to me on behalf of him and Karoli with a proposal to ally on a new #p4p tag. We talked several times on the phone, during the course of which he also suggest that as an alternative, we change the focus of #p2 away from diversity because many progressives will run away from a diversity-identified group. With my #p2 hat on, I told him that I didn't speak for the group, and that we should have a broad discussion, and proposed a Twitter chat. As an individual, I was strongly against the idea of changing #p2's focus. I originally supported the proposal for #p4p, primarily because I saw it as a chance to create a new tribe for "'progressives' who don't prioritize diversity". My concern based on my experiences and research findings is that otherwise, the overwhelming dominance of straight white male techie-elitists with big blogs and mailing lists in the rest of the "progressive" world will overwhelm the diversity interests. During the conversation, I became convinced that #p2 was already funcitoning as the overall progressive umbrella tribe, and so switched my vote to the new option that had emerged by acclamation: officially expand our charter. Shoq withdrew the #p4p proposal. As i see it, we ratified this in the tweeting: #p2 ("Progressives 2.0"), a resource for progressives using social media who prioritize diversity and empowerment, the "progressive batchannel", and an umbrella tag for information for progressives on Twitter. more soon ... Do you find this valuable? |
|
Smartalyx |
14. RE: How I see it (part 1)
May 3 2009, 1:36 PM EDT
Being relatively new to the 'party' I was surprised by the discussion around the whole #p2 tag as it unfolded Saturday. And I fear it will scare other progressives away as well. The good news is I hit the tail end and was able to see the most of the conversation before making an opinion/observation.Jon- I understand what you say above with switching your vote and then ratifying with a tweet, but going through some of the discussion it appears you didn't really feel that way. I now know you were one of the originators of the #p2 tag and why you started it. Honestly- I misunderstood the reason behind #p2, but felt that the Twitter meeting Thursday did move it to become an umbrella tag. And then Saturday. The rest is a general reply not just to you, Jon. The following are my observations: Saturday broke down at some point (through Twitter and the wiki) to "I am taking my basketball and leaving" I don't understand how Shoq setting up a p2info account to retweet the p2 tag was a bad thing. Personally I hadn't heard of the p2pt0 ID and judging by the logo I would assume most of what it tweets would not pertain to me. I feel it would be more specifically targeted to diversity and/or equal rights and therefore not become part of my stream. Would I check in occasionally? sure, but I would not follow. I have specific people I follow for those issues. So the p2info ID made sense for me to add. Look if you want the kind of control being advocated in this thread and others- i.e. you can't set up an ID without 'consensus' type stuff I would strongly suggest moving off Twitter. The best thing about Twitter is the freedom. How is Shoq promoting the tag a bad thing? Are you saying if we want to spread the word that #p2 is for progressives, I need to check with everyone involved? Umm, I can tell you right now, I won't. Do you find this valuable? |
|
JonPincus |
15. How I see it (part 2)
May 3 2009, 1:48 PM EDT
#p2's momentum for continued to grow when Alan Rosenblatt recommended that people start using #p2 instead of #topprog. The ongoing discussions on the wiki, however, continued to be acrimonious, especially in terms of Wetpaint. Shoq repeatedly attacked the technology. To me, his statements revealed a lack of understanding about social network-based organizing and a lack of respect for what JTI accomplished and what others can learn.Shoq's, Karoli's, and my interaction on this subject was filtered through an alpha-geek lens so it probably looks like dickswinging (in a gender-neutral way). The primary technical diffference comes down to the relative value we place on Wetpaint's inclusiveness vs. its technology limitations. A major strateging difference is that I see value from sharing a platform with the most successful post-election online organizing effort (Join the Impact), the group that most directly inspired #p2 (#fem2/fem2pt0), and Tracy's, Baratunde's and my success with Voter Suppression Wiki (where we created a racially and geographically diverse group). In short, Shoq's anti-Wetpaint campaign would have the effect of separating #p2 from the exact groups Tracy and I wanted to engage with. jon 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
JonPincus |
16. How I see it (part 3)
May 3 2009, 2:15 PM EDT
As Smartalyx said, things broke down on Saturday. I started to get complaints in DMs and emails that Shoq had unilaterally created "p2info" and was trying to hijack #p2. When i looked at the @p2info account it wasn't clear to me what it's purpose was. I was surprised that Shoq hadn't set up a page on the #p2 wiki describing this, and had instead created a new wiki -- this seemed to run counter to the "focus energies" view of Thursday's meetings. I made a couple of suggestions from a divesity perspective: include the rainbow and change the location (originally washtington DC). Shoq changed the location, but didn't to respond to the question about the rainbow. Later Karoli tweeted that "it's apparent that when it's used for broader issues it creates discomfort.". And yeah, it does with some people. That's the point. We're here, we're queer (and black and latino and lgbt and feminist ...), and we've organized on Twitter. And a lot of "progressives" aren't comfortable with that. Tough. A diverse community has built the most effective progressive hashtag on Twitter, prioritizing LGBTQs, feminists, women of color, and other dimensions of diversity -- WITHOUT being limited to diversity topics. Now the broader progressive movement wants to use this hashtag as well for additional purposes: a batsignal, an umbrella tag. Cool. As long as we continue to prioritize diversity. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
JonPincus |
17. To Smartalyx
May 3 2009, 2:28 PM EDT
> Jon- I understand what you say above with switching your vote and then ratifying with a tweet, but going through some of the discussion it appears you didn't really feel that way. I didn't, initially; I changed my mind during the course of the conversation. See comment #31 in http://is.gd/woO6 > Look if you want the kind of control being advocated in this thread and others- i.e. you can't set up an ID without 'consensus' type stuff I would strongly suggest moving off Twitter. The best thing about Twitter is the freedom. It's not a matter of control. Anybody can set up whatever account they want; anybody can post to the hashtag. And agreed, this is one of the best things about Twitter. That said, Before setting up a new account whose name gives the impression that it's speaking for the community, I don't think it's unreasonable to check with others ... Shoq didn't, and especially given the past mistrust, people unsurprisingly reacted badly. Setting up a tag with p2 in its name and then specifically saying "but we're not associated with p2pt0, the ones who created the #p2 hashtag" also comes across as not caring what the community thinks. > Are you saying if we want to spread the word that #p2 is for progressives, I need to check with everyone involved? Not at all! i think it's great to spread the word about #p2, and have done so myself. i would ask though that if somebody objects to the specific way you're discussing #p2 it'd be good to have a discussion with them. jon 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Smartalyx |
18. RE: To Smartalyx
May 3 2009, 2:56 PM EDT
Jon- Thank you for the response. I also think this conversation is heavily fragmented (the fact you point to the other thread demonstrates this), so there will be some continued fallout as the pieces begin to mesh together. Even I am still trying to get a real handle on it. But again I circle back to your previous statement before your reply to me (#16) in this thread.You end it with "As long as we continue to prioritize diversity" That is my concern. diversity as stated by you are the groups you mention by name- none of which I fall into. But looking at the April 30 thread it does appear that #p2 was already becoming, and then last Thursday it appeared to cement the fact, an umbrella tag- for all sort of progressive issues not just diversity or the groups you mention. In fact I started following the tag for that very reason- progressive thoughts not just diversity issues. To identify a priority does seem to go against that. I may be misunderstanding you, please clarify if that is the case? I have no problem with it, but I don't want to include green thoughts, freedom issues etc. if you feel that the #p2 needs to be rainbow and diversity focused/prioritized. It does appear that the Twitter folks have decided this already- but I am still curious. Frankly if the 'debate' continues there we will all lose. Thanks for the time and i hope you are taking this as intended- as a discussion, not any sort of attack. Sometimes in threads the civility intended can be missed. And please take this as intended- I am just trying to understand and respect the community around this. Do you find this valuable? |
myrnatheminx |
19. RE: To Smartalyx
May 3 2009, 3:37 PM EDT
Re: diversity. I think as long as #p2 facilitates diversity it's fine for it to be the bat channel tag. What I don't want to see happen, and I think I can safely speak for Jon here as well, is that it become a tag used to reify straight, white, male privilege on Twitter at the expense of more diverse interests. #p2's strength up to this point has been its adoption by women, minorities, and the LGBT community, and we are both committed to making sure that remains to be the case. #p2 is meant to signal action so I think its possible to think of it as performing two functions. 1. people can flag issues or items as of interest to progressives as a group. 2 and more importantly, issue hashtags and community hashtags receive the signal and act--retweeting to their communities, urging specific action off Twitter, etc.
4
out of
4 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
