Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

3

Freux wrote

What about temporary leadership/authority, let's say a film director, it's generally their vision that is followed. Would that make it a hierarchy or just a group of people freely associating under the vision of the director?

From what you wrote, I believe you wouldn't call it a hierarchy because it's freely associating but then what do you call the structure itself?

4

ziq wrote

The director needn't be any more of an authority than anyone else working on a film.

Ideally it would be an equal collaboration between various artists and technicians.

The idea of a director enforcing their 'vision' on everyone else involved in the production doesn't need to be taken for granted.

The others should have a voice regarding their part in the process and anyone that refuses them that voice is an authoritarian.

Directing a scene is one task among many. A director has a role to play. How the role is played isn't written in stone.

Who says there even needs to be one director? Some directors are great at giving direction to actors while others are better with the technical or visual aspects.

Why not 3 directors? 6 directors? Maybe even abandon the 'director' role altogether and try to replace it with something more equitable and collaborative.

There's no reason a film can't be created with a horizontal process.

But film is already a big collaboration between hundreds of people. If someone really wanted their singular vision to be the only thing that ended up on the screen, they'd have to be the only person involved in the production. Write it, shoot it, score it, edit it themselves and act out all the parts.

2

Freux wrote

You just open my eye to the actual question "is it NEEDED?" which as you pointed out, it isn't. You can work in a hierarchical structure but it isn't needed.

Others would use the term "horizontal hierarchy", which if it's horizontal it isn't a hierarchy, what's your opinion on that term?

And to go back on raddle, would you say it's an horizontal process even though some user as more power than others. Since we freely associate and anyone with power can lose it. Or maybe admins don't have the power but have the tool and the community as a whole decide on what can the admin do.

And since this focus thread focus more on parenting, all i can say is that I agree that there is no need for that.

2

ziq wrote (edited )

Raddle is a website that, like all websites, exists on a vertical system that operates along the same lines as private property.

As long as one person is required to 'own' the domain and pay for server usage, and be held accountable legally for said ownership; it's not able to be truly horizontal.

But since we're anarchists, we still go out of our way to make raddle as flat and collaborative as technically possible; implementing moderation transparency, foss sourcecode, admin & mod accountability, elections, and even a form of direct democracy - which goes against my best instincts because it allows anonymous people to vote against anarchy.

But in the end it's still a website operating on a vertical platform. It's not attempting to be some kind of model communist society and it shouldn't be expected to function as anything other than a modern zine or infoshop.

Like any zine that exists under capitalism; the publisher has to pay for licensing and rent and distribution and so on.

People that expect raddle to be some kind of utopian commune or a living mural to their ideology are misguided. It's just a discussion forum.

There's no real authority here. Sure there's a publisher, editors, writers and readers. But everyone can come and go as they please or make their own postmill instance.

As the publisher, I have no actual authority over anyone here. I'm not your boss or your ruler.

Websites are certainly hierarchies because they are owned by people who can pull the plug if they decide to, but it's not a particularly oppressive hierarchy since you're not forced to read the site the way you're forced to work or go to school.

Others would use the term "horizontal hierarchy", which if it's horizontal it isn't a hierarchy, what's your opinion on that term?

I think it's entirely useless, the same way a cherry pie with no cherries in it is.

3

Freux wrote

Just to be sure, I wasn't trying to diss on raddle. I just felt like it could be seen a justified hierarchy but as you pointed out it's only justified because the system of it all is based into a hierarchy. Basically the only justified hierarchy is when you work inside a society that isn't anarchistic.

3

ziq wrote (edited )

The hierarchy of me being able to pull the plug on the site isn't justified at all. But we exist under a capitalist system and the only anarchist way to deal with that is to create tools that can mirror all of raddle's content to other servers, or otherwise decentralize the content. Then hope the owners of those servers don't pull the plug.

Right now a few trusted people have access to the database backups, so they could restore the site in the event of my death if they chose to.

4

Freux wrote

Now I get it ! Because you are stuck with some form of hierarchy doesn't make it justified.

2

noordinaryspider wrote

Bingo.

I hope some nonexistant kid didn't have to give up his dad for you to be able to understand that but this is my point.

I'm not kissing up to ziq, I'm acknowledging his greater investment in this community than my own. His knowledge of anarchism is far greater than my own but it came at the cost of other things he could have been doing instead.

If my own perfect little angel wants to show ziq his flutterbye collection and talk about My Little Pony, he could KILL ziq jr.

If ziq has a problem with the way I'm raising my kid I don't really care unless it affects my kid's safety or ziq's safety.

If ziq has a problem with how I'm talking to new Raddlers, I'm going to shush the little guy or let him play another round of Hedge Wars instead of getting his multiplication memorizing workbook page done on time because I want to hear how I'm fucking up and learn how to do better RIGHT NOW instead of getting banned.

But I could still post on Reddit Mommywebz boards under a different username until the anti-natural childbirth and anti-breastfeeding and anti-homeschoolers recognize me AGAIN by some stupid jokes and mixed metaphors that aren't even all that funny and I'm off to the races again. Here we go round the mulberry bush gathering nuts in May.

2

Freux wrote

I don't think ziq has any problem with how you are raising your kids. Nobody is going to ban you :)

1

noordinaryspider wrote (edited )

And I don't have any problem with how ziq is running Raddle so I'm not going to get bored and go away.

The metaphor sucks. It feels so condescending to keep saying why it works so well while simultaneously laughing at how bad it sucks.

Backstory is that I was momming ziq earlier on Matrix right after telling them I had to take a sabbatical or I was going to mom them.

0

ziq wrote

I'm not actually running anything here, I'm not an admin.

What metaphor do you mean? What works well?

1

noordinaryspider wrote (edited )

Raddle isn't a child.

The metaphor works best for me when I'm laughing at myself and laughing with you while we are publicly talking about how it doesn't work.

I think that's nature's way of telling me to close my laptop and tickle annoy #OccupyBaby or something.

ttyl

2

PerfectSociety wrote

What about temporary leadership/authority,

A couple things:

leadership/authority

The slash doesn't belong there. Leadership and Authority aren't the same things. Our Pre-Neolithic Immediate-Return Hunter-Gatherers had leaders, but did not have authority/hierarchy.

let's say a film director, it's generally their vision that is followed. Would that make it a hierarchy or just a group of people freely associating under the vision of the director?

Depends on whether others who partake in making the film have chosen (outside of a hierarchical context) to go with the director's vision or not.

From what you wrote, I believe you wouldn't call it a hierarchy because it's freely associating but then what do you call the structure itself?

A free association.

1

Freux wrote

Thanks for your input. I was using the slash as a "or" but I get your point.

2

ergdj5 wrote

What about temporary leadership/authority, let's say a film director

Just a minor point there- some of the best scenes in movies are done by the actors outside of any script. This is another case of 'listen to the authority on the subject, but they are not an authority over you', e.g. listen to the architect but he isn't one to order you.

4

Freux wrote (edited )

True but isn't still the director that keep the scene in? What I'm trying to say isn't that people aren't free to improvise and change stuff but that the director has the last say on what's in and out which keep a form of structure. So my question is more about is this structure a hierarchy or not since it is free association (in this example).

Now that I'm thinking about it, wouldn't raddle be hierarchical, which again is free association so maybe the term hierarchy is wrong. And if it's not a hierarcy because we voluntary associate, then what is it called?