A small step forward

[drwex]

I have much more thinky stuff going on. There are several interesting posts in others' journals I'm reading. I want to put this out now because it seems to be one of the things that is relatively clear to me. I plan to modify my party rules to include something along the lines below; please let me know your thoughts.

----------

If you come to my events, please follow the rules of the party.

Guests are participants with hosts in shaping rules that will encourage safer and more fun events. If you have needs for things at any of my events - especially things that would help you feel safer/more healthy - you are responsible for letting the hosts know your needs. I promise to listen respectfully and reply clearly on how we are handling your request.

----------

I'm trying very hard to speak in "I" sentences. sweetmmeblue is of course my co-host on almost all events. She has her own thoughts and ideas, but is choosing when and how to share them. When we do modify our party rules it will be a collaborative modification that we can both stand behind.

Comments

So far so good

[sweetmmeblue.livejournal.com]

"Guests are participants with hosts in shaping rules that will encourage safer and more fun events. If you have needs for things at any of my events - especially things that would help you feel safer/more healthy - you are responsible for letting the hosts know your needs. I promise to listen respectfully and reply clearly on how we are handling your request."

This covers a lot of what I feel about guests and our home. Thanks Motik for taking the front line on this.

[vvalkyri.livejournal.com]

Seems like a useful thing to have. Keeps out a whole lot of the "but they should have known" that I've been seeing, which I assume is part of why if is there. Plus encourages people to let you know how they are feeling rather than be silent about something you may be willing to address had you only known.

[drwex]

Yeah, people continue to be surprised I don't read FB. Sometimes it's hard for someone to realize that something huge and all-consuming in their lives can be unknown to others.

[weegoddess.livejournal.com]

FWIW, I stay away from FB too. No regrets there.

(note that I didn't 'like' your comment above. It would have been in poor taste)

[mizarchivist]

That is a very good parameter.

[drwex]

Thanks. I'd really like to forge a more collaborative process toward safer events/safer communities but that seems like such a HUGE undertaking I can only contemplate baby steps.

[aelf.livejournal.com]

I don't deal well with being put on the spot. I like your rule, and I would be tempted to adopt it for myself, but I would include something like "at least 1 day before the party if at all possible" in it.

You've probably already considered that, but I thought I'd share it in case it was beneficial for others who like time to deliberate about things, even things their friends or family might think should be immediately obvious.

[drwex]

Thank you for sharing that thought. I will consider it.

I did not include a timeline in this draft because I'm hesitant to set preconditions for when people in need speak up. It's already a risk for some people to speak at all. Of course the farther in advance we know of someone's needs the better able we will be to shape a good reply, but I think people know that?

[aelf.livejournal.com]

I don't know. I've been reading some of this from afar, and a number of people seem to expect that everyone should be able to make good decisions on the spot. I know I'm not that person, and I know in the past I've offended people by not "making the right decision" immediately. It doesn't seem to matter if I make the right decision after a couple hours of deliberating, but that somehow by needing that thinking time, I'm obviously not with them, or something.

I don't know if that came into play here at all, but it does seem like there was an immediacy in just about everyone's situation & my own bias suspects that may have played a part.

I understand your generosity of not wanting to say when someone must speak up. You may be better at making spur-of-the-moment decisions than I am. I confess I would feel very up-against-the-wall and second guess myself & not want to commit myself even if there was an obvious right answer if someone needed it immediately (I am not the person to take to order food from any place with a "hurry up" atmosphere and a menu >3 items, even if all-but-one contain items I won't eat. I need time to think).

[vvalkyri.livejournal.com]

I love that you say that even if all but one has items you won't eat. Someone once took me to a sandwich shop with 500 items on the menu expressly to torture me.

Drwex re this thread, the word "ideally" is a marvelous one. Doesn't mean on the spot is verboten but encourages earlier.

[vvalkyri.livejournal.com]

My personal policy is to try not to assume people know things, even things that seem as obvious as "the hosts can better address needs and concerns the more lead time they have to do so."

(I also encourage other people to not assume I know things - it was sickening to learn years later that several people assumed I knew the hospital that so screwed my mom over was considered sucktastic, and so said nothing to me.)

[hissilliness.livejournal.com]

Doesn't a rule requesting that people follow the rules run the risk of becoming turtles all the way down?

[drwex]

That's true. I was (am) trying to find a non-insulting/non-abrupt formulation of the "my house, my rules" principle that I articulated earlier.

[weegoddess.livejournal.com]

These sound good to me so far; I'm unlikely to ever host large parties, but if I did, this would be a good place to start.

[sariel-t.livejournal.com]

This.