On April 29th, 2010, a message was sent via PM to many members of the Acorn Cafe. It was a message of warning, of protest, of resistance - and most importantly, a declaration of one person's love for their community and of unyielding refusal to accept the degradation of that community. Preserved here for all to read is a transcript of its original text:
"I'm writing on a little piece of paper,
I'm hoping someday you might find.
Well, I'll hide it behind something
they won't look behind...
I'm still inside here,
A little bit comes bleeding through.
I wish this could have been any other way,
but I just don't know...
I don't know...
What else I can do!"
- NiN, "Every Day is Exactly the Same"
Hello, fellow Rangerphiles. This is my little piece of paper, upon which I shall write what must be written.
Very likely, you won't know who I am. It doesn't matter. Aside from my not being a regular poster anyway, who I am is rather unimportant. What matters is my message to the Cafe's community, and I'm going to get right to delivering it.
My message is this: Something, an ongoing issue, alarms me. Aspects of our past are being hidden from us, and aspects of our present pushed away as if they were a dirty little secret. I've felt this way abstractly for a long time now, but only realized this in a concrete, tangible way, the kind of way that makes you flush with anger and feel faintly sick in the depths of your stomach, fairly recently, when I saw an exchange of posts, in which a more elder member of the community was informing a relatively new Rangerphile about the past conflicts in the community. I watched as these posts, like the victims of some mafia hit, were made to "disappear" at the hands of the moderators - no explanation, no revealing to us why this should be so, only silence and darkness. Maybe I was just naive not to want to believe that this took place here. I'd heard of this before, in rumors, but I've lurked these boards for a long, long time and I'd never by chance seen it with my own eyes. Maybe I just hadn't been looking hard enough, because I was selfish until now and it wasn't my own voice in peril. Only logical, perhaps, since in recent years, I didn't speak much anyhow. I used to post, years ago, but I fell out of interest in actively participating and sharing with the community after untenetable rules hatefully discriminating against certain people were put in place. Nonetheless, I've kept reading the boards, because people I appreciate and respect are here, hoping that some day those responsible would come to their senses, and we would restore the Cafe to what it once was.
I held out that hope for so long... But you've shattered it, fair community, now that I've seen what I've seen what's become for some time the norm. I feel that our leadership has betrayed our spirit and failed us, and for years we haven't done anything about it. Maybe people just don't see the problem, faithful as they are to our leaders, gazing at them through rose-colored lenses that blind us to dimmer colors. Maybe it's my fault, I didn't count on human weakness. I trusted that the people here are intrinsically good people, that self-correction would reign in the course of time, that the leadership would willingly remain accountable to the people, so that fairness and transparency in the administrative process would ensure that the potential for abuse would be held in check. I'd hoped that the parts of rule #3 that have created so many problems would be repealed and we would all truly be one again, as we were before the schism. When I saw these posts vanish, I realized, jarringly, disappointingly, that I was wrong.
I realized that things are only getting worse, or at least no better.
I realized that it's high time that this must end. I realized that I must take personal responsibility, I can no longer pretend, I can no longer deny the call from deep within. It may be my last and only stand I can make for this community before those in power forcibly banish me, but I have to try, because I would rather die (so to speak) on my feet sounding my voice instead of kneeling in silent compliance to something I cannot conscienably live with.
Therefore, I'm here, today, to issue a call to arms, one that's been a long time coming.
These arms I ask you to bear up are not things of physical violence or bloodshed. It's much more constructive than that, but also perhaps even more challenging. I ask you to wield words, and to send forth your voice.
I ask for this because history shows that it is, under certain circumstances, necessary. It is, in fact, sometimes the only right thing to do. For equality and freedoms to flourish, tyranny and the abuse of power must be protested, fought, and ultimately defeated. These are hard battles, not swiftly won. They must work in many ways against the grain - against institutional inertia, against prejudices, against the doctrines of times past, even against the common apathy and indifference making it a challenge to create the support necessary to fight that tyranny. No doubt even many of you yourselves who hear this message will simply ignore it, declaring it to be "too much trouble over nothing" or "not my problem" or perhaps even little more than a disinterested "meh". Maybe you'll even hate me for challenging the lines you've become comfortable towing. But I think I still have to try. Martin Luther knew this, and hundreds of years later, another man sharing the name, Martin Luther King Jr., knew these difficulties, but nonetheless they persevered. They acted on this simple principle, that the right thing to do is the right thing to do, and they changed the course of history with their challenges, gauntlets that they threw down, when they had finally had enough, in defiance of institutions that had grown (or always were) out of control, corrupt, and unjust. Just as importantly to me, and the example so unique to us in specific, to take up the fight against all odds is what the Rangers themselves would have done, to right the wrongs, to seek tirelessly to win out in the struggle with ourselves and with hostile powers, and erase through valor the marks of shame we bear for our past misdeeds and failures.
The shameful mark that afflicts this community is, thankfully, incomparably less severe than what real-world dictators have done in the past, but the process of how we've gotten here is similar - by small degrees is usually how these things progress. It creeps up, bit by bit, seeming to be a good idea to invest limitless power in someone we believe will use it for good, the danger unnoticed until some event triggers a sudden change for the worse that we realize that we are now powerless to prevent because we put the reins of power into hands that we've allowed to become irresponsible in using that power. At some point, we, as responsible people who care about our community, must look at where we are and where we're headed, and when our direction is not leading us to a good destination, call a halt. We must say "No more! No further! I forbid it!".
This is not met without resistance, of course. One of the ways in which those in power will try to prevent this protest against their injustices is to make it seem as if things were never different, to cover up or rewrite history - to tell you that they're doing what you want, because it's what they've always done and you asked them to. But how are we to even know if they're telling the truth if we cannot allow an examination of what that past truly was? Therefore, I say to you that the point at which we are not even allowed to acknowledge out loud the history some of us know only too well about the effects of certain of the community's rules, because those in power are trying to erase mention of it to cover up the reality of the negative things their policies have done, is a point at which things have gone too far. It is a point at which their methods have grown uncomfortable and sinister, and that is precisely the direction in which we should not be allowing ourselves to head. The danger is twofold: First, if we cannot remember history, we are doomed to repeat it. That should be simple enough to understand. Secondly, the wonders of technology, the capabilities of the phpBB software being used, gives the moderation staff effectively power absolute over the community's voice, and they're wielding that power brazenly to prevent examinations of our rules and our history from taking place, proclaiming this to be for the sake of maintaining a pleasant environment. But such authoritarianism can create nothing heartfelt, only a fascade of pleasantry coldly maintained by force. It's at such a point at which this community is in grave peril of being lobotomized - transformed from something genuinely good-natured and positive, which as a whole we've always easily managed to be a shining example of despite our individual differences, into something in which those invested with power can cow people into a bland compliant docility with the fear of being silenced or exhiled if they do otherwise, and a superficial whitewash of important unresolved issues is imposed by force. We should very rightfully be alarmed when our leadership is unwittingly turning us into a nanny-state of micromanaged, scrutinized, and sanitized conversations and content contributions.
In short, the surest sign that there is injustice in these rules is that the leadership is resorting to orwellian measures to wipe out any mention of the fact that there are other views and an opposition to what's been done, and feels fully justified in doing so. This puts our community in danger of losing its true soul.
More than that, it creates the very problem - conflict and contention, discomfort and hostility - it was supposed to solve!
This has been so from the beginning, literally from the very day these rules were created in June 2005.
Until that dark day, there had been, at the worst, only a very few threads that had ever mentioned homosexuality at all, and those usually only inspiring low amounts of fleeting discussion before the topic would be forgotten again. It was, to be brief, never a problem that troubled us.
But the day these rules were put in place? All the Cafe erupted into debate, argument, protest, proponents of each side polarizing rapidly against the other to try to decide what we would or would not institutionalize as official policy - most deeply, it turns out, ultimately creating an argument, perhaps not intentionally but nonetheless unrelenting to this day, about what kind of treatment we would extend to our own members, current and future, by virtue of how we might potentially treat some of their heartfelt works of expression within this community.
In just those first few days, numerous Rangerphiles left the Cafe, disillusioned and embittered, while I watched with my own eyes. Artists and authors who had created excellent works walked away in protest. As time went on, fallout continued to settle from the detonation that had torn us asunder, as others left at various times after, feeling simply too stifled and unwelcome to stay. The backlash created more, not any less, of the phenominon it prohibited, too - at least one artist created several homoerotic pieces of work for no other reason than because these rules had been created. Some eventually sought malicious vengeance, directing the attention of prankster and trolling websites to our existence and suggesting us as a target. I consider it noteworthy that it was not until after the creation of these rules that our community garnered interest enough for an EncyclopediaDramatica page to be created on us, or for the infamous chansites to consider conducting a raid, tipped off and egged on by former Cafe insiders. This discontentment is not even limited to those who had been regular Cafe patrons, either, at least one prominent author who had had only a minimal presence at the Cafe has nonetheless stated disgust with these rules being emplaced. There are yet other people who still, to this day, consistently snub any participation in the Golden Acorn Awards, our community's highest honor, observing that the competition is unfair under these rules. What, I must ask myself with embarassment, does this say about us? Undeniably the Cafe, for good or bad, is the community's major representative hub and we bear that responsibility for presenting the public face of the community.
So clearly there's a problem. We screwed up in creating that rule. But why did we create it? Why, we may ask, is this happening in the first place? To what end were these rules that institutionalized intolerance and created so much contention and so many problems created? Was it truly to maintain the atmosphere, to create peace and eliminate argument, as we were told?
Clearly, dispute over these rules has created more ongoing division, argument, and internal strife than the brief mention of any character's possible non-canonical speculative homosexuality ever has! Clearly, a true peace has not been created by these rules and their enforcement - not even a convincing fascade of one could, for all the moderation's efforts, be crafted, else we would not still be having this debate, seeing the Golden Acorn Awards protested, watching posts disappear without explanation, hearing the grievances on other websites from banned, ostracized, or self-exhiled former members... In short, still afflicted with the toxic fallout, more than four years after the fact!
We do not have peace, but war unending, created by the very rules our leaders claimed would make us "safe" from such. These rules that were supposed to keep the environment and atmosphere friendly have instead achieved the opposite and made it, for too many people, hostile and uncomfortable!
How was this ever thought acceptable, or a good idea? How could it possibly continue to be accepted after such visible failure?
Those seem like good questions, to me.
As I have mentioned, the reason offered was that it was to eliminate argument. They say it was to bring peace to the Cafe. They say it was for our own good, to preserve the atmosphere of the community. I believe that the moderation was sincere in those desires, but I also submit to you that, one, as shown before, this has failed, and two, the use of policies that trample free expression is another hallmark that one sees that parallels our situation with that created by real-world despots. In Islamic states that impose sharia law, an infamously repressive system that viciously suppresses all criticism of Islam and of the regime, going so far as to declare judgments of death against those who dare to speak against such, their ostensible rationale for doing so is that "we're just trying to do what's good for society", that "people need to be protected from themselves", and to "keep out the immorality and corruption of beliefs other than our own". The nazis also towed that line as they burned books, as have fascists, communists, and all stripes of dictators who banned and persecuted opposing views and voices - in every oppressive state that's ever existed, in fact, the reasoning presented for rigid policies of intolerance and of controlling thought and free expression is framed not in terms of what it restricts, but in terms of rationalizing those abominable restrictions by attempting to declare how they "protect" the people they are, truth be told, subjugating. In every state that has done this, too, that method for "protecting" people has dismally failed, making them victims instead. Attempting to make better the environment of the people by tightening the bonds on their hands and tightening the noose 'round their neck has never succeeded.
Another aspect may be gleaned in certain statements made by one of the moderators not too long after these rules were put in place (Framwinkle, I believe it was). He stated, in no uncertain terms, that these rules were about morality - by which we may assume to mean, the moral views of the moderation staff, mostly highly conservative Christians. Yet again, a third disturbing parallel can be seen here to real despots: the "moral" decrees of a ruling party enacted into legislated morality. Religious law, in other words - subjective religious beliefs and demands imposed by force on everyone, be they believer or not.
And here we are at the bottom of it - these rules are not and never were about "peace", only about controlling the communal voice towards complying with the ideology of a few individuals, and wrapping whatever heavy-handedness results in excuses to make it sound as if it's a good thing. The governments who convince themselves to take these draconian measures will always say that it's only to keep you from sinning - it's for your own good that they want control over your personal decisions, your thoughts, your expressions, your life.
Nonsense.
Self-serving nonsense fed out by those who fear losing their absolutist power over the community's voice, plain and simple! Again I can merely but point to history to show that in a free society, we, as individuals, best decide what is for our own good in our own personal matters, not the government under the iron fist of a few who jealously sit aloof on their thrones of power deciding rules only by their own whim. Thomas Jefferson said this quite well when he noticed that "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
How, then, do we rein in a government run wild? How are we to fight this?
I mentioned both Martin Luther and his later namesake Martin Luther King. I think that examples might be taken from their respective approaches. First, in the vein of Luther nailing a list of his points of contention to the church door, creation of an awareness of grievances is in order. That is, those responsible and those as yet unaware must be informed that there is discontentment and made so abundantly aware of it that it cannot be ignored any longer. Everyone should be made to understand that there is a problem, it should be so widely known that attempted denial of this fact can no longer be credible. Second, a plan of action we may take to protest and remedy those grievances should be devised. The simplest manner in which this may be done is to simply create justice, as King sought to, by doing what is right and just even in the face of attempts to prevent that. This may mean disregarding rules that are obviously unjust, ie., acts of civil disobedience - if the government will not govern justly, then the conscientious should elect to assume the responsibility for overriding those unjust or unfair aspects of that government's regulation, in an effort to pursue the end goals of reclaiming the freedoms to which people are entitled by right.
I believe that some of what we should strive for as final goals should contain (but not necessarily be limited to) the following:
1. The striking down of the second sentence of rule 3 ("You will not post anything relating to homosexuality, homosexual relationships, trans-gender relationships, alternative sexual lifestyles, or any other topic deemed sexually inappropriate by the moderators"). The first sentence of that rule by itself is more than sufficient to provide reasonable control over erotica, porn, adult, or other cafe-inappropriate fan material, without the harmful results inherent in the second sentence - alienating or discriminating against certain people. Therefore, and for the other reasons discussed at length in this message, this second sentence should be removed.
2. The addition of a rule and/or policy specifically prohibiting the removal of posts in "mysterious disappearance" style. Users and the community at large should have the right to be informed of why posts were removed, if they must be removed. The ability of the moderation to effectively govern the board against gross abuse is, of course, necessary, but they should remain visible in their actions and accountable to the community at large to ensure that responsibility is maintained in those actions.
3. Establish and protect the future right of the community to discuss freely the reasons and history behind why rules exist, and to propose new rules, modification to existing rules, or removal of impractical, excessively vague, harmful, or obsolete rules. Those being governed should have some opportunity for public discussion amongst themselves and their leaders concerning how they're being governed! We should not have to live in fear of reprisal from our leaders simply for expressing our thoughts on how their decisions stand to impact us!
I suggest the following as some ways in which a person may approach these and help create pressure for their enactment, depending on what they're comfortable with and how far they're willing to go:
1. Make your voice heard by the administration staff. PM or e-mail them to inform them of your feelings. Remind them that the damage done thus far is self-evident, and that demand is there for the offending parts of the rules to be repealed so that this may begin to be remedied and our community reunited.
2. Make a stand by refusing to accept awards such as Golden Acorns. Hard though it may be to overcome pride and have the discipline to refuse personal gains for reasons larger then yourself, visibly declining an honor whilst explaining to the community why you cannot accept is a powerful statement of disapproval of an unsatisfactory status quo.
3. Refuse to post your work on the Acorn Cafe while discriminitory rules are in effect. Post them in other venues, by all means continue to share them, but make it well known through public statements that the Cafe is declared a hostile environment to free expression and that your work will therefore not be shown there until this is corrected.
4. Alternately to #3, in the spirit of civil disobedience simply disregard rules barring certain pieces of work. If a work is not offensive and is worthy of being noted by the community, but still unjustly prohibited by an unfairly discriminitory rule, consider posting it anyway. Forcing the moderation staff to remove it by their own hands instead of allowing them to tie yours is a statement in itself that will be taken note of. The more you can force them to remove and silence unjustly, the more visible and less defensible their censorship becomes. Obviously, this is only really for those with the nerve to stare down the possible consequences.
5. Promote discussion of these parts of the rules, and why they are unfair. Strive to maintain a general awareness among the community of their existence and distastefulness. Never let it be taken for granted that they're of the same nature as the other, justified, rules of the board. Make them the center of attention and the object of debate. Make it clear that they are not wanted, make them issues of contention - expose them for what they are, problems not worth enduring.
6. Use various situations to your own best advantage in pursuing any of the above. Never fail to notice and draw attention to violations of the rights of your fellow Rangerphiles.
7. Above all, do what you can to make the Cafe once again a haven of friendliness and acceptance, rather than the one of disappointment and unfairness it's become for too many.
I know that these are difficult things to ask of people. Many will wonder why they should stick their own neck out in any of these ways when they don't feel as if the rules have harmed them.
The answer to this is because they have already harmed us all, whether we realize it yet or not. By allowing others to be harmed, we ultimately harm ourselves because we do not exist in a vacuum apart from one another. There is an interconnection between us all. What one person contributes, all may benefit from.
With this in mind, the importance of adopting measures to ensure everyone's freedom and create an assured sense of truly fair due process and warm welcome cannot be overstated. With the richness of talent we enjoy and the unusual durability we've shown over the years, it's easy to forget that ultimately, we are nonetheless not a large community. The number of friends we've lost to this situation is significant, because every single one counts. The damage we've suffered just until now is already incalculable, in that we will, tragically, never know what those we've thrown out in our foolishness may have contributed had they felt welcome to contribute instead of feeling hated or sleighted. How many more people have to be alienated? How much more talent has to be lost to us? How many more people are we going to allow to be repelled? How much greater could our community be, how much more could we have to offer the world? How long do we let the reputation of "friendliest place on the internet", the reputation that helped make us, be undermined? How long can we disgrace this community, risking erasing that which is (was?) greatest about it, all because the moderation staff clings stubbornly to one superfluous sentence in one of the rules and in their self-pride maintains a stubborn disregard for the pain that's been unwittingly inflicted by it?
With every little bit we lose to this, we are killing parts of this community, and watching those pieces die fills me with an anger and an agony that I don't rightfully know how to express.
What truly blows my mind here, too, is that this is being done by a community with a large presence of people who claim to be Christian, for as Jesus said, "What you do to the least of these, you do to me". It pains me to say, I would be ashamed to show my face in a Church filled with the "Christians" who are found so lacking in humility and so overburdened with arrogance that they would do this to their fellow men and women and refuse to amend their ways when it became pointed out clearly what they were doing and what effect it was having.
Does a foolish pride really grip them so tight that they cannot admit a mistake was made and fix it? I don't want to believe that of them. I want more than anything for them to seize the opportunity that is always available to triumph by doing the right thing, to prove this not to be the case - to show that they are the leaders worth following that I know they can be.
I apologize, truly and sincerely, if those whom I speak of find any of this insulting, for that is not my intent. It is simply that it must be said, however harshly you may take it.
And Therefore...
To those among us who have done this evil: This day, you wolves among the flock, I call you out!
I call you to task to answer to the community, to answer for us these questions: Who among good Christians, or the good among any of the world's religions, or even among good people nonetheless without religion, throws their friends out in the cold? Who among good people of any or no religious faith insults them, makes them feel discriminated against, alienates them, drives them out into bitterness?
My brothers and sisters, my fellow Rangerphiles, I tell you, searching my soul all these years, in finally delivering this message, I have decided my answer to that. At the undeniable prompting of my heart, I must declare these things to be wrong. Although I have no doubt that delivering this message will cost me great anger and retribution at the hands of the people in power, perhaps painfully (I expect to probably be banned in retaliation for this message), I have thrown down my gauntlet and taken up my arms in defiance of this situation. I have done my best, doing what I can to try to fight it. This cannot be won without broader support than a single person, however. From here, I must leave it to you to show the qualities of your own character, in asking you to likewise do what you can to make it understood that this must not continue, lest we lose everything, bit by bit.
Humbly, I therefore beg for your help. Speak out for what is right! Demand it from our moderation staff! As I have trusted you, all these years, to do the right thing in the past, I trust you now once again. Although disappointment is always a risk when one places their faith and trust in others, one must take risks to follow their heart. This community has shown itself to be unique, and I can think of no other group of people who, as a whole, I could better place any of my trust in.
I trust, too, in this undeniable fact: That the nature of your actions in response, or the lack thereof, will show your true colors as an individual person and as a Rangerphile.
Each of us was attracted to the show, and continues to be, for a reason. I suspect that for many people, that reason has to do with the nobility and inherent goodness and pursuit of justice displayed by the Rangers. It falls to us, those who admire the Rangers, to uphold their spirit out here in the real world now that we have grown beyond being children and into conscientious individuals, ready to take part in the real world, who hold dear those same values.
We are the Rescue Rangers now.
Let us live up to the name. Let us do for others in need as the Rangers would. Let this be, as a community, our finest hour - the one in which we took action for the sakes of our friends, and welcomed them back instead of driving them away. Reunite our community. Keep the wealth of our friendship open for all to partake in.
This is my piece to say. Having now delivered my message, you may ban me if it is your will, moderators. Silence me like so many other before me, strike me down to preserve the unchallenged enforcement of your dictates, if you feel you have no other choice. I will understand and forgive you, because I know that you are, after all, only human, and no human is perfect. If that is to happen, I have no regrets. One must not be afraid to suffer for doing what is necessary and right.
Thank you for your time.