(no subject)

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

regarding the whole lilspeak brouhahaha etc going on...

Little speak has gotten on my nerves sometimes. Sara (one of my littles) and I have gone round and round about how I have trouble reading her handwriting and her spelling is atrocious (though as I get older mine is not as good as it used to be) but I'm not flat out HATEFUL to her about it, nor do I deny she is real because of it. I just ask her to try and do better. I've bought books to help her. I don't make her feel as though her presence, comments or input are unwelcome because it's not on the same level as mine.

It bothers me that the impression she has gotten (and I as well) that this community is that way however. I can't always be there to proof read and edit her postings...sometimes she wants to say what she wants to say without interference...hell, I'm not even sure what she types would be labeled the "lilspeak" as it doesn't look like what you demonstrated...but she now feels that any typos, mispellings or simple sentences will be made fun of or attacked.

We'd pretty much not said anything in response to the "I am decreeing that people who use lilspeak are fake" post, figuring on just lurking and see what happened, but it's really been upsetting. The small support group we were in via email shut down recently because a couple of members had passed away and others were in flux with thier lives and the list just wasn't active enough...so we came here hoping to have a place to participate. Now half my system feels like anything they say will be mocked, slammed or made fun of, no matter that they try very hard to write and spell accurately.

The whole message about the lilspeak issue could have been written in a way that was not hostile, all it takes is thinking about what you are saying and try to get your point across without alienating a large part of the audience. It could have been written in a way to encourage people to get thier littles to work on thier skills, rather than to make them fear being made fun or someone being rude to them if they even try. I'm not talking about the coddling and all that which I've heard of going on to some really ridiculous levels on some support lists, like not typing in certain colors because  Oh My GOD that triggers someone...I'm just talking about the simple act of trying to communicate in a manner that isn't hostile, exclusionary and intimidating.

I don't particularly want to be on a group where it's all lilspeak as it can be VERY annoying, but I was hoping for a place where my littles could feel safe to express something once in a while if they needed to and it REALLY bothers me that of all things, the thing to pick about is thier skills or lack of them in spelling and typing. It sucks that the vast majority of the world isn't safe for them to express themselves because people don't get it, then in the one place where they people shouldn't freak out because a post comes from my username and my writing style and spelling are different and I sign with a different name, this is going to be an issue. What's the point of having a multiplicity community if you have HIDE the differences in your system and half your system is afraid to post?

Comments

[barbedvelvet.livejournal.com]

The thing is, it's not typos, etc that people are frustrated with. It's intentional typos used to sound "young" because it just plain sounds contrived. It is one thing to not know how to spell, it is another to type poorly on purpose, such as using aa's and ii's. As has been pointed out, that is not a "normal" deviance, that is a contrived spelling that is used within a subculture. If your littles come out to speak, as long as they are typing to the best of their ability and their is at least some attempt by someone to spellcheck if it's *really* bad, there should be no problem. This is about people intentionally falsifying their abilities to "fit in" or to try to convince people they are young. I agree that littles shouldn't be flamed for doing their best and that they should feel safe. They also need to play by the rules of a semi-adult community, just like everyone else.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

I realize you aren't the one who posted the original blast on the whole thing, that you are trying to explain it so please don't think I'm frustrated with you in this response...I'm just very frustrated period because Sara has worked so hard and it just blows my mind that a multiplicity community would try to define whether or not a multiple was "real" or not by whether or not they can use a spellchecker!! In your own sentence, you say "they are typing to the best of thier ability and their is at least" that second their should be a "there"...I personally don't care that you made a mistake, but that is something like what Sara would do...use the wrong variation of a word. Does this invalidate you as multiple? **I** don't think so, but reading that other person's post it seems she would. Sara tends to goof things up like "peeple" or "becauz" which man, I see normal/singleton's do ALL the time, are they invalid people because of it?

I just hate it that we lost the email group she could post on, and now she's terrified to even try here. She doesn't want to post in my personal journal much, because that's "my" place, and she doesn't really want a journal of her own because she's not THAT into the computer...when we found this community we thought hey, somewhere where that once in a great while Sara wants to talk about something she can and it won't be wierd.

[barbedvelvet.livejournal.com]

I'm very sorry about the loss of the email group. That really sucks. :( I'm also sorry Sara doesn't feel safe here... You're right, it is ridiculous to tell if someone is really a multiple by whether they spell check or not. I also think there is a fine line between people making mistakes (like mine... geez, that was a strange mistake for me, I honestly never do that... I guess not never anymore, lol) and people intentionally messing up. That's where my frustration lies. But you are definitely right, being able to spell well shouldn't determine authenticity of a multiple, adult or little. I'm not sure if I'm explaining what I personally feel the difference to be, and I'm sorry. I'm not frustrated with you and I'm glad you aren't frustrated with me specifically, I don't mean to frustrate people.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

no, I'm fine with you ;)

I know alot people, period, who don't use spellcheck because it's slow, it questions every other word sometimes and because it doesn't catch things like they're/their/there, and heck, they just forgot it's available sometimes, or there isn't time to fool with it.

I can understand frustration with the lilspeak stuff, we had a few on my old list that would post back and forth to each other in and I just pretty much ignored those posts, deleted unread because I didn't want to try and interpret it. There are some people who really push the envelope on it too, I don't deny that occurs but I don't think they should be invalidated as a multiple based on that.

There does become a line though where it's not the littlespeak, there are actual personalities that just don't have the same english skills...hell, I've got one personality who does not speak nor write..she communicates solely in sign language. (though I think she is capable of writing, she just WON'T) **I** don't know sign language. From what I've seen and my own personal experience different levels of skills and capabilities is one of the signs of multiplicity!

I think alot of what bothers me too is that I make it a very big point when I talk about multiplicity to people to stress that my experience is not everyone's, and that we are all very different. That there are some common denominators that occur between a lot of us but none of them define us as multiples, and then someone comes here and starts posting the exact opposite. What, if I get on her and post that everyone who is multiple has a personality that is a serial killer, that I know this because all the hollywood movies show this, does that make it fact? I would hope everyone would find that JUST as offensive. (part of why I started talking so freely to people about my DID was the fact that I got sick and tired of people thinking that everyone who has any mental illness is a potential serial killer because of hollywood's bullshit...many people read my journal because it gives them a "day in the life view" of someone who is mentally ill, so they would see that we aren't all that different.

Of all things to call people out on...thier ability to spell...yeesh. Anyway, no, no frustration with you, I think we are actually kind of in agreement...that the littlespeak can be overdone, sometimes is overdone, but it's not really something to say "You aren't a multiple because you did that! You fake!"

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

"it just blows my mind that a multiplicity community would try to define whether or not a multiple was "real" or not by whether or not they can use a spellchecker..."

Don't confuse community policy with opinions expressed during discussion of controversial issues by the membership. She is free to express herself as she pleases. Lilspeak is an option on this community and will be as long as I am running it.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

well, let me ask this...or rather, something I think Sara is concerned about...if/when such posts occur (posts in lilspeak) is it going to be allowed for this person, or others who share her opinion, to comment in that manner to that post?

That is Sara's big fear and what really has her going, heck, she's had people call us fakes because she knows a few big words (though she can't spell them) and now it's the other way around.

Too much knowledge, not enough knowledge....it's frustrating to be real but be able to just be yourself for fear that your very reality will be denied by some person's "reality ruler" to have to fear someone saying nasty things to you just because you mispelled some things or your grammar was odd, etc. Especially in a place of all places you didn't think you'd have to fight such things.

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

No one has yet responded directly to a lilspeak post either with snipes or flames. Anyone who does will be dealt with according to standard operating procedure.

People are entitled to express opinions on all sides of this issue, but they are not entitled to directly criticize another person for how they choose to express themselves or run their system.

The reason I encourage people to learn standard English is so they will be understood, not so everyone sounds like everyone else. People in my group have occasionally expressed themselves in Lauta on this community, and I'm sure there are community members who think that this makes us sound affected, phony, and "look at how special we are." Still, as we wish to continue to have the option of using the occasional Lauta word or phrase, and we wish to accord others the same option with respect to their own languages, dialects or argot.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

I don't even know what Lauta is (unless that's another word for leet/l33t whatever)

I don't mind it. If I can't read it I don't read it and don't worry about it, I just don't want myself or anyone else in the system here slammed for not meeting someone else's standard of what being multiple is.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

"is it going to be allowed for this person, or others who share her opinion, to comment in that manner to that post?"

In my case it doesn't matter whether or not I'm "allowed to" comment in any manner to posts in Lilspeak, because I wouldn't waste my time, any more than I'd comment to a post in l33t. When I comment to a post by a child, I do so in a manner that (as a mother and a teacher) I think is appropriate.

As I've said before, my posts have all been directed to adults, and any children who have the language skills to read and understand them also surely have the language skills to write something approximating standard English. If not, then it is for their own grown-ups to help them learn better skills.

[redrainstorm.livejournal.com]

Just angers us that they feel the littles are not real because they adopted little speak. Like, they're imaginary all the sudden because one of the first one learned that lilspeak is the thing to you so the rest of them do. And this all somehow makes them a liar/faker and that it must somehow be a big/teen typing it out to look like a little or something.
Our littles are surrounded by bigs and can therefore type decent sentances when they can hear a lot of the conversations around them but their spelling sucks (that's being worked on).
But yeah. Really blows no one (not even the teens) feel safe here anymore since now if people don't follow things by the "book" that seems to have appeared, they're not real!

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

I talk to a lot of people about multiplicity, and I answer a lot of questions...but the first thing I always say when I start out is "you have to understand, everyone became a multiple through adifferent process, so multiplicity is different for all of us. All I can talk to you about is how MY multiplicity works for ME, and what I have been told by others. Just because something works a certain way for me doesn't mean it won't work a different way for another multiple" And that pretty much precedes any "lecture" I give on the subject (and I have a lot of those who are curious on my journal flist) so it really is frustrating to see someone who says "you aren't a multiple if you do this, because **I** don't do this and I say it's fake." Explain to me what exactly establishes who is the end all be all authority??

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

I have not seen anyone on this group saying that people who use lilspeak are not real multiples. If I did happen to spot anyone asserting such an opinion, I would advise them to not base such decisions on minimal knowledge.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/287290.html?mode=reply

"It definitely doesn't help that some alleged multiples insist on writing in this appalling ersatz baby-talk that nobody could possibly believe is anything BUT fake. Lilspeak undermines the credibility of all multiples in the eyes of the general public - more specifically, it undermines (or entirely destroys) the credibility of the person using it in the eyes of other multiples."

Bolding is mine.

Hell, **I** find littlespeak annoying, and have worked with my littles on thier spelling and english skills, but I would not for a second say they aren't real just because they don't have the same skills as I do. How in the hell can you expect a personality that young, regardless of how old the body is, to have perfectly polished college level English skills? (hell, there are times Sara writes better than some college students I've seen, they rely to damn MUCH on spellcheck and the like.)

I've been through the OPPOSITE shit as well, people saying Sara and the aren't real because she does know some big words (though she can't spell them right)

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

I do see your point on the "alleged" part. To be fair, I've seen several fakers (that is, people who claimed to be 18-year-old female multiples and were later exposed as 40-year-old men or the like) who really went over the top with the lilspeak, but I don't judge people to be 'faking' based on whether or not they use it. My opinion is more that many people have felt they had to use it in order to 'fit in' in a lot of multiple communities.

My experience is that system kids vary in the range of abilities they have access to. Some of them may be able to access the group's 'general' writing abilities, some may not. It's true that a child who writes more like an adult may find their 'authenticity' called into question, as you mentioned, and I think this is the reason why a lot of systems consciously or unconsciously encourage children to play down their ability; but, on the other hand, a lot of precocious and intelligent singlet children have also had their writing denounced as fake because 'no child could write like that,' c.f. Opal Whiteley. On that point, I'm more inclined to tell doubters to just deal with it.

It seems to me that what bothers many people who challenge the authenticity of lilspeak is that the children write with adultlike syntax and sentence constructions but spell everything wrong. However, I'm willing to accept that for some systems, a child may really have access to knowledge of sophisticated sentence constructions but not knowledge of spelling. If that's how it really works in someone's system, I won't call that into question.

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

You are confusing community policy with member opinions.

I repeat: Lilspeak is an option. It is up to an individual whether they want to use it or not.

[redrainstorm.livejournal.com]

I know it's not policy. I'm sorry I didn't mean it to sound that way. :) But when most of the members opinions seem to be saying "If they type this way, they are fake" many of our younger ones do not feel safe coming. Which is quite sad since this should be the one place they feel they can be themselves.
We didn't come here to try to fit the mold of others. So when the majority of people seem to be coming down on one of us (or some of us) we don't appreciate it. That's all.

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

This is a very large community. Most members do not post at all, or post very occasionally. It is extremely likely that there are as many here in favour of lilspeak as there are detractors.

We've had plenty of posts in lilspeak in this community since its inception and no one has yet directly addressed a person writing in this manner to tell them they are not real.

[chezames.livejournal.com]

Well said! Many of the comments to lilspeak posts have not been hostile, but some have been, and elenbarathi's original post was extremely hostile and rude. She obviously has no clue about how children who are learning to spell write.

BTW, I notice a lot of bad spelling and English grammar in this, as well as other, communities (and I'm sure We're guilty of that sometimes too!). So why are the adults excused when they have more resource to correct such things? I'm not saying correct people, I'm just making a point.

I see nothing wrong in typing the way you talk. That is called individuality, people, it's a good thing. If you don't like the way someone "talks," don't read it. End of story.

Some people need to complain about something, obviously.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

As it happens, I have a Bachelor's degree in Early Childhood Education (1979) and have helped hundreds of young children learn to spell - including my own daughter, who was a world-class bad speller, and now (in High School) still has to use Spellcheck for every papers she writes. I'm also a hyperlexic Aspie linguistics geek, and if necessary can explain to you in excruciating detail what exactly is wrong with Lilspeak from a linguistic point of view.

Care to explain the source of your great expertise in how children learn to spell?

[chezames.livejournal.com]

So that gives you a right to attack people as rudely as you did? There is no justifying the cruelty and b*tchiness of your post, but keep trying, it seems to make you feel better about yourself.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

I think there is also probably a big difference in teaching spelling a child in another physical body, whom you can see, communicate directly too, etc...and trying to teach a child to whom you can only communicate to through writing or voice recordings.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Ahh, so the pot calls the kettle black, eh? but, I note, fails to answer the question.

So let me ask again: what precisely is your claim to authoritative knowledge about how children learn to spell? Are you a teacher? a parent? how many children have you actually taught to spell, that you can state so boldly that I "don't know anything about it"?

*shrugs* If it's bitchy and cruel to say that posting in deliberately-mangled English for the sake of "sounding like a kid" when one is capable of better writing is phony, annoying, and not fooling anybody, then... guilty as charged. It happens to be the truth, however.

Find an example of an English-speaking child under age ten (physically, I mean) writing ii to represent the long i sound. Go ahead, Professor, dig up a documentable example if you're so informed in this field. I'm betting you can't. Why? Because that construction does not appear in English, and where it appears in other languages it represents the long e sound. By the time children have learned that long and short i must be differently represented, they've already been exposed to silent e, which is the ubiquitous construction. No English-speaking child ever wrote the word "like" as "liik".

Inappropriate double vowels are just one of the many interesting lil points about Lilspeak that show it to be every bit as deliberately-invented as the Drow language. There are lots more. I have no objection to people using whatever jargons they like in appropriate places, but this is not such a place. And, sorry, but people claiming that Lilspeak is "how they naturally write" is about as convincing as someone claiming that Drow is their native tongue.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

what about kids who write like as lik? That is one of sara's common mispellings. Hell, I've seen full grown singleton teenagers do that on a regular basis.

There's also a big difference between teaching a child who is actually in another body, whom you can sit down face to face with and speak to, write things down and point to them...and trying to teach someone how to write when the only communication you have with them is writing or voice recordings. There is also a difference in levels of memory and experience between a singleton child in a seperate body and little in a shared body. The singleton child pretty much have a flowing memory, they will remember yesterday as yesterday, the day before as the day before. A little might think that two weeks ago was yesterday. I know that affects Sara's ability to retain things.Then there is also the question of bi-lingual multi issues. As far as I know I don't have any multi's that fluently speak another language other than sign language, but what if you had a child who had a somewhat working grasp of an Asian language, I would think that would cause some confusion as well.

I'm not saying that ALL people who type in lilspeak haven't picked it up via having seen it, but there are many things that could also cause a natural occurance of some of the oddities that occur in little speak...and it's still very harsh to expect a child alter to have the same linguistic skills as the adults in his/her system and accuse them of being an "alleged" multiple if they don't.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

"it's still very harsh to expect a child alter to have the same linguistic skills as the adults in his/her system and accuse them of being an "alleged" multiple if they don't."

Ah no, you misunderstand. It's the fact that these 'child alters' do have the same linguistic skills as adults, as shown by their usage and syntax, and that they are sufficiently aware of correct spelling to be able to substitute a stylized incorrect spelling, which causes their veracity to be doubted.

Repeating once again: not all physical children talk baby-talk, use conventional kiddie-type phrases, spell poorly, use poor grammar, or even have standard-issue "childish" interests. These are not intrinsic characteristics of childrens' writing. Over and over I've seen people saying that the kids of their system use Lilspeak because if they write clearly and well, they'll get accused of "not sounding like kids" - which means that they're basically getting peer-pressured into hiding their competence behind fakery, and I wonder why so few of their grown-ups seem to have any problem with this.

"accuse them of being an "alleged" multiple"

Ummm, I think you need to go look up the word alleged, because it does not mean what you seem to think it means. Actually, I'm not sure one could properly accused someone of being an "alleged" anything... or if one did, would it not be that all such accusations must necessarily be true, since the allegation is implicit in the accusation?

The whole thing would turn into a paradox. To resolve it, you'd have to ask whether anyone had said they were multiple before they were accused of people saying they were multiple, or whether the accusation was itself the first and only allegation.

[chezames.livejournal.com]

First of all, my reply was very calm and to the point, I did no attacking. I didn't call anyone a "moron on crack."

Secondly, I have extensive education and experience in Early Chilhood Education, Psychology, and Liguistics. I have worked with countless children, some with learning disabiliies and some without. However, unlike you, I don't claim that these give me "authoritative knowlegde." And I don't feel a need to list my crudentials specifically and waste my time, as this has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

The fact is that children in a system do not develope the same as children in the 3D do, in any way. When it comes to multiple systems, no 2 systems are alike and no 2 children are alike. If you have a child in your system and they have always spoken and typed perfectly, that's good for them. I am not saying that some people don't make up lil' speak to fit in, but I don't tell them they are morons or don't exsist. You nor I have the authority to determine that. I guess I am more open minded to accept people the way they are.

If you insist on comparing in-system children with children in the 3D world, your argument doesn't hold up anyway. Because the fact is, after a child learns the alphabet and the way letters sound, they then start to spell the way they talk and phonetically. English is a complicated language and few kids pick it up at the age of 4.

The main point in all this is : You are an adult. So stop acting childish by saying "I don't like the way you talk so you don't really exsist!" I mean come on, those are the words and behaviors of many of the children I've worked with. An adult response to your problem would be to not read posts if you don't like the way it's written, and not respond to people if you "don't think they exsist."

I have made my points, all valid and true. If you want to keep trying to sing your own praises by clainming that you are an authority on children be my guest. I have a life and I can't waste time on such childish things.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

You are an adult. So stop acting childish by saying "I don't like the way you talk so you don't really exsist!""

You are an adult, so learn to read - I did not at any time say that anyone doesn't exist. Enough other people seem to have understand what I did say that I don't think your failure to *get* it can be attributed to indufficient explanation. Therefore, providing more would be pointless. Go back and try reading the actual posts as they are written, instead of making up your own version and trying to claim it's what I said.

[chezames.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's amazing how you can edit a post to change what you said without anyone knowing you edited it. *rolls eyes*

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

"Yes, it's amazing how you can edit a post to change what you said without anyone knowing you edited it. *rolls eyes*"

You can't possibly be that stupid. Everyone who responded to the initial post got the full text of it back in their e-mail, where it's beyond the reach of any editing, and can compare it to what's up there now. Yes, one sentence was deleted, by the direct (and public) request of sethrenn. Nothing else has been altered, as the moderators of this community and many other people can verify. So take your malicious little insinuations and stick them where they best belong, dearie - I won't even call them ignorant insinuations, because I don't believe that you are in fact that stupid; I think you know damn well that except for the removal of the "typing like morons on crack" quote, the post has not been edited.

I also think you know damn well that nobody has said that people who write in Lilspeak are necessarily faking. However, they do all sound like fakes, so those who are actually genuine may want to think about whether that's how they really want to sound. Since a whole lot of other people *got* that, either you really are too stupid to get it, or - my hypothesis - you've got some reason for pretending to be that stupid. So... which is it, hmmm?

just an observation

[pilgrimchild.livejournal.com]

I have a little one who we buy handwriting practice books for (such as you buy for Kindergarteners and other little kids) because she loves to practice making her handwriting better. She loves to write her alphabet and wants to write better.
She also has the adults in the system write down hard to spell words for her at the tops of notebook pages, so that when she is out she can copy them and try to improve her spelling.
She really tries to write carefully. I've noticed though, that the more upset she gets, or the more emotionally intense she is feeling something, the more she reverts back to her younger-self ways of spelling.

Re: just an observation

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

I've even gotten the calligraphy pens for Sara...we have a system hang up that I didn't even realize at first in that I am very left landed and she is VERY righthanded..My handwrting is bad by most people's standards anyway, then add another personality and switch hands and yeah, we have put ALOT of work into this!!! But sara now even does little thank you cards to some of my friends who send her things like post cards and stuff and it's been a big improvement, but there is stil some mispelled words here and there, puncutation missing, whatever...heck, it's not like my english is perfect, especially after taking my medication...

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

I haven't actually seen anyone in here saying that children who use lilspeak are fake-- or, if they are, I haven't seen it. I certainly wouldn't judge someone to be fake simply because they used lilspeak. What I have seen people saying is that children who use lilspeak may make others think they're adults putting on an act when they are actually real.

[(Anonymous)]

"What I have seen people saying is that children who use lilspeak may make others think they're adults putting on an act when they are actually real."

Precisely. I have no opinion about whether children of systems I know only casually online, and not at all in person, are "real" under whatever definition of "reality" one might arbitrarily choose. How the heck would I know? and what makes it my business anyway?

I know some children sharing adult bodies who seem like genuine children to me. I have also known some people who definitely were faking multiplicity for the purpose of emotional manipulation, and they did not sound like real children; they sounded like parodies of children.

The point is that Lilspeak makes any user sound like a parody. It causes a lot of people to say "oh puhleeze, that is so fake" and not take the writer seriously. I should think children would be glad to know this, because nobody likes being looked down on and not even knowing why. I should also think some of the more precocious ones with literary inclinations may be delighted to be liberated from having to write Lilspeak, and maybe will start a little peer-pressure toward achievement of good writing.

Anonymous post above

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Sorry; the Anonymous post above is mine; I forgot I was not logged in.

[chorus-of-chaos.livejournal.com]

it's happening in a lot of communities anymore, especially big ones...there is another community I'm in where one particular person (who is not the moderator) jumps on everyone for the slightest infraction of how SHE percieves the copyright laws...not how they actually ARE, but her perception of them...calling anyone who posts a criminial and demanding that they delete the post and just...really whacked out. That community has lost so many members because of her. She'd achieve much more if she would just ask nicely "could you please post where you found this pattern and the copyright information?" I've run into it in a photography community, just everywhere. I don't know if everyone just suddenly has a bug up thier butt about everything and takes out on LJ or what is going on.

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

If people have been slamming you and I haven't noticed, please keep me informed and I'll take appropriate measures. There have been a few threads in which flames were thrown around after I thought things had quieted down and I didn't catch it in time.

Careful

[spookshow-girl.livejournal.com]

-.- I can barely post without someone rebutting me, too. And if anyone's willing to prove that statement, go ahead.

Damned if they do damned if they don't, huh? Logically, that either forces someone to not post their opinion, even if they have a valid point, or they do so anyway and it "proves" your persecuted stance.

If you're not careful, it might be percieved as passive agressive.

Anyway, I didn't see you getting flack here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/213476.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/215305.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/227327.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/220847.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/239432.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/247063.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/248096.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/250173.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/262644.html), here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/271423.html), and here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/286980.html). That last post is your most recent. In this (http://www.livejournal.com/community/multiplicity/262644.html) post you asked me a question in response to my question, and I never got back to you on that. This was because I had trouble explaining what I meant, and then assumed that I had already responded. A legitimate mistake.

However, the overall tone of the responses to your posts have been supportive, and helpful, with occasional disagreements, and at least one readily found comment that could be viewed as a complaint. That happens. Where are you coming from on this? I'd really like to know. Is it based on that one thread? I thought that had resolved itself, to your satisfaction, and I don't think I'm the only one who is suprised that the apparent shift in stance.

Feel free to provide links to the responses that are the cause for this rant, I'm sure it would clear a lot up.

--Me

[random-element.livejournal.com]

Shame on you. These are children who have somehow been hurt, and they're trying to reach out in a place where they were supposed to be safe and free of discrimination. A place where they could be themselves and finally state their mind.

Safety

[shandra.livejournal.com]

See the thing about safety is, it's largely about perception.

Obviously no one wants to be made fun of every time they post, or be questioned as to their realness. I haven't seen that happen here and I find the moderation pretty solid on that end.

I did see people say "this style of writing makes me question whether someone's fake or not." I guess in this discussion as an adult I see that even the original somewhat heavy-handed post criticising a particular writing style doesn't make it a personal comment about a specific kid or their realness or not.

As a kid I think that would suck - kids don't make those distinctions as well.

So - I can see why people's system kids are feeling uncomfortable. And I see the wish you're expressing and I am glad to hear it because it's really good to know.

At the same time anyone else's system kids' safety is something I'm totally unprepared to take responsibility for, unless that system and I (or a slightly larger group of people) have discussed what that is exactly.

Up until that point I kind of expect each system to manage their own stuff - and if they let their kids post here, which I don't mind at all and think is neat - I assume that they know how manage it if their kids *do* get upset, or which kids are ready to jump in and which ones need more of a guiding hand.

I don't know who's reading what when and in a community like this one where it's not "welcome littles! Post here!!!"

That makes criticism that basically comes down to "people hurt our kids and that's mean" a little hard to read - it ends up feeling like I was in a restaurant that was pitched to adults more or less (like with a bar and without cartoon characters) and someone in the group was on some, say, childfree rant, and the family next to me suddenly pitched a fit that their kids could hear.

Whereas my approach would be to think that the parents should either take the kids out of the restaurant, or have a family discussion about some people rant about not wanting kids and how our family doesn't believe that and here's why.

I don't know if that makes any sense, but I guess I'm kind of saying - in my opinion only, maybe one approach is to talk about the difference between a personal attack and a general criticism, about how some people in life will have their weird shit and how do you deal with that, rather than raising the bar to some concept of safety that may or may not be appropriate.

And whether in a discussion community that means to be quiet, or whether that means to argue with them at full tilt, or whether that means to make one's point calmly and then let it go, or any other of a number of options for a repsonse.

Re: Safety

[redrainstorm.livejournal.com]

The reason we took it to heart was one of our littles (TRACIE) posted here and in the other "nonstupidplural" community she got directly linked. Then the post was made -here- and everything went up in flames. Because our littles post was posted through the other community, and because her post was a few posts down, it was a personal attack as we saw it.
But, we're going to try to stop commenting about this drama here. It's only hurting our little ones further. We'll probably just remove ourselves so our littles don't make anyone too scared! They've gone and changed who they are for people like that who don't even matter.
Again, we know it's not the moderation here but we don't personally like when a whole group comes down on something like this.

Re: Safety

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

If by a "whole group" you are referring to nonstupidplural, that's one thing; none of us read that group and we're not aware of what goes on there.

If by a "whole group" you mean this community, keep in mind that a number of people have posted in favour of lilspeak and explained why it's important to be patient and understanding toward young people who use it. Emotions run high on all sides of this issue. I would hope that your young people would stay and make themselves heard.

Re: Safety

[luwana.livejournal.com]

Thinking of warning people not to directly link, or at least only use it to make a more general point. I don't really want direct attacks on that community, unless we're talking about an absolute rule breaking trolling spaz. Lilspeak is just... it happens. I don't really want flames going down there.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Sorry about that; the link and quote have been removed.

[kangetsuhime.livejournal.com]

Nono, not the link *here*. I don't care about the link that was here ;) That's up to th mods here. I meant people putting links on nonstupid, to entries here, making direct attacks and such.

What we'll probably do is take up the idea that was put to us, of having nonstupid as just for multiplicity talk with no fluff, no 'noob' stuff, slightly looser rules, and then an all out snark community. Because, with the amount of bitching people do on their own journals *anyway*, it's certainly needed :P

Re: Safety

[shandra.livejournal.com]

Oh, okay - I hadn't followed the link. That makes sense.

My perception isn't that everyone has come down on lilspeak, even people like us who have chosen not to use it. Some people have, but that's not everyone. :)

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Nope, not a personal attack. I don't know you or anything about you, really; what reason would I have to attack you personally? But yes, that post in Lilspeak was about the most unbearable I've seen in a long time, and very obviously the work of someone who is capable of writing readable (if not perfect) English.

If TRACIE has the skills and comprehension-level to read my posts, which are not written in child-friendly English, then she is surely able to understand why deliberately writing in fake baby-talk is likely to annoy some adult members of a mostly-adult community. As for her reading nonstupidplural, if her feelings are prone to be hurt by honest opinion plainly stated, then maybe that's not such a great place for her to hang out - especially since unfavorable opinions about Lilspeak are posted right on the front door.

"we don't personally like when a whole group comes down on something like this."

Well, that's understandable, but consider: the people "coming down" on the use of Lilspeak aren't doing it because they hate the people writing it, or don't want children posting, or any of that. It's just that the fake baby-talk is annoying, and if its purpose (as some have stated) is to make the user "seem more like a child", then hey, it ain't working.

Now you know something you didn't know before, which is that quite a few people find Lilspeak phony and annoying. But if by "whole group" you mean "all of multiplicity, then you haven't been paying attention, because a whole lot of people have posted to say how cruel they think it is to even say that one finds Lilspeak phony and annoying.

This community isn't supposed to be a "safe place for littles" where no one is allowed to say anything that might upset them, and where they can freely indulge their childish impulses. Supposedly it's a safe place for adults to discuss important issues pertaining to multiplicity. I would say The Acceptability of Lilspeak: Pro and Con is precisely such an issue, and if the debate gets a bit rough at times, hey, that's how things often go on adult discussion forums. Kids too young to deal with that might be better off sticking to the places made specifically for children.

[redrainstorm.livejournal.com]

Tracie didn't read it. We did. We talked it over with the littles just saying they should spell better. They heard the elders talking about it and thought it was a huge deal like they were bad, we recently helped them understand that's not the case.
We thought it was safe, again, our mistake. We won't let the littles post here, and if we do, a big will write it out, or they will when they spell better.
Again, some are looking forward to spelling better like "outside kids" (though they aren't outside kids, and all systems are different so sometimes they're not treated like outside children) and are trying hard to reach good standards.
It was our mistake for letting her post, and our mistake for telling the kids what you thought of their spelling. But, it's all cooled down in here so we'll wait until it's cooled down in the community as well.
Thanks.