After discussing this with the people most often using the mutual aid community and feedback here we will be making a single change.
Meta posts will no longer be permitted in [email protected] critical meta posts must not be about specific users and posted in [email protected] at risk of removal.
We will change the mutual aid sidebar to remove the clause permitting meta posts, we will also ask that users post once a day so that everyone's post's can be seen but this is not a hard rule as it is pretty clear that removing posts is a last resort in that community. This joins the other community recommendations that users include currency, how much is needed, updating when a user has received funds, or updating/locking the post when the need has been met.
This will be unfeatured in about 12 hours
~~Hello users of hexbear:
Due to recent meta posts in our mutual aid community we wanted to open up discussion about the community [email protected]
We will never require explanation or justification from a user asking for aid in the community, and the mod and admin team continue to commit to not featuring an individual's mutual aid request to prevent unfair exposure.
In addition, we will maintain a strict "No critical comments or meta comments" on a mutual aid post.
This post is to discuss the mutual aid community's rule of allowing meta posts: mutual aid as a community, those making posts in it and those commenting on posts.
We are considering removing the exception allowing meta posts but wanted to involve the userbase before committing to a change.
Please comment with any thoughts, feelings, or suggestions regarding this change.
Thank you~~
Having accusations directly sent to the mod team shifts responsibility from the user wanting to donate to the moderator team, which at this point violates the spirit of the community in so far as we as a mod try not to influence individual fundraising efforts.
So I have a question regarding that: there were some semi-regular posts in the MA Comm a few months ago, I won’t say which specifically, but they highly resembled certain scams I’ve seen online. At the time I kept mum, but I am curious if “I think this might be a scam” messages to the mods are treated differently than “This post has X, Y, and Z, which is documented at such-and-such as being associated with scammers” messages. Or if the mods are 100% agnostic on that front (no pun intended).
right, then I've a mind that no accusations should be sent. i get people being upset, shit is dire. but while i understand, it just doesn't sit right. even if people are misrepresenting who they are i don't think they makes em less worthy, i don't get to judge why they're doin it. are they taking money outta months of the other people who need help? i don't think so. i don't think there's a set # of peeps putting out a set # of dollars. i donate to people when i can, that's the rule i use. i donate less lately cuz... well, take a look at my new name and guess...
if no one wants to vet worthiness and —to be clear— no one should be, then we're right back where we started: no posts attacking other users. those should be treated same as those smarmy judgin comments i see sometimes: straight to the effin modlog and a warning sent that reminds people of the spirit of this space
There is obviously a limited amount of each though. Maybe some people will give some months and not others, or might stretch their budgets more then other times, but there is a limited amount of resources and its not enough for everyone who needs help.
I don't see how that can be true. This is a small community and with a few privileged exceptions I think most of us could be helped significantly by an infusion of money. But on the other hand, no one's collecting data as far as I know so idk, you could be right on that point.