Silk

Wow, it's looking like a quiet Monday so far! Any takers for the 13th?

Aww, thanks! Well, guess I'll fill one out then. I see there's a box for "academic" programmes, so I guess I'll tick that while I'm at it; I'm at least vaguely qualified to do that! All right, here's my first draft of a proposed pitch. It appears to be within the character of the form, though I feel it's a bit long. (Honestly, the more I look at it the more I think I should probably cut out the entire first paragraph, but I've left it here for now in case it gives anyone else to bounce off of. Please throw out any and all suggestions! Line edits, order, trimming words, anything I've missed, etc... Once we're happy with a draft, we just need to decide what the title is and who's actually submitting the thing, and I think we're off to the races. Proposed Programme Description Discussions of diversity are not new to the speculative fiction community, but we most often see them in a professional or industry context. However, writing communities outside of the industry itself, such as critique groups, also play an important role in fostering an inclusive community. Online critique groups in particular can be an invaluable tool for providing writers feedback from people with different backgrounds and perspectives than themselves—but creating a truly diverse community requires more than just an Internet connection. It requires an active and ongoing effort from group members and moderators to create a space that is safe for all voices. Groups must be willing to address: how to call out biased or problematic content (including racism, sexism, homo- and transphobia, etc.) how to accept critiques that reveal problematic content in your own work (and learn from them to improve your writing) how to support marginalized writers an act as an ally in a critique group the responsibilities of group members and moderators in facilitating an inclusive environment This panel is proposed by the members of Reading Excuses, an online critique group that has been active for nearly 9 years. A fan spin-off of the popular podcast Writing Excuses, the group has always prided itself on being open to everyone—all genres of speculative fiction and all levels of writer, from brand-new to published authors. As the group has begun attracting more diverse voices over the years, we have had to explore what it means to truly be open to everyone, and take many of the above lessons to heart. Although we’re still learning, we hope that the insight we’ve gained from addressing our group’s challenges can help others create groups that are safe, productive, and inclusive for all. A draft of proposed questions can be provided upon request. Additional details about programme item Proposed panelists: (our names & maybe very brief qualifying detail) The proposed panelists are active members or moderators of the Reading Excuses forum and include women and nonbinary authors; however, we would be thrilled to increase the breadth of representation on our panel, particularly including authors of colour. People willing to represent other axes of diversity would also be most welcome. All panelists should be active members and/or moderators of online critique groups.

Thanks for clarifying! I've never been accused of being "esteemed" before. Even by proximity. There used to be a LOT more crossover between us and the Writing Excuses "community," so to speak (can't remember now if there was an actual dedicated board for it that far back), since our forum literally arose out some of us chattering and making friends in the comments section of the WE podcasts. Some of those members we lost when the forum moved from the more generalized Time Waster's Guide forum to the 17th Shard Sanderson fan forum; others have just generally moved on. A few, like Chaos, are still members of 17th Shard but no longer participating in RE itself. Me, I migrated to 17S specifically because RE was moving there, and just never got into the habit of exploring the rest of the forum. It's really just a time thing for me. As for the Creators' Corner, I haven't spent much (read: any) time there so I could be speaking completely out of turn, but: my impression has always been that that forum is much more of a for-fun thing, whereas we're more professionally oriented. I hope it's obvious that I don't mean that in a negative way at all; it's just that the priorities over there seem to be more on the fun of making and sharing things, whereas this group more interested in saleability and craft.

What do you guys think? Should I fill one out too just in case we can't find a more appropriate mod? Maybe a mod isn't particularly needed, specifically, since whoever's on the panel can presumably speak to how the mod's strategies affect the group? Or are we just going with a "fill it out now and sort the details later" approach here? Suggestions As promised, I (finally! sorry about that...) have some suggestions on @kais's draft! Mostly my suggestions have focused on consolidating some of the questions/topics, since the draft as presented would make for a very long panel. To be honest, the draft I'm providing below probably still makes for a long panel, assuming 3 panel members and about 3 minutes per person per question (which is probably conservative). Unless the idea is to have different people answer different questions within each topic? I am somehow only just cluing into the fact that this is probably in fact what you meant. Anyway. I've also suggested the removal of some of the more general stuff about crit groups in favour of focusing on the diversity-oriented questions in particular, partially because of time reasons again but also because I think it's the intersection of the two topics that's most of interest. And I've rejiggered the suggested order a bit, mostly based on my chopping up of the questions as originally presented. Suggested edits to the questions are below. Tonight I'm gonna try and work on putting together a short description/pitch. Possible titles Critique Groups: Writing Your Way Out of the Echo Chamber Challenge Accepted: Allowing Critique Groups to Challenge Your Worldview Questions Topic 1: The benefits of diverse voices in critique groups Q1: What are the advantages a critique group with diverse voices, in background or in genre? Comment: I'm wondering a bit about "in background or genre." Diversity in genre is a valid thing to talk about, but I'm wondering if it takes away from the focus on inclusivity? Plus, I know people of the, ahem, puppy variety have tried to co-opt the term "diversity" for things other than the generally accepted usage meant to centre marginalized writers, so maybe we don't want to go there. Or maybe I'm making mountains out of molehills. Topic 2: How to make sure your critique group enables a culture of diversity Q1: Has ensuring diversity always been a focus of your critique group? If so, what did those in charge do make space for diverse voices when the group formed? Q2: How do you do you attract and keep diverse voices, especially if your group is primarily made up of members of a dominant culture? Q3: What are common pitfalls you have seen in critique groups trying to be inclusive? Topic 3: Accepting critiques that challenge your worldview and understanding Q1: For marginalized critiquers, what are the dangers to you in calling out bias? Do others always respond in a way you might expect? Comment: I've condensed it a bit, but this question is so important! Let's make sure we don't lose it. Q2: How should writers respond to critiques that say their writing is problematic or biased? Should that response change based on whether the writer does, or does not, agree with the critique? Topic 4: Allyship in critique groups - group roles in fostering inclusive environments (without depending on the emotional labor of marginalized writers) Q1: What are critiquers’ responsibilities when responding to stories that demonstrate problematic content or bias? (i.e. fridging, white savior narratives, etc.) Q2: What are critiquers’ responsibilities towards other group members when someone responds badly to being called out on bias in their writing or behaviour? Topic 6: The role of moderators in critique groups Q1: What additional responsibilities to moderators have, over and above other members, to ensure that marginalized voices in the group are not drowned out? Q2: How can moderators enable greater allyship in a critique group? How can mods foster an inclusive culture that empowers everyone to participate? (calling out bias, supporting marginalized writers, etc.) Q3: Maintaining the peace versus challenging bias- which is more important in a critique group? What if you lose members who are otherwise fantastic contributers, just because they are biased? Comment: Again, this question is really important--we definitely want to make sure it gets addressed. However, I'm a little leery of the current phrasing, especially since at the end of the day, we don't necessarily know who is going to be on or moderating the panel, and it potentially leaves the door open for someone to come waltzing in and declaring that actually, "maintaining the peace" is more important than supporting marginalized writers. We know that's a false premise, but we might be setting ourselves up the wrong way here. Conclusion: Personal notes Q1: How did you first get involved with a critique group? What was its composition? Did that composition change over time and if so, how did that affect you and your writing? (Potential shorter version of this question, as I think the longer version may be more appropriate for an intro): How has participating in a critique group with diverse voices affected you and your writing?

Absolutely, please do!

Working on it! I have some suggestions coming up as soon as I can manage. I do have another commitment tonight but I'll do my best. In the meantime, I'd like to suggest the following pitch strategy: As @kais has noted, there are separate forms for pitching panels and volunteering to be ON panels. I think that before anybody fills out either form, we should settle among a few "nominees" among ourselves. Each of those nominees would fill out the form with whatever else they're interested in, but also indicate that they're interested in participating in the Reading Excuses panel (or whatever we end up calling it). As for who those nominees should be: it's extraordinarily mercenary of me, but assuming kais and/or @Mandamon are willing, that might go a little ways towards helping the pitch be successful if we can name-drop you as published and self-published authors. Since some of the questions focus on mod responsibilities, it'd be good to have a moderator on the panel (not necessarily me; I'm sure there are others with more valuable contributions than I could make) and as Mandamon has noted, it'd be good to have a POC on the panel. The latter two are something that the Worldcon programming team can potentially help us out with, so worth flagging in the actual panel pitch. In essence, I think we want to be able to "nominate" specific people who we know are wiling, while also being able to do a general summary of the kinds of people we'd like to see on the panel. The panel pitch should also name the specific people who we've identified as interested and a good fit. I think the panel pitch should also emphasize that this is something our group specifically has been actively working on over its relatively long history, with some significant effort going into this in the last, what, 2-3 years? Then we just need to make sure we know who is submitting the final pitch. (I'm happy to do that but I'll defer to kais or whomever particularly wants to.) Gonna stop here for now because I suspect I'm going to get pulled into the aforementioned other commitment at any moment, but I'll definitely respond ASAP! I'm not actually sure that the programming team wants a list of actual questions (a generalized summary would probably be a good thing to provide either way) but it'll help us articulate the pitch to settle on some questions first, and if we choose not to submit the full list immediately, it will be good to be able to quickly pull it out on demand.

I dunno, with the way everyone's lining up out the door for this week... Alright, so we have @Robinski submitting tomorrow. Any other takers?

@kais this is a great start! Monday's a holiday for me, so I'll try to take some time over the long weekend to read more thoroughly and suggest some edits. It ain't me, that's for sure...

Thanks, kais! Mandamon, that's a point well taken. In general, though, I'd suggest we focus on what we want to see for structure/content for now. It'll make for a stronger pitch, and we shouldn't assume we will have much control over the membership of a panel if it gets accepted as part of official WorldCon programming; the experience of WorldCon participants this year and the language on Dublin's Q&A page both suggest this isn't necessarily the case. My initial suggestions for places to flush out some content would be (in no particular order): how a crit group enables an environment/culture where such matters can be addressed, the successes and challenges the group has had in doing so, why it's important to do so, and what the responsibilities are for members when commenting on others' work, members when receiving comments from others, and moderators in facilitating a safe environment. Thoughts?

I’d been thinking along these lines too! I’ll visit the worldcon thread when I have a chance. If I win, you can mail me a plate of fungus just so I can say someone did.

Oh no, sorry to hear that you're having so much trouble! Best of luck getting a replacement set up. We'll see you back here when you're able.

Please do!

I love this idea! These look great! Awesome! I'm not crafty at all, so I'll be pretty useless in this department unfortunately...

@ICanDream, do you know if you will want/be able to submit this Monday? Assuming "yes" for the moment, with @shatteredsmooth's request that means we still have three slots available.

Excellent point.

That could be fun! Not sure what we’d offer as a prize, though it feels like we should do something. Maybe having the top 3 stories linked to on the forum? That’d mess with people’s publication rights, but then I’m assuming these stories would already have to be linked to in some relatively open fashion as it’s be way too cumbersome for everyone if the stories were being shared on an individual basis. We’d have to be really transparent about that. But if it was a clearly “just for fun” deal that’d probably be fine. Personally, I’m wondering if we can get some sort of “unofficial official” event going at Worldcon. A meet-and-greet? A side panel in a custodial closet?

For the first few years, if memory serves, there was a similarly sized group of "constants," a lot of whom ended up wandering off in the span of a few months or so...

There is--please go ahead!

I see shatteredsmooth, Robinski, and Aeromancer for Monday (sorry, tagging doesn't seem to be working at the moment).

So it looks to me like we have @Majestic Fox, @Robinski, and @Zay Wolfe up tomorrow, with @ICanDream for next Monday.

*raises hand* 5 years is nothing to sneeze at!

You know what I realised earlier this evening, apropos of absolutely nothing? I'm pretty sure Reading Excuses was founded in Nov/December 2009. Which means that when we get together for Worldcon 2019 Recon 1, those of us who are able, we'll also have the opportunity to celebrate 10 years as a writing and critique group.

Not at all. We realise that stuff happens, and having more feedback never hurts. Critique (and submit) away! That means we have two slots still open.

Do it!

Anyone other than @Majestic Fox for Monday...?