I don't think four or five people immediately responding "that's wrong" is piling on. It's when it starts to drag on and generate its own momentum.

I feel like there have been (in the past, not this week), accusations of piling-on that were due to crossposting. Because people were so quick to respond to a wrong post. (Sorry, I'm watching NYPD Blue and it's affecting my syntax. Such that the manner where I'm trying to get my position across might be confused along the way. And so forth.)

As for myself, I factor in x-posting. Anything that happens in the first batch of posts seems like an immediate reponse. The fact that there wasn't xposting after Sean's post is the thing that folks are feeling a little sheepish about.

I know. But part of why some people said they didn't post immediately was so as not to be seen as piling on.

Really, though, I'm trying to speak more generally.

As for myself, I factor in x-posting. Anything that happens in the first batch of posts seems like an immediate reponse. The fact that there wasn't xposting after Sean's post is the thing that folks are feeling a little sheepish about.

Please also factor in the fact that many folks flip, flop and fly through Natter and can easily miss a couple posts in the shuffle. Especially on a Monday morning when you haven't checked in all weekend and there's 400-odd posts in Natter waiting for you along with a ton of what-you-get-"paid"-to-do work, and especially when nobody actually says anything about the post at the time. I had to go back after bon bon's post to see what the heck she was talking about.

So unlike this thread, where posts tend to run scarce unless something major's going down, things get lost in Natter all the time. At least for me.

For much of what happened after that, I agree with most of what Jessica said here : Jessica "Bureaucracy 3: Oh, so now you want to be part of the SOLUTION?" Aug 31, 2004 7:14:02 am PDT,

A post from the peanut gallery:

Reading it all now, I agree that Jessica pretty much nailed it.

Now let's move on before we have to vote on something.

Now let's move on before we have to vote on something.

Is that a proposal?

There were six whole posts and seven minutes between the Sean and ita posts, and I think that's a lot of time. But that's just my opinion, and I can accept that we don't agree on it.

I think it's a lot of time, too--too much. When I was thinking about this last night, I wondered how much of it has to do with both ita and Sean generally being good posters.

It's not like either is a troll, or a problem child, or a even a person who is a little too guac-attracted. What we saw was something we've never really had here, before. That's not meant to excuse our non-reaction. Some of us should have said it was out of line, right away. But I am wondering if it explains it a little. I still feel badly that nobody spoke up for ita, until bon bon called us on it.

Billytea attempted to do the same to me when he insisted I could not win mano-a-mano in a squash court against a python; luckily there was a silliness filibuster.

It is my guiding principle: thou shalt not diss the echidna mole rat cassowary painted dog Komodo dragon octopus antechinus python.

(h) all of the above

I reached the same conclusions that Polgara did.