I think we need to do more than "encourage". I think it ought to be grounds for a warning.

Err. I'd rather we not identify anything as automatically deserving of a warning. Context is everything.

signed, me, the moral relativist

which prompted no changes to what I posted

There was also some agreement that something should be done to remember the Stors.

Consuela -- you're right. But I still think if anyone does it, and it's not two friends busting on each other, it deserves more than a finger wag.

Speaking of the FAQ, there will be an entry explaining how to use the filter. I think there ought to be a line at the end saying something like "announcing you've filtered someone is considered extremely rude, and may be grounds for an official warning".

There was also some agreement that something should be done to remember the Stors.

Yup. And the stuff from Dialect that it is outdated for the board but still should be archived. I will note that - and what is to be archived for Dialect when I get to it.

Speaking of the FAQ, there will be an entry explaining how to use the filter. I think there ought to be a line at the end saying something like "announcing you've filtered someone is considered extremely rude, and may be grounds for an official warning".

Should this, in whatever form it takes eventually, maybe be on the "How To" page - and then repeated in the FAQ?

In short, don't make a point of announcing "That's it! Fuck you psycho crackpot! You're on my filter" and flouncing off. In short, the first rule of filtering is don't talk about who you're filtering.

From now on I'm going to call the filter 'Flight Club'.

Should this, in whatever form it takes eventually, maybe be on the "How To" page - and then repeated in the FAQ?

I would agree with that.

"Am I done, now" being a shout-out to Doyle's last line is rather poignant. It kinda stops working, if it is not a quote.

Mmm . . . I guess. I'm more liking it for the "no better Angel line to title the 'last' thread with" than the shout-out-iness. Just like it better with "we". (shrug) But I will not be too upset if it is "I".

I think we need to do more than "encourage". I think it ought to be grounds for a warning.

It would have to be looked at in context, but if being just plain mean is warning grounds so is threatening blocking. I hope friends don't start with the blocking threats in jest unless it is really damned obvious because this would be very confusing to newbies. please don't block me

Speaking of the FAQ, there will be an entry explaining how to use the filter. I think there ought to be a line at the end saying something like "announcing you've filtered someone is considered extremely rude, and may be grounds for an official warning".

I think it needs to be stomped, too. I don't even think joking about it can be allowed, because newbies may not get the difference. It is one of the "The first rule of filter is that we don't talk about the filter" situations.

See, I think the day we start limiting what we can joke about is...um...an unfunny day?

I'm completely in favor of people not using the filter as a club to harass people with, but we can't pretend we don't have history with each other. A lot of us give each other shit. It's what we do. It's just something newbies will have to figure out.

In theory I agree, Dana. But part of what happened with Schmoker was that he tried to joke with people the same way they joke with each other, and it went really badly. I dunno. I don't want us to say something cannot be said, because that's getting kind of TWoP, but the tone would be so subjective that it might be easiest to make the rule that you don't talk abotu the filter.