Not til around December 9th.

I would like for dw to be warned for posts that disrupt community harmony and, when, being called on it, not handling the disgruntlement.

I know I'm supposed to provide links so here we go.

The first ruffling happened around calling Seattlites "passive aggressive thugs" dw "Natter .38 Special" Aug 30, 2005 4:04:01 pm PDT. When Plei nicely chided him here P.M. Marcontell "Natter .38 Special" Aug 30, 2005 4:16:21 pm PDT, his response was to agree that she was indeed defensive (found dw "Natter .38 Special" Aug 30, 2005 4:34:22 pm PDT).

Next one that pinged me was dw "Spike's Bitches 26: Damn right I'm impure!" Sep 9, 2005 1:43:04 pm PDT The Frumpy Librarian slam. Which Sparky1 dispatched politely and quietly. And the response was, "HEY! That's my experience." In that same post there was something about Plei's name being Japense for a car that yuppie lesbians drive.

Then due to the power of software, things fell off radar for me. Until the big blow up two weeks ago in Bitches when he said that the people Susan was having a problem with should "Burn in motherfucking hell, you fuckheads." When called on that, he deleted it at some point, but continued to argue about how those people he was arguing with were in the wrong. In fact, he said that the onus should be on us to email him when we have an issue with something Susan says dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 1, 2005 6:38:40 pm PST.

When he realized he overreacted here dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 2, 2005 8:35:16 pm PST there wasn't an apology for the comment or even a statement that there would be an effort to change the reaction/behavior that prompted it.

which brings me to today. Susan posted about public schools here dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 3:50:24 pm PST, with an implication about their inferiority. dw backs her up dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 5:05:23 pm PST Kristin calls him on it and he responds dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 7:09:46 pm PST I post that I'm offended here Kat "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 7:55:48 pm PST dw responds to me dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 8:08:17 pm PST here. I respond with what I want which is not an apology, but merely an acknowledgement that what he said, especially following on Susan's comments, can be interpreted by those of who are teachers as offensive here Kat "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 8:45:00 pm PST

After a lengthy exchange in thread with Susan about it, dw posted dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 11:13:31 pm PST, which seems a clear disinterest in dealing with it in thread. And, so I'm here.

Whew...linky done.

So here's where I am and what I am upset about. It seems that there is a pattern of behavior where dw writes something that bothers people. They say something. He defends, counterattacks or ignores what they want. It simmers down. Then happens again.

To me, this seems like a breach of community standards and I'd like to see him warned. Not for any single incident per se, but because these skirmishes cause a disruption to our community.

So many of us say offensive things and when called on it, we learn how to gracefully back down or, if not, at least modify our behavior. I certainly hope that a warning here will do that.

Edited to add: if it were just me that gets bothered, I'd excercise my option to block. But it's not just me. And this is not me saying "the lurkers support me in email." It's me saying, I'm tired of watching LOTS of people get bothered.

I'll second this request.

I'll third.

I agree with Kat and Cass and Perkins.

The following post here dw "Spike's Bitches 27: I'm Embarrassed for Our Kind." Nov 17, 2005 11:13:31 pm PST where dw flat out REFUSES to acknowlege his offending Kat and others, is a direct breech of our community, along with the laundry list as shown by Kat.

Thanks Kat for taking the time to provide all the links. Attempts to deal with this in thread clearly have failed. My feathers have been more than ruffled, which takes a lot with my calm demeanor. (not last night)

eta: ok, now I have skimmed the conversations from last night and don't feel that dw's comments were out of line. To me he was clearly speaking about his personal experiences and not stating blanket statements about teachers.

It appears to be an oversensitivity based on the original major offense. dw's posts last night would not have caused any problem had he not offended previously. There were no personal attacks last night.

The question isn't really whether he was being offensive with his original statements last night. I thought they were kind of over the top, particularly the "drinking, writing detension slips and planning their retirement" line, but I think he did mean them to be directed only at his own experience. The disruptive behavior is his continued refusal to accept that his remarks offended people, apologize for the unintended offense and then let it go.

I'm not sure what happens when the poster decides to leave the community before 10 secondses are posted. Anyone?

I'm not sure what happens when the poster decides to leave the community before 10 secondses are posted. Anyone?

People leave and come back and leave and come back. I think a warning is a warning and how a person responds to it is their own business.

I agree a warning is in order, is "sheesh, learn to apologize for fuck's sake" a warning?

So I guess that makes me fourth, or fifth.

I'd like to ask that we try not to let this escalate. If the response to a warning is a snotty post I suggest we let that slide in a heat-of-the-moment way. If the response is a succession of snotty posts that's a different thing but I think any cooling-off period we can muster would be a good idea.

I can't even remember if we need secondses in order for someone to be warned.