Yeah, the community isn't defined as who paid, it's defined as who contributes. Which includes all kinds of people who've contributed their words and thoughts and etc. as well as the people who contributed their money. There are lurkers who paid, and they'd have a hard time speaking up against someone rude, just because most people wouldn't know their names.

I don't think the Buffistas that sent money have more rights than the ones that didn't. That's not all that building the board is about.

Aha, that may have been the objection that was raised, yes.

Here's my counter-argument. My contribution was on behalf of both me and [insert name here] who couldn't afford it, but was around back then.

Me, I didn't pay. Sure, spurious what with the coding, but still.

If we were selling rights (or trading them for work), we should have said up front.

As a Stompy, I'm torn. I do not want to be argued with when action is called for. And I don't want to be where all the decision lies.

That having been said, I think the Stompy Foot mix is sufficient that the Most Sensitive Common Denominator is a good guide.

three did and three thought you were hilarious?

Then I figure we shrug and deal for awhile.

And, of course, we discuss it here like adults.

There are also people who've come around recently who are clearly respected members of the community. It's not even about longevity. The fact is, we do know it when we see it, and we are wary about stomping with our feet on people, and we give people the benefit of the doubt, and then we have a procedure. If the stompy feet can't agree to give someone a warning, well, we'll cross that bridge if we come to it.

I've noticed that things have calmed down there since the focus has turned back to the show, and away from the Natter. I hope staying on topic helps. (Catching up in the thread it has read like a strange, through-the-looking-glass Natter where everyone was nattering to avoid the trollage.)

BTW, I think the actions taken were appropriate and I was glad to see the warning.

we do know it when we see it

This is our policy in a nutshell, isn't it? "We know it when we see it, and we know who 'we' are"?

Yip.

In my experience, this can be troublesome. People change over time. What if a longstanding member becomes increasingly offensive over time? Other long-termers may not become offended because they are gradually exposed to a persona overtime. But if a newbie did the same thing, people might find it offensive.

Not trying to be problematic throwing this out there.. but have run into just this situation on another forum and I don't know what the solution is. We made the mistake of giving someone leeway for too long, and ended up really dividing the board by trying to achieve both transparency in moderating, and respect for longtermers.

Nothing is foolproof, but I'd like to think that if an oldtimer starts disturbing the community that the oldtimer gets talked to. Same with a Stompy Foot.

We did have a foo-furrah back in the day when an old timer said things that other people found intensely offensive. As has been mentioned upthread, the reaction to chiding is the telling part. This oldtimer was ... not officially warned since that was before here ... but people spoke up, like Betsy and Suela did today. And the person made their decision, which was to leave.

I'd like to think that the same procedure would come into play, when someone crosses the line that the community reacts, and then it escalates from there.

Like to think.