Mike, a 'real Buffista' is someone who contributes to the community where and how they can, and abides by the community standards we've developed. I'd say, according to that definition, you're certainly a Buffista, if you want to be.

I just came to say what Suela (and askye) already said better.

I can understand where the feeling of 'not yet a real Buffista' comes from, at least for the time that I've felt it as a relatively newbie - it takes time to feel a part of a group that's already closely knit together, with a 'history' and events they remember together and sometimes are vague about it (remember the Willow and Xander scene in, I think, "Invisible Girl", laughing at some memory, and Buffy, knowing that they're her bestest friends, still felt pretty much not one of the group - that's the kind of feeling I'm thinking about), it takes time to be comfortable to use the slang, to call people by their nicknames and be familiar with the (OK, I practically typed a Hebrew expression here and deleted it) people that are already at the party. But being new doesn't mean the presence is less, just shorter, if I'm making any sense.

Also, I take issue [with] the rather glib, negative and out of context characterizations regarding Mieskie's posts in Cindy's 'nilly' of them. This is not in any way meant to be an attack on Cindy, merely a statement of my opinion.

I'm sorry the link descriptions came across as glib. For the record, before I continue, I didn't take anything Mike posted as an attack, but rather an honest critique. I was trying for a lighter tone, but in retrospect, I can see where it might have come across as glib. I was trying to avoid sounding harangue-ish. Again, I'm sorry.

I was only (in that lighter tone), trying to give a hint at which particular incident to which each link would lead. I don't think there was a concise way to provide any context, because the context itself can only be found in the linked posts and the discussions of which they were a part. My descriptions weren't intended to provide context, just as a book index doesn't.

Sorry, Bets, I'm ear-worm proof. Nyah.

as evidenced by this and our pre-Phoenix discussions on the matter, we don't shut up even after consensus has been reached.

Heh. (1) We looooove to talk. And (2) more importantly, there's a very strong ethos here of wanting to, for want of a better term, do the right thing. Anne described it perfectly here:

I'm glad that we are able to post-mortem, vent, re-hash, and basically just let ourselves get settled again after the Recent Unpleasantness. I was on another board where a member was banned after sub rosa discussion by the mods. The banning took a lot of people by surprise, but unfortunately the banning came along with an edict of We Shall Not Speak of This Again. It led to a lot of backchannel nastiness, etc. I'm also glad that all of this discussion has taken place where any Buffista, from the tall to the small, can read and take part in it.

We may overtalk things, but it's to a good end.

Chiming in with the Buffista-love

That is all.

I just want to chime in by repeating both a point other people have made, and a point I have made.

As other people have said, basically you are a real Buffista once you delurk and consider yourself a real Buffista. I really think it is more your own comfort level. Mike, if you are willing see yourself as a Buffista you now are one. You disagreed with us - but did so politely. That is all we ask. I disagree with people a lot - and so long as I do it politely it is not objected to.

But one point that may be controversial, that I made before. I do think there is such a thing as a core Buffisita. It takes a lot of work to keep this place going. Some of us (not me) do a lot more of that work than others. People who take up the thankless work of coding the board, or being a Stompy Foot, or any of a number of things are doing more than the average bear to keep us going. That makes them core Buffistas. 0

It is just like any volunteer group. A few people do most of the work; in this group that is recognized, and on internal Buffista matters their opinion will weigh more heavly whether they formally have more authority than anyone else or not. (And Allyson, you are definitely part of that core group.)

You core Buffistas (and except for Allyson apparently, you know who you are) who hate the idea of being in that position will just have to live with the fact that you have done a lot of work, earned some respect for it, and will be listened to more than your average bear as a result.

Okay, now I feel bad.

One, yes there is a Core Group of Buffistas, people who worked really hard to get us where we are.

I was mostly worried about "real" buffista vs, not a real buffista with other posters.

Also, I used Allyson as an example from something I drug out of my memory from when we were trying to hash out the policies & procedures for dealing with difficult members back on WX. I don't mean to speak for Allyson and I may be misrepresenting her viewpoint entirely.

In the Firefly thread there was a post from DXM that M had been suspended, Steph blessing the decision, then Scrappy posted a reference to M's farewell 'big brother' reference and Jon posted a request to not talk about it any more. That was the only discussion of which I was aware at the time.

Like DX, in retrospect, I should have said "go to Bureaucracy", rather than just "Move on." If you didn't know about the discussion here, it would have sounded (did sound!) like I was just trying to suppress discussion, and for that I apologize.

My general response to the idea of people in charge is summarized in the following:

The Catalan Oath of Allegiance

We, who are as good as you, swear to you, who are no better than us, to accept you as our king and sovereign lord, provided you observe all our liberties and laws--but if not, not.

Hey this might be a dumb question, but what would we have done if mieskie came to this thread and posted annoying and combative stuff?

Mike's posts kind of make the point, were we talking secretly behind his back? And what would we have done if we'd no longer been able to do so?