If you take sexual advantage of her, you're going to burn in a very special level of hell. A level they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theater.

Book ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'


Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier  

A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.

Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych


Allyson - Jan 28, 2003 11:39:23 am PST #3791 of 10001
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica

I've gathered that you and Kristen were both important somehow on the Bronze boards, but there seems to be some sort of story about what you did there that makes you important in fandom and connected to ME staff, and I don't know that. Could I have the reader's digest version, please? Thanks.

I'm not really sure how to answer that. Maybe Monique did. It makes me uncomfortable.

We both were involved in boards that tanked due to infighting and assholes, and splintering.

Unsure what ME staff has to do with any of it, or why it's relevant to our experiences with fandom and message board dynamics. Maybe you could clarify?


Lyra Jane - Jan 28, 2003 11:44:49 am PST #3792 of 10001
Up with the sun

I didn't want to make you uncomfortable. You said, basically, that I should shut up because I didn't have context on what K. was saying. After I had some time to think about it I decided to ask for context, because it was clear to me there was backstory there I simply did not know. Maybe I should have emailed, but I felt odd about doing that.

ME is relevant b/c I've seen your posts about Fury & Minear things, and I wasn't sure if it was an official connection (e.g., employment) or an unofficial one. Monique did explan that for me.


DavidS - Jan 28, 2003 11:46:25 am PST #3793 of 10001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."

I'm not really sure how to answer that. Maybe Monique did. It makes me uncomfortable.

Monique did. Emphasizing, of course, the only reason anybody should pay attention to you and Kristen is because you both know her.

I think Hil neatly summed up the issues around thread-proliferation. Let's let that sit for a bit, then come back and make a community decision about how to go forward. We don't need to rehash this debate much more, I don't think, so let's get a protocol in place. Let's remember that it isn't an either/or issue and that ultimately we'll probably come to a compromise stance that allows for growth, but not unchecked, and that also factors in bandwidth.

I'm glad there has been Doberlerization.


Monique - Jan 28, 2003 11:46:35 am PST #3794 of 10001

We both were involved in boards that tanked due to infighting and assholes, and splintering.

Yeah, that too.

I like to block that part out, though.

Emphasizing, of course, the only reason anybody should pay attention to you and Kristen is because you both know her.

No no no no no.

It's not the only reason. It's simply the most important reason.


Sophia Brooks - Jan 28, 2003 12:02:47 pm PST #3795 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here

I think what Anne says has a lot of merit. I am still piping up about tableing discussion of new threads until we figure out what is going on with Buffy and Angel, in which case I think we certainly will need a raison d'etre other than natter.

Also, I think we need to do something (I am not sure what), about core members (including myself) wanting to stop reading Bureacracy. This seems wrong, although maybe everyone is just testy because of the cold, like everyone in my office!


DavidS - Jan 28, 2003 12:09:32 pm PST #3796 of 10001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."

It's not the only reason. It's simply the most important reason.

So sorry. That's a key distinction.


Lyra Jane - Jan 28, 2003 12:10:04 pm PST #3797 of 10001
Up with the sun

I am still piping up about tableing discussion of new threads until we figure out what is going on with Buffy and Angel, in which case I think we certainly will need a raison d'etre other than natter.

Modified proposal (I know, I said I was out of this discussion, but oh well): we table the larger "where do we go from here?" question and focus on the specific threads that had been proposed as of yesterday. I'd like to see movies, general TV-NAFDA and general TV-Unamerican. I'm not in a rush, but ISTM the time to start those threads is about now, both because of sweeps and because the big holiday movies are still in theaters.

Also, why do the Foamies need a separate thread, rather than being in movies?


§ ita § - Jan 28, 2003 12:10:48 pm PST #3798 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

core members

There's that concept again ...

why do the Foamies need a seperate thread?

Separate from which thread? Natter?


victor infante - Jan 28, 2003 12:11:41 pm PST #3799 of 10001
To understand what happened at the diner, we shall use Mr. Papaya! This is upsetting because he's the friendliest of fruits.

Also, I think we need to do something (I am not sure what), about core members (including myself) wanting to stop reading Bureacracy. This seems wrong, although maybe everyone is just testy because of the cold, like everyone in my office!

You may have something there. Still, I think everyone needs to step back again and take a deep breath.

As far as I'm concerned--and I'm speaking only for me here--everyone's opinions and experience are valued, no one needs to prove their street cred, and nobody needs to prove their identity. People overreact. It's life. Best to just get past it.


Lyra Jane - Jan 28, 2003 12:11:53 pm PST #3800 of 10001
Up with the sun

I edited, ita, because I had the same question when I reread. Separate from general movies talk.