Will people think I'm losing it if I want to say one last thing about the m/s/a issue?

Yes! Why are we (not just John) all so obsessed with being right about this? Some people feel one way, and some people feel another way, and the twain may never meet. Moreover, what kind of silly people are we to try and convince each other with logic to feel a different way?

I think more than one person herein the past 14 hours has flirted with being insulting to other people's feelings, on several sides of the issue, and that makes me sad and angry. I'm very pleased it's gotten back to "how I feel" and "why I did X" in the past 30-40 posts.

Feelings is feelings, and trying to argue with feelings is like trying to beat someone to death with a feather. Diplomacy is acknowledging and stating your feelings without wielding the violent feather.

I have a great deal of interest in discussing the procedure, because while I can say without a doubt that we handled the situation as best we could, I'd like to not have to be left in the same gray zone again.

With Victor on this. When we've all had a good cry and a good nap, can we convene for a Stompy Foot Duties caucus? Say, next Monday or something?

Can't we go back to talking about Nutty's bras again?

Yes! Today I am wearing something by Bali, which is incredibly old and ratty. If you'll turn to the Natter thread, we can begin a discussion about the vagaries of bra design during the course of the hormone cycle.

I have a great deal of interest in discussing the procedure, because while I can say without a doubt that we handled the situation as best we could, I'd like to not have to be left in the same gray zone again.

With Victor on this. When we've all had a good cry and a good nap, can we convene for a Stompy Foot Duties caucus? Say, next Monday or something?

I'm all for discussing this issue in a calmer frame of mind. I'd hate to put in a whole bunch of silly rules and regs, and get caught up in a storm of paranoia and 'what ifs.' I think the true benefit from such a discussion is that it would make us each think about how we'd behave when faced with a troll.

If this teeny not-quite-a-troll can cause this much damage, what happens if a real troll shows up? Can we be prepared? Is there anything we can do without damaging the community?

To me, these are two very different types of poster. Real trolls aren't a threat to community Zen, because they manage to build a great consensus against themselves.

This type is different. This type is disruptive because s/he can carry on a decent on-topic conversation when s/he chooses, doesn't *exactly* flame, just breeds dissent, blames others when s/he's called on problematic behavior, yet still manages to ingratiate himself into the sympathies of our more compassionate members.

Why are we (not just John) all so obsessed with being right about this?

Because we see this board as a safe haven. We'd like to share it with others who belong here, and keep out those who'd disrupt or destroy it. And if we make any mistakes on these calls, someone(s) will get hurt.

I'm all for discussing this issue in a calmer frame of mind.

Wrod. Count me in for waiting a few days to discuss general rules re the treatment of trolls. Monday sounds good to me. (But I'm one of the less frequent posters in this thread, so feel free to ignore me on this.)

I'm all for the TWoP way of dealing with trolls.

It's in the week long, 500 post discussion about whether or not a person who calls all of us a bunch of elitist cuntbags and then apologizes, fits for a day, and then calls one of us a rusty douchebag, apologizes, blames it on medication, is okay for three days, makes two friends who are unaware of the problem, and then repeats the problem, that the real damage occurrs.

"Perhaps we can TRAIN the troll!"

"He makes good points in the Angel thread when he's not calling us douchebags!"

You can't train a troll. This is how a troll operates. They make a few friends, and make a few enemies, and toe the line until people are driven crazy.

THAT's the kind of troll that destroys.

I'm all for the TWoP way of dealing with trolls.

I only hang out in the C.S.I. forums which are for the most part pretty civilized, so I haven't seen any examples of TWoP troll-dispatchment. What do they do to them?

Because we see this board as a safe haven. We'd like to share it with others who belong here, and keep out those who'd disrupt or destroy it. And if we make any mistakes on these calls, someone(s) will get hurt.

Particularly now when my world is full of confrontation I want to come here to feel safe.

I have to say, one thing that this whole mess has convinced me of is that there needs to be someone(s) empowered and willing to act against disruptive community members. Probably those someone(s) discuss it amongst themselves before they act, but taking it to Bureaucracy every time seems likely to lead to long drawn-out conversations and hurt feelings.

I'd suggest a system like:

1) Anyone can volunteer. There are N empowered people at any given time; first-come, first-served. Everyone else is on a wait list, and the role gets cycled through say every three months.

2) A discussion of community values is had before the system goes into place, so we can come up with some rough consensus there.

3) The e.p.s act when necessary. They discuss the matter among themselves, but they don't have to put anything short of a full ban to a vote here.

And for everyone who hates the idea of a Stompy or whatever being empowered to act without consensus on all his/her actions, I'll remind you of the scene the term comes from in the first place; Buffy doesn't want to be a disciplinarian, wants to be able to keep just being Dawn's friend, but Giles, ever the grown-up, points out that it's her responsibility and Dawn needs her to accept it. If all the Stompies do is tech admin stuff, and that seems to be their primary role at this point, then who is responsible for making sure, metaphorically, that beds are made and people get to school on time? Because someone has to do that job, whether in a household or a community.

I, however, am not a 14-year-old girl and do not want/need someone to act in my best interests.

That would be a very big change in philosophy for Buffistas, and one that some Buffistas would feel was anti-Buffista.

X-post