Discussion 1: Welcome to the Hellmouth
Does anybody mind if I pass out?
Willow ,'Beneath You'
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
Wolfram - Mar 19, 2003 4:11:45 pm PST #8189 of 10001
Visilurking
Burrell - Mar 19, 2003 4:47:52 pm PST #8190 of 10001
Why did Darth Vader cross the road? To get to the Dark Side!
Can we call the thread something like Voting Issues or Voting Discussion, not just Discussion? I don't think the one word is clear enough.
DavidS - Mar 19, 2003 4:53:12 pm PST #8191 of 10001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."
Speak Softly and Carry a Big Whoop.
I like this or the Lightbulbs. Which does contain a multitude of layers.
Wolfram - Mar 19, 2003 4:58:19 pm PST #8192 of 10001
Visilurking
I don't get the Whoop thing.
Sean K - Mar 19, 2003 5:09:41 pm PST #8193 of 10001
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty
I'll back lightbulbs, just for the innuendo.
Ginger - Mar 19, 2003 6:03:24 pm PST #8194 of 10001
"It didn't taste good. It tasted soooo horrible. It tasted like....a vodka martini." - Matilda
I don’t post much, in part because I am hesitant to enter into and possibly disturb the community you have here. It is, as you know, generally a very nice place and always a very funny place, and I think you’re quite justified in being protective of it. I think I have been lurking long enough (several months, actually) to have internalized many of the rules. For example, the other day I found myself thinking, with some annoyance, “someone’s nattering in COMM.” I have read the FAQ and the Site Etiquette. While the policies are in there, I think it would be helpful to have, spelled out in an obvious place, a “geopolitical ramifications of being mean” section to which you could point offenders with a link. Perhaps it could just be a condensed version of the Etiquette unacceptable behaviors, along with the banning policy. This may be a part of developing a more codified “how to kill a troll” policy, as you’re discussing.
And I propose Discussion: Shout about it, when you’ve got to choose (Okay, I’m old. Simon and Garfunkel old.)
scrappy - Mar 19, 2003 6:06:58 pm PST #8195 of 10001
Nobody
Love your suggestion, Ginger.
Wolfram - Mar 19, 2003 6:14:04 pm PST #8196 of 10001
Visilurking
While the policies are in there, I think it would be helpful to have, spelled out in an obvious place, a “geopolitical ramifications of being mean” section to which you could point offenders with a link.
This is a good idea. I forgot to include in my previous epic-sized post, that I also don't think pulling an offender into Bureaucracy will be too effective. I've noticed in the other threads that people have a tendency to jump on the bandwagon for chastisement purposes and this can worsen a situation rather than ameliorating it. Pulling the offender into this thread only sets the stage for more of that kind of thing.
jengod - Mar 19, 2003 6:35:30 pm PST #8197 of 10001
I support a "geopolitical ramifications of being mean" document.
brenda m - Mar 19, 2003 6:48:24 pm PST #8198 of 10001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
I still think When Buffistas Attack needs to be used as a thread title somewhere, where it's not implying divisiveness.
For the next F2F?
No big whoop makes me think "Orange whip? Orange whip? Three orange whips." For some reason, whip appeal does not.