I'm totally confused about what this vote thing is about.

Someone asked for a Stompy to please warn her about her behaviour. And then debate started over whether or not Zoe's behaviour warranted a warning.

I have no idea if a warning has been issued.

We aren't trying to VOTE on the issue, we're just being Buffistas and airing our greivences and opinions and thoughts.

There are many of us who have been holding our tongues for months.

There are many of us who have been holding our tongues for months.

And, to be totally accurate, a number who have NOT, who have asked Zoe, in-thread, to watch her tone.

When a poster does not adhere to the in-thread request to watch his/her tone, the next step is an e-mail from a Stompy, reiterating that request and (I think) pointing out that the next step, if the poster doesn't watch his/her tone, is suspension for 2 months.

We aren't talking about banishing her at this point. . . . If she listens to the warning and changes her ways then everything will be fine.

Yes, you are, because that is what HAS to happen if she doesn't heed the warning.

You are jumping way ahead of things.

Perhaps I can be accused of looking ahead, but only because nobody else seems to be willing to. Look, when you give an employee a warning at work, there is an implicit (or possibly explicit) statement of "Make it right, or you'll be fired." This is the same thing. If an employer does not then follow thru if it's not taken care of, there is no point to the warning being issued in the first place.

I know how squeamish we all are about this, but, damnit! You are saying "Oh, let's just warn her and then everything will be fine" and ignoring the possibility that it WON'T be.

However her response still wasn't very clear but I think everyone pretty much gave up on trying to get an understandable answer.

To be honest, I thought that her response was poorly thought out bullshit. Because she sometimes puts the quotes around the characters and sometimes around the actors, and sometimes around the names of the posters she is responding to, and sometimes around what appear to me to be random words.

"Oh, let's just warn her and then everything will be fine" and ignoring the possibility that it WON'T be.

Well, you're right. It might not.

Every posting board is not right for every person.

Someone asked for a Stompy to please warn her about her behaviour. And then debate started over whether or not Zoe's behaviour warranted a warning.

So, can ANYONE call out the Stompies? Honestly, I'm curious as to the procedure. Could (for example) Zoe call them out on, uh, whoever, for attacking and insulting her and trying to get her to leave the forum?

How many people does it take to call out the Stompies?

If it ain't codified, then it's just wanking.

I have no idea if a warning has been issued.

Not to my knowledge, and I would seriously doubt it.

We aren't trying to VOTE on the issue, we're just being Buffistas and airing our greivences and opinions and thoughts.

Nope, and, as I said above, I don't think that a vote is appropriate at this level.

Well, you're right. It might not.

That's all I'm sayin'.

Every posting board is not right for every person.

Nope.

If it ain't codified, then it's just wanking.

Could you elaborate? Wanking as in never-going-to-bear-fruit, or wanking as in an ineffective warning?

Of course there is no vote. I helped make these procedures, I know how they work.

I was one of the few back on WX , before we had the rules, saying "well what are we going to do if we have a problem poster, we need to think about that.."

I will say this again.

I think Zoe posts much of what she does in a deliberatly provactive way trying to get any type of attention and to stir up trouble.

Which is why I have no problem asking for her to be warned.

Wanking as in never-going-to-bear-fruit, or wanking as in an ineffective warning?

It was meant more as "guessing." So, if there's no set rules for how many people it takes to call out the Stompies, it's just going to be subject to each individual person's interpretations, and some Stompies could spend all day issuing warnings, while others go MONTHS without issuing one.

I'm exagerating for effect, of course, but you get what I'm saying.

I think Zoe posts much of what she does in a deliberatly provactive way trying to get any type of attention and to stir up trouble.

Which is why I have no problem asking for her to be warned.

I have my own opinions as to why she does it, which may or may not coincide. Aw, hell, they do, at least partially. I don't think that that is all the time, I think that there's more to it than that, but there always is. And it may be enough, if it continues, to warrant the big B, but if we're not prepared to enact that, without kidding ourselves, then this whole thing is pointless.

And if it is, then go in with guns blazin'.