My 2 wooden nickels to add to the chorus from the Mostly Quiet People corner:

I'm a low-volume poster, high-volume reader. In the beginning, it was fairly easy to ignore Zoe's posts and self-MARCIE. Now, I'm finding it hard to Doblerize due to the following reasons (which may or may not involve my own Issues, all opinions strictly my own, YDramaMV):

• The volume of posts from Zoe: The amount of posts I need to skip make it hard to follow some threads because I have to do a lot of self-MARCIEing.

• The reactions from other posters: I have seen both gently polite and (IMO) inexcusably rude responses. Because people I want to read are talking about the posts, the look-at-the-train-wreck instinct kicks in and I end up going back just to understand *their* posts. I feel as if I have to skip half the thread to avoid dealing with this issue at this point and it's making it hard to enjoy my time in some threads.

• I find most of her comments to be incoherent, thoughtless or generally ignorant and when I do read her posts I end up staring at the screen trying to understand what was supposed to be communicated and frustrated that I can't. Totally my problem, but not helping.

This is becoming a (personal) vicious cycle because I am now hypesensitive to anything Zoe posts and predisposed to view it in an unfavorable manner. With the lack of inflection/body language, any innocent comment can be perceived in a negative light.

If there were MARCIE, I would put Zoe in it, but I would still be missing large parts of the discussions and feel I was missing out. This really bugs me. Again, this is totally my problem, but I think other people may feel similarly.

I don't feel like this is a situation comparable to cool kids picking on the different kid. I feel more like sand was dropped in the conversational gears instead of grease, or that Martha Stewart joined Punk Planet and tried to insert conversations about raising your own hens in the mosh pit.

This is not a value judgement - I don't think of anyone as a better or worse person for not having the same sets of values, communication strategies, or interests. It does mean that I personally may not want to spend my free time with them.

In a perfect world, we would all be able to accomodate everyone's induvidual quirks. In the real world, someone may drive me batshit for no good reason. Frankly, I have no idea whether to attribute Zoe's controversial posts to cluelessness, malice, or some amalgm of the two and don't care as long as some way to alleviate the problem appears.

Zoe seems to drive many people on the board batshit, possibly because we are heavy on the logical and analytic side of things. We are also heavily predisposed to embrace people who are 'different', for lack of a better term, since (IMO) a lot of us vary significantly from the mainstream in one way or another.

I think the divisiveness over what to do stems from wanting an inclusive community and being afraid to exclude someone for reasons of feeling they are incompatible (not evil, not stupid, just not fitting in). It's probably impossible to create hard-and-fast guidelines that account for this many people's individual feelings and a (IMO) general dislike of establishing positons of power/hierarchical structures that place some posters opinions above others makes "Who decides" a question no one really wants to answer.

At this point, enough people are upset that *some* kind of action should probably be taken, if only for Zoe's well-being, since I agree that discussion someone present in third person seems mean, although she has been given (IMO) adequate notice that it's happening and encouraged to participate.

I wish I had more helpful procedural things to suggest - my personal experience with artist's groups is that ultimately the Buck Stops with Someone and if the Universe is kind, everyone can agree on who the Someone (or Very Small Group) is. I know that this isn't the kind of action the Buffistas prefer, and am more than willing to try any idea for arbitration that's more democratically aligned.

Hope this all makes some sort of sense and helps in some way and that spending time trying to word carefully hasn't caused my spelling or grammar to fly out the window. I have to get moving to provide Amoral Support at a friend's music gig which became solo as of last night, will catch up when I get home. Thanks for taking the time to read.

I believe, if there is a poster who is offensive, either because they don't realize the line they've crossed, or think that this board is like any other, a link to bureacracy with a request to come and discuss board proper behaviour, in whatever form the request is worded, is the best solution.

I agree. I don't know if Zoe's lurking here, but I've seen two or three posts made to her in other threads inviting her over and telling her she's being discussed, and she's ignored them. In the light of Scrappy's comment:

I spent almost an hour composing a message to Zoe about why her posts might make people become angered and how she might change her style a bit to avoid that--since I saw this coming a couple of weeks ago. She never responded. I am not sure the comfort of the rest of us is of interest to her--although I hope I am misjudging her

it does rather seem that she's not prepared to enter into a dialogue about this.

Isn't this entire 300 post discussion a warning?

Dude. Just email her and toss her the link. If that's not enough, then no "official" warning is.

You've set it up so that all Buffistas are "officials."

Well, here's the official warning, Zoe. You've caused 300 posts in Bureaucracy because you've been an asshead. If I were you, I'd find another board, or, continue on in the same vein if your purpose is to get lots and lots of attention.

My personal opinion is that Zoe must be creaming herself at all the attention she's getting, but then again, I'm the one who had a fantastic time with the brain damage post.

When i apologized, i was apologizing to the Scrappy-shaped folks who were offended. I wasn't so much caring if Zoe had tossed herself into bed and cried, because I don't give a shit about her, personally. I gave a shit about me, and people I like, who were pissed off and otherwise annoyed, but too polite and/or kind to smack the shit out of her.

The thing is, that my post likely gave her an orgasm. She lives for negative attention, and this thread is loaded with it.

I think ignoring her will cut off her supply, but not all Buffistas are willing to do that, because they feel that anyone can be potty-trained.

Don't warn her, get rid of her. If it makes ya feel bad, I'll go in and euthanize her and everyone who finds it repugnant can dislike me, and everyone else can just be relieved.

Out of over 800 registered human beings, you've tossed two people. It's not like it's a big habit, or a slippery slope. It's a by-product of growing, it's a community bowel movement, and it's natural in the progression of any message board.

One of our neighbors is playing techno at a volume of 10 at 2AM every day, and after repeated requests by the neighbors to turn the volume down, she continues to go crazy with club mix. Now, some folks may be able to sleep through anything, and aren't bothered by it. Well, they shouldn't be bothered by the eviction of the tenant, either. If you're not bothered by the noise she makes, then you shouldn't be pissed about the noise I make about her.

Really, she's not added anything positive to the community with her presence, so what's with the big?

It really breaks my heart to come in here and see us turning ourselves inside out again and again. I don't want to sound uncaring, but really. We have community standards. We have a procedure in place for dealing with people who break them. It is clearly stated. Anyone interested in being a part of this community can (and should) find out what the standards are and what the process is for dealing with those who don't adhere to those standards.

Many people feel that Zoe has broken those standards. They've cited examples and linked to specific posts. Personally, I have no problem with Zoe, but my ability to do a personal MARCIE is vast. It contains multitudes. Clearly, she's upsetting a lot of other community members with her posts. Why on earth do we have a process if we are not going to use it? Warning Zoe doesn't make us the bad guys. It doesn't make us less compassionate or less accepting. We just want to follow the process that many thoughtful people designed to deal with just this very situation. If people feel uncomfortable with "warning", call it a notice, call it what you will. But I think it's clear that some type of action needs to be taken.

I'm just afraid that the more we go around and around with this, the greater the chance that we're going to get into a mieskie-type situation, which was so disruptive and hurtful for us as a community. This "warning"/notice is actually an attempt to reach out to Zoe and bring her in line with the rest of the community, not force her out. Or at least, that's my impression. No one is saying "Let's kick Zoe out.", though probably some might like to. They're just saying "Let's do what we said we would." And I agree. We have a procedure in place. Let's follow through with it. It may be a little unpleasant. Nobody likes to have to look like the "bad guy". But this merry-go-round of knives we're on with each other is infinitely more unpleasant and disruptive for our community.

Allyson, I love ya, but please tone it down a bit. I'm afraid you're hurting your own argument, and that's not of the good.

If I make an officially-worded request for a no-consequences first notice to Zoe, and it's seconded and thirded and so on by a lot of posters, can we just send her an email already? Because, if so:

This is an official request for a notice from the admin account to the poster Zoe Ann, informing her that her behavior is extremely disruptive to the community. I would like this notice to explain why she is receiving it (i.e., she has been rude, repeatedly ignored repeated requests for clarification and apology, over a long period of time, and on numerous occasions). I would also like the notice to make it clear that we are not threatening her with suspension or banning or anything else, at this time; if she corrects her behavior, there will be no further problems. I would like this notice to be sent damn soon, because I'm fresh out of patience. And bubble gum.

I'm standing firmly in the corner with Allyson on this.

I really don't care why Zoe behaves as she does. If she's doing it because she enjoys the ruckus, or because that's just how she is, or it's a great big joke or experiment.

Fact is -- community standards exist. There has been no move I've seen here to change them. She's violated them. There has been a stopgap suggestion, and it's a harmless one, so I'm very pro it.

So, over a hundred posts ago I wrote:

I personally feel that a formal warning system is less confrontational or mean than sparing in the threads. I also feel a warning is appropriate in this case. My understanding of the warning system is that it is not a trip to the woodshed but rather a polite attempt to explain community standards to posters who appear to not understand them.

Since that time and included within a couple hundred posts before I have seen many requests for a warning. I'm not counting them. I sent a personal message myself. I am not a stompy so I will leave it to someone more authoritative to do any wording.

I'm off to do some tuna grilling now. Peace, love... and shit. very little humor from F2F discussion I missed

Allyson, I love ya, but please tone it down a bit. I'm afraid you're hurting your own argument, and that's not of the good.

The thing is, Holli, this isn't me. Buffistas were an oasis. I don't post here, much, anymore. The voting stuff sent me over the edge, and then the truckloads of posts on how to deal with assholes sealed the deal.

I don't so much participate, and I miss it, but the board culture changed, so I bought myself a subscription to the Well, and decided I'd rather chill with folks who have "been there and done that."

And the thing is, I'm fairly valuable. When I participate in a community, I do so wholeheartedly, and spend the time and heart to make a positive contribution and hope that I somehow enhance other people's experience in the community, and they in turn enrich my experience.

It grates me in ways I can't fully describe that so much energy is used to discuss whether or not we should cut the cancer, or bottle feed it.

I can't see people like Zoe, or Mrsthebloody, or mieske, as anything else but a malignant growth.

I feel like a rat jumping the sinking ship when I read this stuff. It sucks.

Okay, I just read this whole thing and I'm reminded of why last month I suggested we get a formal system down for warnings/suspensions/bannings. I think the sheer volume of posts in this thread means that she needs a formal warning.

Do I think it's going to do any good? Well, no. I don't think it's going to make the slightest difference in how she posts. But I think it will help the community a great deal. People feel very frustrated right now. Maybe if they know she's been warned and is treading on a slippery slope, everyone can take a breath and calm down the next time she goes off.

The mental illness thing really bothers me. Because I have posted with people who have had truly challenging disabilities. I once had a poster who was MP. They never violated the rules of my board nor were they a disruptive presence. Not once. And if there is some problem that makes her unable to follow the rules, then this isn't the forum for her. Now, if we knew she had a problem and she told us of it and was making an attempt to work within the existing CC, that's a different story. That's not what's happening here.