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.

Well said, Bitter.

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.

YES.

Also, the speculations about Zoe's mental capacity are, I think, incredibly inappropriate and are making me (and others, I think) very uncomfortable. Unless she weighs in here and mentions neurological impairment herself, I really feel that that topic should be off limits.

What bitterchick said.