I'm suggesting that making the first move towards warning be simpler, rather than hundreds of posters trying to decide whether or not a stompy should alert somebody that there was a problem.

In my opinion there were first moves being made before it got here. scrappy (?) someone sent an e-mail about the tone of posts, people posted in thread objections. Those to me are first steps.

FWIW, Zoe's web page seems to say she's left the Buffistas and is on another forum. So it may be she decided leaving quietly was a better option than defending herself here.

Personally, I don't like the idea of the entire warning process being done in secret. I think posters should be able to privately request another poster be warned -- but I think once a warning is being issued, it should at least be mentioned in here, so the warned poster can apologize, explain, etc.

OTOH, TT kept the whole warning/banning process private, which may have saved their admins some grey hairs.

I don't like the notion of backchannel at all. I prefer to discuss issues which concern the community in this thread. Whether it is proposing a new Monkey thread or discussions concerning violations of community standards.

See, I'm thinking of this as being a tactful-taking-person-to-one-side thing, rather than an ominous-behind-the-scenes thing. An initial step, or two steps, or three steps, to opening a dialogue and trying to sort things out before it gets to this kind of courtroom situation - and one which would actually take some of the onus off the stompies, 'cause it could simply be what happened to any poster who had given offence, to alert them to the fact that there really was a problem.

I'm not especially invested in this, incidentally - very much making it up as I go along, but I share Maysa's sense that this kind of public discussion of one's failings could be very intimidating for someone who wasn't actually a malicious troll.

Zoe's web page seems to say she's left the Buffistas and is on another forum.

Nah, she's been posting quite a bit in UnAmericans and other threads all the while this discussion's been going on (giving me a taste of what people are saying about the Angel thread). I'm pretty sure she's reading this.

Five e-mails would be enough for the stompies to backchannel among themselves, and consider whether the problem was primarily with poster or the people offended.

What you are describing here is a moderated board, which is not what we have here. This kind of massive structural change to the Buffistas would need to be put to the vote, and would likely be fought tooth and nail. If you think Kafka is ugly now, just wait....

If I were Zoe, I would be pretty intimidated in this forum. (Even after the first few posts about the situation)

Maysa - the first post by Kat was very calm. It was as much of a question on procedure as anything else. The second post was by Jilli, only linking to the incidents in the Angel thread. The third post on the subject was in Zoe's defense, by connie. The fourth was by bitterchick, not sure if a warning was warrented but recognizing a problem. The fifth was by Nutty, correcting what she thought was a mistatement by connie. The sixth was by Victor, pointing the finger (nicely) at people who have objected to Zoe in the past.

Then people started airing their complaints in general.

for reference, it starts at: Kat "Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier" Apr 11, 2003 3:05:10 pm EDT

But there already was taking aside. It's just that it got to the point that someone felt that it should go beyond taking aside. It got to the point that someone, lots of someones including me, thought there needed to be an official response, teeth or no (though I'm in favor of teeth) because the taking aside wasn't working.

I'm also against any kind of backchannel dealings, except on a strictly personal level. If Buffista X has an issue wth Buffitsa Y that for some reason Buffista X doesn't want to bring up in-thread, then s/he should email Buffista Y herself. It's really not fair to the stompies to expect them to be backchannel moderators in addition to everything else they're doing, especially now, while we've got so many technical issues to deal with.

And when a situation gets to the point where people feel official action is warranted, it should be handled here, in the open, where everyone can participate.

Personally, I think this situation was handled very well. We told her what was happening, multiple times and through multiple channels, and only acted officially after it became clear that she wasn't going to respond.

I just checked UnAmerican, and she has posted there within the last few hours. Sorry for my confusion.

Has anyone even had an email from her since this started? I can understand where this would be hard to read ... but I would still respond.

I emailed her the link to the start of the discussion, but have not heard back.