Am I correct in thinking people have e-mailed privately? Not that it really changes my stance, but I do like to have my facts straight.

You're right Cindy. I shouldn't make assumptions about her feelings. I think I was trying to make a point that the gentle had been tried and soundly ignored.

I missed a bunch, so here's a catch up post:

I can understand how someone may feel like the situation was very intimidating, and the decks were stacked against them.

And getting a warning out of the blue, telling you that X number of unnamed Buffistas had complained about you wouldn’t?

I'm not remotely advocating a "four complaints and you're banned" kind of policy. I'm suggesting that making the first move towards warning be simpler

But it goes warning/suspension/banning, right? So a poster wouldn’t have any chance to defend herself until after the first formal step was taken.

I was trying to suggest something that was automatic, in which a protest from or about Jo(e) BrandNewPoster would carry the same weight as a protest from or about Jo(e) PostingSinceTheDawnOfTime

As I stated before, I think that your proposal would do just the opposite. It would radically disempower the newer posters simply through intimidation.

I think some of us want moderators, or "automatic" warnings, for the same reasons--it lets us "off the hook" from playing the meanies ourselves. We want the problem to go away or fix itself so that we don't have to feel like the bad guy. I find it a tad disengenuous, just as I find the endless handwringing unnecessary.

a protest from or about Jo(e) BrandNewPoster would carry the same weight as a protest from or about Jo(e) PostingSinceTheDawnOfTime

This is the case now. I mean, we've got more veteran posters than newbie posters simply by virtue of the fact that posting with any kind of regularity turns you into a veteran fairly quickly around here. But it's never been the case that newbie complaints are taken less seriously just because they're made by newbies.

So Fay, considering that scrappy's (and I hate to keep using her name since I may be misremembering who said they sent e-mails) e-mail and in thread requests went ignored, do you think that she does give a damn about having caused distress?

Heather, I have no idea. I'm talking about general principles, rather than the specific instance of Zoe.

Sinc you ask, I still have no idea how to take Zoe, and, as I think I said when Scrappy (I think it was Scrappy, but it may have been someone else) told us about having actually emailed her and received no response, that does imply quite strongly that Zoe isn't prepared to engage in a discussion of the problem.

I have been trying to restrain my own frustration, because my impression has been that she isn't malicious. That counts a lot for me (although YMMV) in that I feel I should try to be kind/understand what's going on. So sue me.

Regardless - I was just making a suggestion about the general process with B MP, rather than talking about Zoe. It seems that my suggestion sucked, and would turn us into a police state moderated forum, which really wasn't my intention.

I would say we even listen to newbies more (not more than any other poster, but more than most boards).

Fay--you have such a good heart. And I love the way you can think on your feet and rethink your position without getting defensive or stupid.

Just weighing in--smonster emailed her privately as well, and let her know about it in-thread. AFAIK, she received no response.

I don't think Zoe's malicious either. I mean I don't think she's sitting there trying to disrupt. I do think she comes off as thoughtless, which to me, is pretty bad too.

Maybe we're talking past each other because I am talking about this situation, since it's the problem at hand. I see that people want to have firmer procedures in place, but right now I just want to figure out a way to handle this.

I agree that the person in question doesn't strike me as deliberately malicious in the same way that mieskie/Schmoker was. She is more like a child who hasn't learned manners.

Which doesn't mean that she shouldn't be dealt with, or that we should put up with her because of that. IMO, an official warning to her is long overdue, and if that ends up subsequently in banning, then... with all the sadness of our hearts, we'll have to do it.

(Which doesn't excuse actions like Allyson's vicious attack on her either, and much less the later bragging. But that's another subject, so I'll just leave it at that).