On #1., I'm coming more and more down on the side of "Enough already. Systemic disregard is warnable."

On #2., yes. Boilerplate we can pull up at will. No inventing warnings on the fly, no having to draft. Boilerplate warning text.

I'm with Plei, on both points.

Our site etiquette currently reads:

Consistent demon-like behavior may earn a warning from the Stompy Feet. If you don't listen to the warning, you will be suspended for two months. And if you come back unreformed, you will be banned. Banning is rare and very much a last resort.

What I sent Zoe wasn't a warning. Some of the delay in my sending it was because I didn't know what to write. I made some stuff up, but really, I thought that was what Cindy was composing. Since her text said nothing about the meaning of the warning, and that another warning would result in suspension.

That was my understanding too. I think a stompie may want to give a person an unofficial warning to help guide them and keep them from getting the OFFICIAL AND PERMANENT WARNING. I think this should be up to the discretion of the stompy based on the level of egregiousness.

And on the topic, I'm sure a consensus was reached as to the Warning/Suspension/Banning system long before my own registration, but I believe a two month suspension may be too long considering the initial point of this board which is to discuss recent episodes of BtVS, Angel and other M.E. related things. Two months can be a third of the television season. I personally think one month is a better length for suspension because it's a sufficient cooling off period, and should the offender learn his lesson, he doesn't need to miss a whole bunch of episode discussions. If he doesn't learn his lesson - ban. IJS.

I'm sure a consensus was reached as to the Warning/Suspension/Banning system long before my own registration

Yep. Before this board existed, in fact.

Over the weekend, I went from wanting a warning to being willing to compromise with an unofficial, no-black-mark notice/intervention, basically to avoid people feeling bad. Now I'm seeing a resurgence of people who are pro-warning.

Practically speaking, it would be kind of stinky if we went to warning now, having done the notice/intervention just a day ago. Unless we have a new, cited offense, we should go back to talking theoretically, yes?

I'm willing, as I said roundabout-wise last night, to sit down and work up a law document, based on what we have and have not decided in these 9,999 posts. I suppose I should go back to WX Bureaucracy too? That's where a lot of the original consenses were worked up. I'll need a few days and/or a few co-helpers, but with luck and finesse we can see what bases we've covered, what's still not covered or was never consensed about, and what gaps to fill.

One of those gaps being "Exactly How To Phrase A Warning". And assembling the Three Whoops I Mean Two Stone Tablets of Buffista Law, and publicizing them, will decrease the amount of confusion and procedural argument on this thread. I hope.

We developed the system on WX and mostly hoped we wouldn't have to use it and then were thrust into this situation with a population explosion and mieskie.

I don't know how to phrase this the right way and I'm not trying to put anyone down or offend anyone, but I think part of the disconnect we are having is that some people will be okay with saying "the behaviour is unacceptable and has to stop, if it doesn't stop, then the poster has to go." And others will never be comfortable with that.

Wolfram, also there's more to Buffistas than just talking about the episodes. Although I realize that many people come here just to talk about the shows there are many, many places to do that online and during those 2 months that someone is suspended they can find a place to discuss Buffy.

I can name 4 other places, not including the newsgroup, to find discussions of Buffy/Angel off the top of my head.

And on the topic, I'm sure a consensus was reached as to the Warning/Suspension/Banning system long before my own registration, but I believe a two month suspension may be too long considering the initial point of this board which is to discuss recent episodes of BtVS, Angel and other M.E. related things.

Wolfram, I don't want this to come across as snippy, but honestly, my reaction to the above is something like screaming horror.

I'm sorry you disagree with the policy we have in place, but we cannot stand to revist every policy every time someone new joins the board and disagrees with them.

Also, a suspension doesn't prevent someone from reading the board. Just posting. So it's hardly like we're depriving someone from our glorious ep discussion.

Practically speaking, it would be kind of stinky if we went to warning now, having done the notice/intervention just a day ago. Unless we have a new, cited offense, we should go back to talking theoretically, yes?

How long is long enough to wait when you know that the unofficial notice/intervention has done as much good as pissing into the wind? (This is a serious question. I'm seeing what look like redoubled efforts to annoy.)

Nutty, I think that would be incredibly useful.

Wolfram, also there's more to Buffistas than just talking about the episodes. Although I realize that many people come here just to talk about the shows there are many, many places to do that online and during those 2 months that someone is suspended they can find a place to discuss Buffy.

First of all, Buffistas is the One True Place to discuss M.E. episodes, and I won't hear of any other site being it's equal.

Secondly, is the point of the suspension to cure the inappropriate behavior, or to encourage the person to find somewhere else to go permanently? Or a bit of both? Because the latter makes suspension tantamount to a ban.