Spike ,'Showtime'
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Why should they have to decide if the email raises a valid issue or is just someone trying to stick it to a poster they don't like?
Presumably they have eyes, and brains. And I'm talking about email in addition to bureau discussion, not instead of.
It would be theoretically possible for a clique of 10 to all agree to email Stompies about someone who followed the rules, but they didn't like -- but rule-by-clique could happen just as easily with posts here as with emails.
Well, I consider rampant serial posting of utter nonsense to be trollish behaviour.
Right. I'm against anonymous complaints again. Because it puts onus on the Stompies, and blindsides everybody -- including the bystanders, who might have a contribution to make, if only they hadn't been left out of the loop. Maybe it's painful and scary to be totally on-the-record, for events which will be, you know, on-the-record, but it's the only ethical thing to do.
I don't think airing complaints here is a good idea. I think it leads to pile-ons. I think there should be a separate e-mail address for such complaints to go to. Otherwise, I find the stepped process a fine one.
Lyra, you really think that
1) there are groups of 10 that are going to try and push people out of Buffistas on a regular basis
and
2) if it looked like a group of people with a grudge against 1 person were trying to force someone out that the admins would allow that?
I don't think airing complaints here is a good idea. I think it leads to pile-ons. I think there should be a separate e-mail address for such complaints to go to.
If it's done by e-mail, people will complain about the process being secretive. It'll happen. I know it will.
All I'm saying is that we need more than just a 10-people-complained-official-warning-time criteria. There are other considerations.
And I want to know what you think they are. From my perspective, the only quantifiable element in a situation like this is how many people are hurt.
but there are people who will insult you whenever you enter a conversation, send you nasty emails, and generally make it no fun for you to be part of a community. I wouldn't say "yes, X deserves a warning" if X was like this, because frankly, life is nicer if you're low on X's radar.
Lyra Jane, if someone, veteran or not -- particularly a veteran who should know better -- is behaving in such a manner, it's the duty of every member of the community to speak up.
If you feel that someone is abusing you in this way, say something.
Now, I haven't noticed such behavior but then I'm not in all the threads. If we want to have an unmoderated board then what that means is we all become the moderators, and we're all responsible for maintaining the community standards. We can't hand the responsibility off to ita or the other Stompies, and if one person is offended regularly, chances are others are too.
Speak up.
I think it leads to pile-ons.
Can we define pile-ons? Is it more than a number of people agreeing about something?
No, but there are people who will insult you whenever you enter a conversation,send you nasty emails, and generally make it no fun for you to be part of a community. I wouldn't say "yes, X deserves a warning" if X was like this, because frankly, life is nicer if you're low on X's radar.
There are people who do this that are Buffistas? Because that is harassment, yo.