I'm very possibly in the existential corner, if someone can prove to me that it exists.

Allyson--As I said earlier, I think this was settled when you apologized, but since you said you were open for feedback, here's mine. I understand that you were angered on behalf of your friends and I understand that you want Zoe gone, but the thing is, I don't want that to be your decision. I want that to be a decision of all the interested parties, includng myself I value my personal autonomy and hate to have it infringed, even by people whose hearts are in the right place. If we are out and some jerk hassles me, I don't want my BF to step up and deck the guy. I like that he wants to protect me because he loves and values me, but it's my call. To take the choice away from me feels really disrespectful to me.

Just a suggestion: We have a proposal before the board in Lightbulb. Why don't we all step away from the Zoe discussion until that point is settled. Once we have a procedure in place, those who feel like she needs a formal warning can come back to Bureaucracy and try to muster the "X" number of votes if they so desire.

Sounds sensible to me.

The whole entire Angel thread is full of echos.

Or possibly parrots.

They're definately undead anyhows--working on the ALIVE part.

I asked Zoe to clarify, because I didn't understand what she said. She went back and edited the post to include:

add: I'd probably speak more clearly if some will remove this (metaphorical) gag - Please.

So, she seems to think she's been gagged, but she STILL will not explain things she's posted recently that folks have asked for clarification on, nor has she joined the discussion here. That says "doesn't care about the community" to me.

To me, also. For fuck's sake! Now she's making snarky comments about the warning/notice -- but let's keep bending over backwards to accomodate her.

t edit Sorry -- while I was typing this, kat p. made the suggestion to back away from the Zoe issue, and I didn't see it. Fair enough.

Allyson, I said I thought your post to Zoe was hateful (in slightly kinder terms) the day after you posted it. And I certainly intended for you to read my most recent post. So I don't consider it indirect at all.

Since you asked:

Would I have supported a warning for you right after the original post? Yes. Would I request one for you now? No, because it's several weeks ago, you apologized, and Zoe didn't get one. Bragging about it is obnoxious, but not worth a warning, IMHO. The "subhuman" comment is, I think, borderline, and I'd like you to apologize for it.

I can't remember who came up with them but I liked-

B2: Kafka's glad he's dead

B2: No exit

B2: Like Kafka, only not as funny

Just a suggestion: We have a proposal before the board in Lightbulb. Why don't we all step away from the Zoe discussion until that point is settled. Once we have a procedure in place, those who feel like she needs a formal warning can come back to Bureaucracy and try to muster the "X" number of votes if they so desire.

Sounds good to me.

Why don't we all step away from the Zoe discussion until that point is settled. Once we have a procedure in place, those who feel like she needs a formal warning can come back to Bureaucracy and try to muster the "X" number of votes if they so desire.

Agreed.

Like Sartre, only longer

I like it (Duh.)

I liked it too.

The "subhuman" comment is, I think, borderline, and I'd like you

But I'm not going to do that.