{{{Nilly and Laura}}}

In some ways, I'm having flashbacks to when Gus was outed as a sock puppet: the same sense of betrayal, the same sense of "all the pieces were there, why didn't we put them together?

A few months ago, P-C did something to someone who wasn't me that upset me, and I had to talk to someone about it. Someone not part of this community, because I didn't think I could talk about it here, but whatever, we've addressed that.

Anyway, his reaction was "wow, your imaginary friends site seems to be a greenhouse for growing people with mild internet fame and major sociopathy."

I had to admit that when framed between Gus and P-C it does look that way, but I was adamant that the majority and core of people are wonderful.

I'm not sure two in 15-some years is dispositive. Scientifically speaking. For a site that is not exactly prominent but also is not closed or restricted, it's pretty damn good.

And now that I think of it, didn't Gus also arrive in the wake of some famous person posting or other? That said, lots of good folks found us through Tim as well.

{{{Nilly}}} So good to hear from you!

Statistically I think 2 out of however many active posters we've had over that time (it has to be in the hundreds, right?) is way, way below the amount you'd encounter with just a random sampling of the population.

Good to see you, Nilly.

I have to agree that the true problems have been incredibly few and far between, which is phenomenal for an internet community. I think the nature of our community just means that it feels much more personal when it does occur.

Nilly! So good to "see" you.

I think the nature of our community just means that it feels much more personal when it does occur.

Yes, this.

NILLY!

Is it sad that I'm enjoying this little family reunion, even thought it's for such an awful reason?

wondering if there's any way to try to - if not prevent, at least try to minimize any sort of damage that may be caused to my beloved b.org.

I hear you on that, Nilly. It is, as always, good to see your font.

I don't think there is much we can or should do except what we are doing. Talking to each other. I would never have thought I would need to tell Buffistas to talk more, but, hey, maybe some of those times we don't hit post we should?

I keep thinking how I first joined when the Zoe situation was detonating and that colored how I posted for a long time. Made me very careful. And, clearly, at times we have, as a community, swung too far the other way. I don't think there are any rules or bright lines, unfortunately, that will keep us safe and comfortable.

On the other hand, it's not like we are getting new people these days. It seems like we ought to be able to, I don't know, agree not to take umbrage at being corrected or questioned or protected when something seems hinky. Something.

Dana, I will need final wording of the proposal. The last wording I can find is:

Proposal: Ban Polter-Cow from the board immediately, without going through the usual three-strikes process, for a long-term pattern of harassment of board members.

Latest revision:

Due to a long-term pattern of harassment, suspend the standard warnings procedure to allow the Stompies to ban Polter-Cow from the board immediately.

That *is* more clear. Thanks!