(PS: Ed, I hope you don't feel piled on, what with the crossposting and whatnot.)
Willow: Happy hunting. Buffy: Wish me monsters.
'Beneath You'
Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!
We open it up, we talks the talk, we votes, we shuts it down. This thread is to free up Bureaucracy for daily details as we hammer out the Big Issues towards a vote. Open only when a proposal has been made and seconded according to Buffista policy (Which we voted on!). If this thread is closed, hie thee to Bureaucracy instead!
Jesse - May 05, 2003 11:57:02 am PDT #1017 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Nutty - May 05, 2003 12:01:30 pm PDT #1018 of 10289
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."
There's truth in what DX says. If we have a security matter -- stalking, police notification, or that kind of thing -- we currently have no secured place to talk about that matter community-wide, only backchannel of various types.
Then again, I'm also of the opinion that 98% of the time, Bureaucracy -- the best test case for locking, I think -- doesn't need to be locked at all. You know, when we're debating thread names and working on proposals and other things. I'd hate to think we were driven behind a locked door, for that 2% of weirdness.
Then again again, I know that operationally, people act as if we're in private, even when they know intellectually they're not. I like the intimacy of the site, and would be sorry to lose it.
Then again 3x, I don't see as how locking a thread would be very effective against a determined troll. If Zoe can re-register with a different email and post in Natter, she can re-register and read intimate details in any thread.
I guess I'm coming down on the side of no, so as not to throw the wheat out with the chaff. But it's something I wish we had a middle-ground solution on, because the concerns that sparked the proposal are certainly legitimate.
DXMachina - May 05, 2003 12:01:40 pm PDT #1019 of 10289
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
Jesse, nope. I knew it wouldn't be all that popular.
Jesse - May 05, 2003 12:03:44 pm PDT #1020 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Jesse, nope.
Just checking.
Lyra Jane - May 05, 2003 12:04:03 pm PDT #1021 of 10289
Up with the sun
What everyone else said. This proposal really doesn't give much security, since anyone can register.
DXMachina - May 05, 2003 12:07:53 pm PDT #1022 of 10289
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
What everyone else said. This proposal really doesn't give much security, since anyone can register.
Yeah, they can. But then, at least, if they start making threats or harassing, we have an e-mail address. I know it's not much, but it's better than nothing.
Matt the Bruins fan - May 05, 2003 12:08:32 pm PDT #1023 of 10289
"I remember when they eventually introduced that drug kingpin who murdered people and smuggled drugs inside snakes and I was like 'Finally. A normal person.'” —RahvinDragand
I suppose I don't really have much to add to the discussion that hasn't already been said. But given that the proposed thread reading requirement wouldn't be likely to guard against the determined efforts mentioned above, I see it as risking a negative impact on the community feel without much in the way of positive results to counterbalance.
bitterchick - May 05, 2003 12:08:58 pm PDT #1024 of 10289
Give 'em back!
No! They're mine and you can't have them. Nah nah nah nah nah.
Oh and I noticed that earlier, in Bureaucracy I think, someone referenced the reason why I'm mostly posting under a pseudonym these days. I honestly don't think that locking every single thread and making people register before reading would have made a bit of difference.
Let's say that we locked all threads. One day I come into Natter or Bitches or wherever and talk about what a bitch a former friend, who does not post here, is. The next day, that former friend approaches me and proceeds to quote my posts back to me. Well, what can the board do? She's a registered member but, unless I know her username, they can't block her from lurking.
I think it'd just be a big ole mess.
Lyra Jane - May 05, 2003 12:10:30 pm PDT #1025 of 10289
Up with the sun
But then, at least, if they start making threats or harassing, we have an e-mail address.
But if someone was making threats or harassing(either on the board or through email), wouldn't we have an email address anyhow?
§ ita § - May 05, 2003 12:10:51 pm PDT #1026 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
if they start making threats or harassing, we have an e-mail address
No, we don't, necessarily. And if we do, what use is it?