I think it is unBuffista

I still hate this term, for the record.

I don't like the idea of making threads locked for members only, I don't see what good it will do.

If we have to move an issue to voting and this thread isn't locked then people can read this. If the issue is mentioned in other threads then unregistered lurkers can read about it there and register and read.

I don't like delaying the registration process. I'm one of those people who would have never participated if it had taken a long time to register and participate. I'm just like that, there are plenty of places I've registered and posted once or twice and then never gone back. If there was some place where I had to jump through hoops to be able to post then I just wouldn't jump.

I know some people had issues with the fact that the admins dealt with meiskie privately but I think that people are going to have to realize that as admins they are going to have private discussion about how to deal with situations.

I'm not sure how else voice my objections except I agree with what other people have said. I don't see how locking threads will be any kind of help.

I know some people had issues with the fact that the admins dealt with meiskie privately but I think that people are going to have to realize that as admins they are going to have private discussion about how to deal with situations.

Maybe this isn't what people are talking about, but my impression was that John had a personal problem with mieskie that he was addressing one on one, and the fact that he was an admin was secondary. Am I completely misrepresenting this?

Anyway, none of this has to do with the actual proposal at hand, so I don't quite see the point of this whole conversation.

I thought that the problem was with the admins confronting "Anamthea" once there was proof he was meiskie.

And I had thought I'd seen somewhere mentioned earlier in this thread about making an admin thread as well as locking B'cracy.

Am I completely misrepresenting this?

We were presented with conclusive evidence that Schmoker = Mieskie, and approached Schmoker about it via private email, rather than bringing the evidence immediately before the entire board. I still think it was the right thing to do.

And I had thought I'd seen somewhere mentioned earlier in this thread about making an admin thread as well as locking B'cracy.

an Admin thread isn't necessary as we have a listserv.

I still think it was the right thing to do.

I do, too. Because bringing things before the entire board just leads to DAYS of kerfluffle.

And, in the mieskie/Schmoker case, he had clearly violated the terms of his suspension, for which there is a clear admin response. No need to drag the board into a discussion of whether or not the admins should do what we *already decided* should be done in such a case.

We were presented with conclusive evidence that Schmoker = Mieskie, and approached Schmoker about it via private email, rather than bringing the evidence immediately before the entire board. I still think it was the right thing to do.

Oh yeah. I agree with that, as long as y'all are comfortable with it.

I'm concerned because our admin. aren't going to act on their own, and did catch flak when they handled Anathema behind the scenes.

Going back to the relevant portions of that discussion, one person posted that he/she was distressed by the backchannel handling, causing a stompie to post an official statement earlier then they intended. Then another poster stated he/she was also distressed by the non-public nature of the Anathema sitch. The overwhelming majority of the posters were extremely pleased by the handling the stompies did, and congratulated them on a tough job well done. And I think it's the truth. Let's not let 2 unhappy posters change the current system, because I think it worked very well in that situation.

Maybe this isn't what people are talking about, but my impression was that John had a personal problem with mieskie that he was addressing one on one, and the fact that he was an admin was secondary. Am I completely misrepresenting this?

John wasn't one of those two posters I just mentioned, and he kept his admin duties and personal problems separate. He had nothing to do with the flak that someone is talking about.

I know some people had issues with the fact that the admins dealt with meiskie privately but I think that people are going to have to realize that as admins they are going to have private discussion about how to deal with situations.

I'm not remembering the situation this way. My only problem with the finale of the mieskie situation was that there was a conversation on this board about "backchannel" and "things" that were being done. It didn't even say what topic [mieskie] the conversation was about. Just that were backchannel admin things going on.

It made me feel very uncomfortable. So yes, people will need to understand that sometimes backchannel happens. People will also need to refrain from mentioning backchannel issues here unless they're ready to talk the whole thing out.