I can live with 48 hours.
I would totally get behind a 6-month warning period. No problems in 6 months - woohoo you're all good. Anything warning level or above in the 6 months and you are in suspension-ville.
Simon: Captain's a good fighter, he must know how to handle a sword. Zoe: I think he knows which end to hold.
'Shindig'
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!
msbelle - Apr 14, 2003 2:58:30 pm PDT #613 of 10289
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
Deena - Apr 14, 2003 3:00:37 pm PDT #614 of 10289
How are you me? You need to stop that. Only I can be me. ~Kara
Thanks for splainin' me. I went off to try to catch up in other posts. I took an hour in bureacracy and I was trying to deal with a whiny baby at the same time. That could explain why it took so long to catch up in one thread, now that I think of it.
Yes, I just meant that I'd like the clock re-set at some point, and 6 months seems reasonable. So that one warning at month 1, if no other problems, then not suspension at 6 months but another warning.
I have a headache, so, basically, what you all said.
Deena - Apr 14, 2003 3:01:17 pm PDT #615 of 10289
How are you me? You need to stop that. Only I can be me. ~Kara
sorry, cereal - also fine with 48 hours, or even 72, but not longer.
Jessica - Apr 14, 2003 3:04:09 pm PDT #616 of 10289
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
I think I'm just gonna nod vigorously at whatever msbelle posts.
48 hours = good.
6 months gets you a reset = good
Jesse - Apr 14, 2003 3:04:58 pm PDT #617 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
My only reason for wanting a shorter time period is that I don't think we need enough time for everyone to weigh in -- we just need to find out if we have enough concerned people to warrent the warning.
Nutty - Apr 14, 2003 3:09:31 pm PDT #618 of 10289
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."
Right. I'm thinking what Jesse is thinking -- if there aren't 10 indignant people within 24 hours, then it's not worth a warning. Extending it to 48 strikes me as lowering the bar.
Because, really, what I've seen so far in our various stompinesses is that 15 people will jump over to Bureaucracy at the same time, or that 1 person will, and suddenly 25 people say "I was thinking that too and didn't dare say it!" So, I am for the shorter time.
Kat - Apr 14, 2003 3:09:51 pm PDT #619 of 10289
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
All sounds reasonable. As I noted in Bureaucracy, I would like clarification that the people who have brought it up in-thread needn't be the person who brings it to bureaucracy. Cause I can envision a situation where the poster has upset lots of people but no one wants to the be bad guy. So someone, like me, posts in Bureaucracy.
msbelle - Apr 14, 2003 3:12:28 pm PDT #620 of 10289
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
Kat, I thought I made that clear in my new wording? no?
Ok. Jesse and Nutty got me. I was ready to move over to 48, because I thought maybe I was just being too pushy, but when oh when do we not have 10 posters within a 24 hour period?
§ ita § - Apr 14, 2003 3:12:58 pm PDT #621 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
if there aren't 10 indignant people within 24 hours
Looking at the stats, one would be ill-advised to get pissed off early Sunday morning. Pretty much a tiny fraction of the traffic of the rest of the week.
Nutty - Apr 14, 2003 3:13:04 pm PDT #622 of 10289
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."
Yeah, that's reasonable, Kat. If one person attempts a social enforcement on-thread, and it clearly fails, then I don't mind if it's someone else who brings it to Bureaucracy. After all, the whole point is that it's more than one person with an axe to grind.