I don't think the discussion will be over at 10 and I'm not sure it should be. Buffistas like to add their 2 cents, and I don't see the good in stopping them.

This is especially true when the process gets to #4, I think.

Again, I'm just feeling things out, and not really married to my opinions just yet.

Okay, I like the idea that after 6 months of good behavior, you get a clean slate. That was a concern in the back of my head that I kept forgetting to mention.

Also, would it be possible to make it policy that once the issue gets picked up in Bureaucracy, it gets dropped in the original thread? This way we let the thread get back to its topicy goodness and we're not debating on two fronts.

I like that idea, bitterchick.

After the notice, that's fine by me, but what about when the request to be met in bureaucracy isn't followed up on?

I like the 6-month good behavior exemption, and the idea that once something is in bureaucracy it gets dropped where it started.

what about when the request to be met in bureaucracy isn't followed up on?

I think it depends. If the alleged offender says, "Look I don't want to talk about this in Bureaucracy. I was wrong, I'm sorry," then hey, our work is done. But I think a refusal to address the issue at all and not even show up in Bureaucracy to try and work things out is a statement in and of itself.

Also, if the offensive behavior continues in the thread? That's a whole different animal and should be dealt with in the original thread as the situation unfolds.

ETA: Or maybe not? I dunno what to do in that case.

I like the 6 mth clean slate deal.

bitterchick has a point about someone not even showing up to discuss that they are causing problems, the lack of particpation should be taken into consideration.

Also, I agree with 48hrs.

if they don't show up and/or don't apologize, then they're warned, right? officially, because that's the next step. There will still be 10 or however many posters asking that they be warned. It's just that the 10 or however many who were offended won't take back their request for a warning since there was no explanation or apology.

That sounds right Deena. Sorry. I think I'm applying this too much to the situation at hand to talk about the policy in general.

I'm going to skip here for a bit until I'm able to generalize.

if they don't show up and/or don't apologize, then they're warned, right?

Oh hell yeah. And personally, if I were on the fence about them being warned and they didn't bother to show, I'd probably be much more likely to fall on the side of "warn".