If time limits seem like they're going to be a sticky place, I'm siding with Heather on this.

If it's going to be a killer, then we can wait, by all means. In fact, yeah, maybe we should. As long as we get that done SHORTLY after this vote is finished.

You can propose it in B. for the next discussion and vote, right?

It probably is at least worth discussing.

But, for the person who it's happening to, assuming that they want to remain part of this community, it will feel like having to walk on eggshells, never knowing if saying one thing wrong will get them kicked out.

Honestly, if it's that hard for this hypothetical person not to anger large groups of people that they feel as if they're "walking on eggshells" to avoid it, I don't think 6 months or 2 months will make a difference.

Hey, amyth, that was an accident (unlike my 4444 in spoilers and my 9999 in bureau)

part of me really gets what Heather says, and then part of me sees that without everything spelled out, we basically don't have a real policy.

I'm not sure everyone gets it, but the idea of going back to bureau and opening a disussion on
1) how long warnings stay in effect
2) what constitutes moving a warning to a suspension (cause this is next to come up, mark my word)
makes me want to pull each and every one of my hairs out.

I'm not sure everyone gets it, but the idea of going back to bureau and opening a disussion on

1) how long warnings stay in effect

2) what constitutes moving a warning to a suspension (cause this is next to come up, mark my word)

makes me want to pull each and every one of my hairs out.

Are the time limits really a deal breaker for a big number of people?

I think shoving it all into one vote could make this discussion and vote far more difficult than it has to be.

You can propose it in B. for the next discussion and vote, right?

It probably is at least worth discussing.

Mmmmm . . . . I think we need to wait for the outcome of this one before we do it, as it's fairly predicated on what the policy is.

you know what? I went and looked at my proposal and there is a lot going on there - 4 steps and lots of blahblah for someoen who gripes about it. I think Heather is right.

The length of the warning and what constitutes moving from warning to suspension would logically all be in one proposal.

We shouldn't discuss it here and now, but I strongly encourgae someone to develop on their own what they think that proposal would look like and then pop it in Bureau as soon as this vote is over.

- ms. reallykeepitmovingalong,youhavenoidea.

I worry a bit about ten people mobbing someone unpopular. Could it be modified so that if an equal number of people to those offended, found the complaint not only wrong but unfair then no warning? In others words the bar is ten people, and a lower number than whatever you get finding it totally unfair. If the "this iwas offensive peole" don't at least outnumber the "you are picking on the poor thing" people, then is a warning really justified?

I think the time limits are not a big deal. I do like the idea that the clock on a warning eventually gets reset. And in terms of occasional outburst, usually if you have an outburst and apologize no one even thinks about escalating to warnings. I think "I was under stress. I screwed up. What I said was wrong sorry" gets a lot of slack - at least in my personal experience as someone who has screwed up on occasion.

I honestly don't think any one will run to bureaucracy and complain for someone who has a short period - even of repeatedly screwing up - if they apologize. I think not apologizing or screwing up repeatedly over a long period is what escalates it to the point of someone filing an official complaint. I would say this is actual observed Buffista behavior.