t standing in the been pissed off by gandalfe corner

I just let it go. The post in question was only annoying to me, I thought, and I also thought maybe (probably) I was being hyper-sensitive. I don't think anyone else would do anything different unless they were trying to cause trouble. If it bothers you enough, you bring it up in-thread and you talk about it. If talking about it doesn't solve the problem, then it goes on to more buffistawide handling.

I think buffistas, in specific and in general, are so polite and so willing to give the other person the benefit of the doubt, that if a warning occurs, the offense has been so egregious, and the in-thread discussion so unhelpful, that a warning is the next logical step for multiple posters. Then, it has to happen all over again within a six month frame of time for another warning to occur. I don't think that's walking on eggshells worthy.

I'd kind of be sad to see the timeframe dropped because it's an issue that's important to me -- since I do think that having no timeframe assumes that you will be "walking on eggshells" the rest of your buffista life. Of course, I don't want to slow this process down or cause others to have problems with its passage, so if that's what has to happen, okay.

I don't thinking dropping the timeframe from this proposal should be seen as dropping a warning timeframe as a point of discussion altogether.

As I said above, I think it is something important to get in place. I think a warning period should be limited and finite. I also think that the procedures for elevating a warning to a suspension should be spelled out. I think the two things could go into one proposal. I think someone should draft language to this point and have it ready to post in Bureau as a proposal as soon as this voting is complete.

so, is someone going to volunteer? because, I would hate to see 6 of them posted all at one time *g*.

I think that we should keep in mind that in the history of the Phoenix we've only been moved to the warning (with or without teeth) of two posters? Is that right? Out of 800 plus? So I think that the ganging up is wildly hypothetical.

If we're really that worried about it then just add a stiff penalty for anyone caught ganging up and tryign to force a poster out.

Of course, it be effective if the situation ever occured then the threat would have to be followed through on.

Elena, I really enjoyed your posts in Bureau over the past few days (I read 400+ posts today). I didn't take much time in my meara to say that, but in the quiet time we have here, I thought I would.

Oh, thank you. I never see you because I don't go into Natter. When I come to visit Trudy (maybe in the Fall) I'd love for us to get together.

And now I'll stop Nattering. Oh, the ironing is delicious.

I think that is a plan.

t /natter

It amazes me how issues build and build and build in Bureau, but just pitter here.

That's because, MsBelle, you're not just msbelle, and msmoveitalongpants, you're msgetothepointpants, and no one's disagreeing with you.

Pretty much. I think the above proposal is workable. I don't think we'll use it much either.