Burrell - step one is that A complains in the thread where the offensive post occurs.
For example: A says, "Hey B, that offends me. Please watch your tone and/or hateful language."
B can either 1) Doblerize and then all is well, OR B can 2) continue to antagonize.
If 2, then it is A's resposibility to say in that same thread, "B, I am taking my complaint to Bureau and asking that you be given a warning."
Is that clear? I don't think it would be possible for B to get to the "up for a warning" place without knowing it. If B was away when A posted the in-thread complaint, there would be no reason for A to move to Bureau. Lack of response without additional offensive behaviour I don't think would warrant it.
Burrell - step one is that A complains in the thread where the offensive post occurs.
[...stuff cut...]
If 2, then it is A's resposibility to say in that same thread, "B, I am taking my complaint to Bureau and asking that you be given a warning."
You are assuming that the whole conversation happens in real time. I am assuming that things may not work out that way. What if A is reading last night's discussion, sees B put his/her foot in his/her mouth for the upteenth time, gets pissed off, and goes to post in Bureaucracy (remember that the person who posts in Bureaucracy need not be the same person who registers a complaint in thread). Or say the fight starts the night before, A gets up the next day still pissed and boots it to Natter--while B is at work. Not only are such scenarios possible, I see them as likely.
and goes to post in Bureaucracy
you mean after posting in the thread where foot in mouth occured, right?
I am actually still not seeing the problem. can someone else see what I am missing?
Bureaucracy's only supposed to happen after in-thread failed. In thread can't fail if B's not around, really.
look ita smart - ita talk clear.
Just so's we're clear -- I don't want a pony.
well duh. a bunny with a pony would just be silly.
Bureaucracy's only supposed to happen after in-thread failed. In thread can't fail if B's not around, really.
Let's look at the latest example. X number of people at various points asked Z to clarify, or apologize, or otherwise modify her behavior. Finally Kat, who had NEVER asked for such, said, "I'm taking this to Bureaucracy." What if *that* happens again, when hypothetical Problem Poster B just happens to no longer be in the thread? I'm surprised no one else thinks this is even remotely likely to happen.
I'm surprised no one else thinks this is even remotely likely to happen.
I never said all that.
But Z had been asked to clarify, was around, hadn't clarified, and someone took it to Sartre.
So saying "well, what if that happened, but different" doesn't quite work. I'm assuming that the poster that takes it to Sartre is going to get a "Well, let's see what the clarification is or isn't, first."
