Proposal: Warnings will be in effect for 4 months. After four months, the offending poster's slate is wiped clean.
Perhaps we should spell out "After four months of good behavior the offending poster's slate is wiped clean."
Gunn: You saying popping mama threw you a beating? Lorne: Kid Vicious did the heavy lifting. Cordy just mwah-ha-ha'd at us.
'Underneath'
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!
Jessica - Apr 16, 2003 7:36:14 am PDT #846 of 10289
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
amych - Apr 16, 2003 7:38:54 am PDT #847 of 10289
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
Perhaps we should spell out "After four months of good behavior the offending poster's slate is wiped clean."
But if they weren't behaving well during that time, wouldnt they have gone on to the suspension stage?
Jessica - Apr 16, 2003 7:46:02 am PDT #848 of 10289
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
But if they weren't behaving well during that time, wouldnt they have gone on to the suspension stage?
Oh, that's true. Probably not necessary, then.
Gandalfe - Apr 16, 2003 7:51:41 am PDT #849 of 10289
The generation that could change the world is still looking for its car keys.
Oh, that's true. Probably not necessary, then.
Well, it doesn't hurt to have it in there, does it? I mean, it's only 17 characters, and I'd hate to see someone try to weasel out of it with that loophole.
Jesse - Apr 16, 2003 8:01:12 am PDT #850 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
In light of recent events, I think after the initial warning procedure, it makes sense to have a common-sense next-steps plan. I mean, if there's any angst over giving the warning, but then the person, say, FREAKS OUT, we should be able to move to suspension more quickly, think.
§ ita § - Apr 16, 2003 8:03:22 am PDT #851 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
How quickly is more quickly?
Technically, yesterday/this morning's behaviour followed procedure EXCEPT there was no allowance for clarification. Perhaps a loophole for "egregious disrespect to the community as a whole"?
Jessica - Apr 16, 2003 8:09:21 am PDT #852 of 10289
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
I have a suggestion that people may or may not like, and it probably outside the bounds of this particular proposal. (If it is, I'll propose it in B'cy when the vote for this one is over.)
Currently, the steps are warn/suspend/ban. In the two cases we've had so far, banning followed very closely on the heels of suspension due to continued demonlike behavior. Because of this, I think we should change the steps to warn/warn/ban. We're under no obligation to paper train people to be good Buffistas, and if they can't cut it after two official warnings, I'm not gonna want 'em back in two months.
Thoughts?
Jesse - Apr 16, 2003 8:11:51 am PDT #853 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Technically, yesterday/this morning's behaviour followed procedure EXCEPT there was no allowance for clarification.
I was initially thinking that the suspension would need its own ten seconds.
Cindy - Apr 16, 2003 8:13:49 am PDT #854 of 10289
Nobody
How about
1) Warn
2) Warn with suspension or ban, tbd by the nature and seriousness of the incident.
Sort of like how job descriptions include "other projects as assigned" - a catch all, so real PITAs can be removed.
msbelle - Apr 16, 2003 8:16:37 am PDT #855 of 10289
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
Cindy (in response to your earlier post),
I think where I am getting confused by you and Burrell is this.
If an in-thread complaint is issued and NOT responded to, there is NO reason to move to Bureau. NO response is, in effect, a stoppage of behaviour.
Now if Poster A is called out in Natter, leaves Natter at that moment and goes to Buffy and exhibits same demon-like behaviour, we might have a problem. BUT, and I think this is a BIG point, we have shown over and over and over that at least some members of this community are willing to really extend themselves to offending posters to make sure they get what is going on. AND if we add the language of a Stompy notifying the poster of the move to Bureau, I don't know what else we can do? Having a set wait time before moving to Bureau seems like the worst possible answer to me. The board will implode if a nasty decides to reign terror with or without knowledge of a complaint.
And, I restate, it is only a warning. A warning does not do a damn thing to a person who starts following the community standards.
I kinda want to take a warning on myself just to prove the point that it is meaningless to someone who respects the board.