Meaning tonight at midnight, right? Does that post contain the final language? Us ballot writers need to know. msbelle? yoo-hoo! Oh pink one?
Time for some thrilling heroics.
Jayne ,'The Train Job'
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!
Jon B. - Apr 18, 2003 8:40:26 am PDT #913 of 10289
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
msbelle - Apr 18, 2003 8:41:26 am PDT #914 of 10289
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
Hi there. Let me gather up my past posts of language and put together my suggested ballot.
msbelle - Apr 18, 2003 8:55:54 am PDT #915 of 10289
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
OK - here is what I have. I think Proposal three may be confusing and I know some people think it is unnecessary. ANy assistance in making it clearer is appreciated:
PROPOSAL: The following procedure will be in place for warning a poster about unacceptable behaviour.
1. A user-complainant will try to resolve the complaint on-thread. If unsuccessful,
2. A user-complainant (does not need to be same person) will post in-thread that it's time to meet in Bureaucracy.
3. A user-complainant posts in Bureaucracy outlining complaint and linky citations, and requests a Warning.
4. At least 10 other users in 48 hours second the need for a Warning. If 10 other users do not complain within the 48 hour period, no complaint can be made again about that particular incident, unless it is being used to illustrate, with others, a pattern of demon-like behaviour.
5. As soon as the request for warning receives 10 seconds, Stompy sets forth a Warning over email and in Bureaucracy.
Yes/No
PROPOSAL: Warnings will be in effect for four months. After four months, the slate is wiped clean.
Yes/No
PROPOSAL: The procedure for lodging a complaint and requesting action after an initial Warning, will be the same as for a Warning. (in-thread attempt, post in Bureaucracy, 10 seconds in 48 hours, action).
Yes/No
PROPOSAL: The poster known as ita should have to change her on board name to bo bita.
Yes/No
Jessica - Apr 18, 2003 9:02:58 am PDT #916 of 10289
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
The only suggestion I have is this part:
5. As soon as the request for warning receives 10 seconds, Stompy sets forth a Warning over email and in Bureaucracy.
I think either the warning should be posted in the thread where the incident occured, or a link to the warning in Bureaucracy should be posted there. Just to avoid excuse-making.
DXMachina - Apr 18, 2003 9:06:14 am PDT #917 of 10289
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I agree with Jess. The warning should be as close to where the infraction takes place as possible, so there is less doubt that the person actually sees it. Include a link back to Bureaucracy, and then in Bureaucracy, mention that the warning was given with a link.
msbelle - Apr 18, 2003 9:37:03 am PDT #918 of 10289
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
ok, so,
PROPOSAL: The following procedure will be in place for warning a poster about unacceptable behaviour. 1. A user-complainant will try to resolve the complaint on-thread. If unsuccessful,
2. A user-complainant (does not need to be same person) will post in-thread that it's time to meet in Bureaucracy.
3. A user-complainant posts in Bureaucracy outlining complaint and linky citations, and requests a Warning.
4. At least 10 other users in 48 hours second the need for a Warning. If 10 other users do not complain within the 48 hour period, no complaint can be made again about that particular incident, unless it is being used to illustrate, with others, a pattern of demon-like behaviour.
5. As soon as the request for warning receives 10 seconds, Stompy sets forth a Warning over email, in the thread of incident, and in Bureaucracy.
Yes/No
PROPOSAL: Warnings will be in effect for four months. After four months, the slate is wiped clean.
Yes/No
PROPOSAL: The procedure for lodging a complaint and requesting action after an initial Warning, will be the same as for a Warning. (in-thread attempt, post in Bureaucracy, 10 seconds in 48 hours, action).
Yes/No
§ ita § - Apr 18, 2003 10:02:33 am PDT #919 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
msbelle, how about the idea of calling it not a warning, but a strike? One strike=warning, two strikes=suspension, three strikes and you're OUT.
Just so it's clear that we're defining the process of "strikes". And meaning that if it later goes warn/warn/ban or something, that this particular portion of proposal is not affected.
So ... this is the process of how a complaint can grow up to be a strike, and how long a warning stays on your record, and then the third part doesn't need to be voted on.
Does that make sense?
Jessica - Apr 18, 2003 10:32:17 am PDT #920 of 10289
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
I like that, ita.
Jesse - Apr 18, 2003 10:35:21 am PDT #921 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I'm not crazy about the idea of calling them "strikes," because it sounds too punative or something. I really believe there are people out there who basically mean well, and would take their warning, go forth, and Act Right.
§ ita § - Apr 18, 2003 10:36:57 am PDT #922 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
The name isn't what it's important to me. It's the idea of separating them from warning/suspension/ban, and complaint's already taken, because that's what's initiating the process.
But I do think whatever they are, they are punitive.