'Bushwhacked'
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!
3. A user-complainant posts in Bureaucracy outlining complaint and linky citations, and requests a warning.
Would it be easier to just change the original language to may request a warning? It just seems to me that sometimes you'll want to ask for a warning, and sometimes just want to continue to try to hash it out with the poster without tying up the thread. As it originally read, it seemed liked going to Bureaucracy automatically constituted a request for a warning.
So I'd like there to be a notation that they can ask me to come over here and explain myself before they actually request a warning and seconds. (If they choose - maybe I'm being such a bitch that they want to go straight to warning me, and they should be able to do that too.)
Brenda. I am not going to include all available options for people in this proposal. That is not what it is for. Theoretically people can just ignore folks, you know. The rules shouldn't have to explain that.
If bitterchick makes me want to slap her, I tell her to take it to Bureaucracy...but what if she doesn't want to go?
Then she doesn't go. And if she stays in the thread being offensive, then you ask for an action.
All this proposal says is that after trying to address offensive behaviour in-thread, a complainant will at least inform the offender that they are taking it over to Bureau. This came out of people not wanting to have Action occur against someone who is unaware of Bureau.
Edit: never mind, long post that I ended up figuring out as I typed it.
Why not just have a regular vote on whether someone should be warned?
Ten people is not very many. What ten pals might find unforgivable thirty others might see as a goof.
Edit: never mind, long post that I ended up figuring out as I typed it.
Don't you love it when that happens.
I got nothin' new.
Moved from B:
Do you really think we have ten-person cliques that tight around here? Ten people who would not only be that petty, but all at the same time towards the same person? I just don't see it happening.
Wolfram easily annoyed ten people with what turned out to be a style (as opposed to his intent) that didn't didn't bother a bunch of others.
Why not just have a regular vote on whether someone should be warned?
If that happened, I'd be turning in my keys and leaving.
I don't think I have the vocabulary to explain how much that idea bugs me.
Dude, I just saw two of my fav people go at it in another thread. Which is kinda like seeing your parents fight, but it leads to my point:
You're not really going to have ten people lining up to blackball/force a warning on someone who hasn't done jack, because I can't see anyone finding ten people one's close enough to to pull that crap who all feel the same about person X, Y, or Z.
Wolfram easily annoyed ten people with what turned out to be a style (as opposed to his intent) that didn't didn't bother a bunch of others.
Yeah, but did anyone suggest warning him?
No.
Do you really think we have ten-person cliques that tight around here? Ten people who would not only be that petty, but all at the same time towards the same person?
We could be a VIP post away from such a scenario.