I am also not concerned because I not only trust that 10 Buffistas wouldn't gang up in a nefarious or whimsical way, but I also trust that if 10 people suddenly formed an anti-Scrappy cabal, that other Buffstas would leap to my defense.
Which I think brings us back to the point Trudy's concerned about - that there is no provision as it stands for the defense. I'm not sure whether I think we need it or not, but I see what Trudy means. Michele's suggestion of a stompy veto might be the least complicated method of dealing with this, but possibly there's another option I'm not thinking of?
If it is a concern to some then a stompy veto is a good option.
If we were to ever have a situation where 10 (really, 11, because there has to be an initial complainant) people decide to gang up on another poster this is would a very different community than it is - and that would be of very great concern to me.
My feeling is that, with this kind of procedure in place, the type of people who would organize an attack on a blameless community member would get themselves sporked for other reasons before they had the chance.
And I think the "linky citations" requirement is proof against people being sporked for no reason.
[Spork is fun to say. Spork spork spork.]
10 is also a pretty high number considering the fact that we are only counting as a "second" someone who says, "yes, I think that X's behavior warrants an official warning" (as opposed to saying, "I think that X is annoying, but he has not violated CS").
I'm sorry that what I was suggesting came across as such. I was trying to suggest a compromise, because even though I don't share your concern to the same level you do, since two people I respect (you and Gar) have both mentioned it, I'd like to see it at least discussed.
And I'm sorry if I came across as snippy, Cindy.
The stompy veto could prevent a scenario where, say, another board perished and 15 or 20 refugees decided to teraform the phoenix to their satisfaction.
Can you imagine? A bunch of Rules G*rls telling Allyson not to cuss?
I'm going out for a while. I put up a ballot at [link] (the usual place). If wording needs to be changed, I can do so, but it won't happen until 1 or 2 am or so. Also, has ita pointed votes@buffistas.org to whoever is counting this time?
Jon, yes, that is the final wording as I would like it to stand.
I will put a link in Press to the voting place at midnight.
I trust ita to see that the counter person is set up and this thread is closed.
