The revised proposal is here: Dana "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Oct 16, 2016 11:09:08 am PDT
If I remember correctly, and it's three days of discussion, that would mean starting the vote on the 18th.
And Kaylee, what the hell's goin' on in the engine room? Were there monkeys? Some terrifying space monkeys maybe got loose?
Mal ,'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!
Dana - Oct 16, 2016 10:25:44 am PDT #9935 of 10289
"I'm useless alone." // "We're all useless alone. It's a good thing you're not alone."
Laura - Oct 16, 2016 10:34:35 am PDT #9936 of 10289
Our wings are not tired.
I'm sorry, Laga. This isn't easy for a lot us us. It brought out my mama bear instincts though. My cubs have been hurt.
Theresa - Oct 16, 2016 10:55:28 am PDT #9937 of 10289
"What would it take to get your daughter to stop tweeting about this?"
I am shocked. I'm sorry that anyone felt uncomfortable and I'm grateful to Jessica for sharing her experience. I support the members of the board who have been hurt and whatever needs to be done to make the board a safe place. Thank you Dana for speaking up.
That's all that I've got because I'm still processing.
Jesse - Oct 16, 2016 10:56:36 am PDT #9938 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Right, banning is not a voting issue, but I feel like bypassing our stated procedure should be.
That seems reasonable to me.
Hil R. - Oct 16, 2016 11:03:43 am PDT #9939 of 10289
Sometimes I think I might just move up to Vermont, open a bookstore or a vegan restaurant. Adam Schlesinger, z''l
I've been messaging a bit in Twitter messages with one of the people who's speaking out against Sunil there. I only told her about things that I'd personally seen -- anything that happened to someone else, that's their story to tell -- but I just wanted her to know that she wasn't alone, and that there's history here, and that people have been seeing this since college. I didn't mention Buffistas by name.
Connie Neil - Oct 16, 2016 11:14:26 am PDT #9940 of 10289
brillig
I am in favor of doing this formally, of voting for taking swift action in the face of egregious behavior. Every clear, official process that we take on this gives it more weight. No one can say "Oh, a bunch of people got together over the weekend and banned me from their silly board."
msbelle - Oct 16, 2016 11:14:49 am PDT #9941 of 10289
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
One site, The Book Smugglers, [link] has removed his work for sale and stopped work with him on future publications. So the severity within the SFF community is wide.
Dana - Oct 16, 2016 11:31:59 am PDT #9942 of 10289
"I'm useless alone." // "We're all useless alone. It's a good thing you're not alone."
There's just no part of this that isn't upsetting.
quester - Oct 16, 2016 11:35:49 am PDT #9943 of 10289
Danger is my middle name, only I spell it R. u. t. h. - Tina Belcher.
The other reason I support banning him is that to do less, now that we know how his actions have hurt people in our community, seems like a slap in the face to those he has hurt, pissed off, or driven away. And I would much rather support them than keep enabling him.
This. I think this is the most important point.
I will consent or vote to ban him, whatever we need to do.
DebetEsse - Oct 16, 2016 11:39:44 am PDT #9944 of 10289
Woe to the fucking wicked.
Can we revise the proposal to something like "Suspend the standard warnings procedure to allow the stompies to immediately ban," which both acknowledges that there is a procedure that we're not following due to the severity of the situation, the the community is behind this choice, and that banning per se is not generally a votable issue?