Well, the reason we were thinking about voting on it was because of the War thread. Someone was supposed to make a list of all the decisions that would be affected, but I agree it can stay "on hold" for a while...
We were first supposed to vote on whether "old decided issues" were subject to the new rules, and if the people voted yes, then the proposed War thread was next in the queue. We were waiting on someone, I think Anne, to finish a list of "old decided issues" so people know what the ramifications of the first vote would be. I'd still very much like to see this vote happen, but I've been enjoying the peace and harmony on this thread too much to bring it up.
Dragged from BBaBB to where it seems to belong: Cindy "Buffistas Building a Better Board" May 5, 2003 10:36:42 am EDT:
Is there any way to restrict the ability to read the Bureaucracy thread to members only?
Please discuss.
[Edit: I hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes with this. I'm definitely sorry if I am]
Your wish is my command, Nilly.
Proposal:That the community, if it is practical to code, allow individual threads to be designated, "Accessible only to members of the community," and restrict access to those threads only to registered users. Any such threads to be so designated shall be determined by separate proposal and vote. If the proposal passes, the coding of this feature shall be added to the features request list.
Background: We have had a couple of situations where unregistered lurkers have caused some problems for members of the community. One felt it necessary to change her ID after one of her posts was quoted elsewhere by a lurker, identifying her as the person who runs a specific web site. Another was stalked by two people, who then made threats to the admins regarding her posts, and the posts of her friends on the board, which ultimately forced her to leave the board. Earlier today, Zoe violated her banning. She has also begun to send e-mails to members of the community, which has caused some concern. I would like to be able to discuss situations like these without having to worry about who is watching over my shoulder.
When I was first thinking this, I had in mind that possibly two threads would wind up being protected, Bureaucracy and Bitches. Bureaucracy for the reasons noted above, and Bitches because members occasionally post there about very personal issues. Other folk may think of others. Regardless, we would vote before changing any of them.
I know we pride ourselves as an open board, but I don't see a problem with the proposal on that score. All I am proposing is that if someone wants to read a restricted thread, they join the community. This is not a great hardship unless one is banned. This is not meant to be similar to the forums at WX that require one be vetted and given a join code, or asking to be put on a friends list at LJ. We don't restrict membership.
I don't like the idea much, myself.
AFAICT, it's effectiveness is to prevent banned posters from reading B'cy, right? It has no other teeth, right?
What's the point?
edit: xpost
I'm opposed to it as well. I don't see any reason to keep anyone from reading Bureaublahblah, ever. If Zoe sees us saying this, so what?
We limit posting to registered members, but I'd really rather not see us limit reading to them as well. And anyway, the proposal wouldn't have stopped any of the incidents in question from happening.
I'll second that proposal. (Though, like ita and amych, I'm not sure it's of much practical value.)
I'm against it as well. There are, and always have been, a large number of lurkers here. We've always been inclusive of them, and often times they'll delurk after several years (like Moonlit) and become a part of the community. If they're locked out of Bureau, they can't follow what's happening in the board. I don't think you can make the special case status for Bitches. People talk about personal stuff everywhere.
Right now, I'm against it.
One felt it necessary to change her ID after one of her posts was quoted elsewhere by a lurker, identifying her as the person who runs a specific web site.
I don't see how the proposal would help with this, even if we restrict every single thread.
Another was stalked by two people, who then made threats to the admins regarding her posts, and the posts of her friends on the board, which ultimately forced her to leave the board.
I would need to know more about how the two people even found out about the board before deciding if this is a good enough reason.
Earlier today, Zoe violated her banning. She has also begun to send e-mails to members of the community
What amych said. And how would the proposal help?
I'm generally against the proposal, because I don't think it will fix the problem we have. I will, however, second the proposal to get it to the voting stage, because I think it's a worthwhile thing to hash out and/or vote on.
