Actions have consequences and some consequences are permenant, that's just how life goes.
So that's my dream. That and some stuff about cigars and a tunnel.
Faith ,'Get It Done'
Bureaucracy 2: Like Sartre, Only Longer
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
askye - May 12, 2003 11:18:53 am PDT #1765 of 10005
Thrive to spite them
Steph L. - May 12, 2003 11:20:35 am PDT #1766 of 10005
I look more rad than Lutheranism
He was banned. I don't see any reason to even discuss reversing that decision
Apparently, some of us do, however.
What's the fucking point of even having the power to ban someone if people are going to call for it to be reversed????
The warn-suspend-ban method is WHAT WE AGREED ON. Okay? And now we need to stand by our agreed-upon procedures.
Jesse - May 12, 2003 11:22:36 am PDT #1767 of 10005
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I know I've said this here before, but I'll say it again: Separation from Buffistas does not cause physical harm. A person can live a perfectly fine life without Buffistas. It may be hard to believe, but it's true. I know several people who are blissfully happy in their lives even without Buffistas. I swear. He'll be OK.
Jon B. - May 12, 2003 11:22:43 am PDT #1768 of 10005
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
The Stompies sent a letter saying that it could not even be DISCUSSED for two more months. They did not make any promises, and in fact, they indicated that they didn't think it likely that his "record" could be wiped clean.
Thank you Dana. That's exactly it. Can we go back to talking about new threads?
bitterchick - May 12, 2003 11:24:11 am PDT #1769 of 10005
Apparently, some of us do, however.
And, obviously, I don't get that. I thought our ban was a permanent deal.
I mean, is this going to be the new thing now? Revisit a banning a few months down the road when the poster claims to have changed their ways? Should I start prepping for the Return of Zoe Finch?
Nilly - May 12, 2003 11:25:15 am PDT #1770 of 10005
Swouncing
So, there was a proposal from Allyson in Allyson "Bureaucracy 2: Like Sartre, Only Longer" May 12, 2003 12:46:59 am EDT and a sort of proposal from Trudy in Trudy Booth "Bureaucracy 2: Like Sartre, Only Longer" May 12, 2003 12:06:16 pm EDT. The first one got the needed number of seconds, the second didn't (yet?), and they are interconnected.
Where do we go from here?
Sorry to post and run away, but I really have to go. Will catch up tomorrow.
[Edited because as much as I need to run, I'd love to post with real words that exist in the English language]
Jesse - May 12, 2003 11:26:12 am PDT #1771 of 10005
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Yeah, is Allyson going to write up a formal proposal so we can start talking about that instead?
Denise - May 12, 2003 11:29:28 am PDT #1772 of 10005
I thought it was decided that decisions made before the voting process would not be held to the new rules. So why does the 4 month "we'll see how we feel" period, even apply to mieskie? Wasn't he banned before we started voting? Or am I wrong about this?
askye - May 12, 2003 11:32:22 am PDT #1773 of 10005
Thrive to spite them
The four months revisit is about warnings not bannings.
Allyson - May 12, 2003 11:33:00 am PDT #1774 of 10005
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica
Heya, I am so very swamped at work, and won't be able to write up the proposal til lunchtime, which is about an hour and a half from now. That okay by all or am I putting forks in people's eyes?