I voted against bannings from the beginning. I don't think we should use them. I think if we DO it should be a last resort and I think that if someone apologizes they should be given another shot.

And, as a Buffista in good standing, I get to say that and will.

Seriously, what kind of ego trip is that ?

For me, it's not an ego trip. I have no ego investment whatsoever in his ultimate fate. It's more a question of how I want to invest my time here (as in here at the Phoenix board). I personally don't want to waste my time on this particular issue, and yet it seems to be the ISSUE THAT WOULDN'T DIE. I'll admit that it may well be selfish and/or cold-hearted of me to say that I don't want to keep reinvestigating the question of bannings, but there you go.

I think that BANNING FOR LIFE seems a little overly grand.

Someone acts like a prick, kick 'em out if you must. If they do it again, do it again-- maybe even for longer. But if "you must depart from us and ne're be in our company nor discussed again" isn't taking an online community a little too serisously I don't know what is.

And as far as "wasting time" goes, some people don't agree that it is a waste of time and would prefer to have their right to disagree not continually denegrated as such .

I'm sorry if my language is getting harsh, but people of a minority opinion really get dumped on around here. Some bail and those who stick around are going to start to get annoyed.

I've never denegrated you, Trudy, nor have I argued against your right to speak your position. I said that I feel the topic is a waste of *my* time. That's a personal judgment based on how I want to spend my time. It is not a dismissal of your interests to say that I do not share them.

I don't deny your right to disagree, Trudy. But I'm going to argue with your position when I think you're wrong.

And I don't think "people of a minority opinion really get dumped on around here." Around here, everyone has his or her say. If you're in the minority opinion, by definition most people's "say" will be opposed to yours. There's no way to avoid that, as far as I can tell.

Trudy, I disagree with your opinion, but that doesn't mean I think it's stupid. I in no way mean to denigrate anyone who disagrees with me.

(Unless they disagree that I am the Grand High Queen of all Hotties. Then they can go fuck themselves....)

I don't deny your right to disagree, Trudy. But I'm going to argue with your position when I think you're wrong.

That's cool. But every "this discussion is a waste of time" complaint means that somebody's opinion doesn't matter to the person complaining.

OK, if "it's only an online community, you can deal with being banned for life" is a valid argument, then "it's only an online community, why do you need to ban people FOR LIFE anyway" is too.

Heeeeeeey, Trudy's blinding us with logic!

I'm sorry if my language is getting harsh, but people of a minority opinion really get dumped on around here. Some bail and those who stick around are going to start to get annoyed.

I agree with this. I've been dumped on a lot, and I also know there are other people who agree with the minority but don't feel like getting dumped on. So they aren't posting.

I also know that those doing the dumping aren't being malicious about it, but it just works out that way when you are in the minority.

Heeeeeeey, Trudy's blinding us with logic!

I cannot tell you how strongly I disagree with that. In a community, especially an on-line community like this one, all that we have -- all that binds us together and makes us a community -- is our relationships with each other. It is vitally important to me that people not lie to us as a group, that people take our (really not that hard-to-follow) rules seriously, that they believe we're serious when we ask them to stop doing something.