I don’t feel compelled to attempt to define Buffistas or suggest a metaphor to describe our community. I read the bureaucracy thread because I was raised to participate in my community and I do feel I am a member of this community.

I’m not exactly sure (perhaps because I did massively conflict avoid here recently) what it is we are trying to decide here. Do we have an urgent need to define the community?

Yes. And may I just say, the "who are we" conversation scares me like no other topic we've wrestled around here. I strongly doubt that it will be a productive discussion, and I see a lot of potential for harm.

Gar, that's an excellent analogy.

By registering, this makes the person a citzen of the Phoenix.

So ChristianDollarStore? The spammerific troll. That was a citizen? Because I'm feeling pretty strongly that he/she/it wasn't

Yes, citizens. And when citizens screw up, they get thrown in jail. Or banned or booted or whatever your word of choice is. There is a difference between a citizen and a good citizen, but until proven otherwise, all citizens get basic rights. Their behavior afterwards shows if they're entitled to keep those rights.

Well, yeah, I'm thinking Connie's right on that. Registration isn't what makes you a spammer; it's posting spam that makes you a spammer. That you may register with full intent to spam is probably a bad thing, but I don't see as how it's preventable till after you post and prove your intent.

Brenda, FWIW, since I think I'm the one who explicitly brought up metaphors this time, I find it valuable to discuss them, every now and then. Partly because they shape the kind of language we use on other Bureaucractic discussion, partly because they give me insight into why everyone else doesn't automatically agree with me, partly because it is cool to open up other people's heads and find out what's inside. The "who are we" thing comes up cyclically, and as long as we're still pondering it, with a multiplicity of answers, I'm OK. I mean, it's dreadful boring on a re-read, because we really do this every two months, but it's a thing.

Typo Boy has proposed the party metaphor before, but now that people have pointed out problems with the government and social capital models, it seems more apt than it did.

Allyson, I think you summed it up nicely, we do have different philosophies. And we are never going to see eye to eye on these issues. I would rather have every citizen get a right, then require some minimum amount of activity/posting/friend-making etc. though I agree that ideally those with more social capital should have a greater say. It's just too hard to find where to draw that line. Of course, that's me again pushing for a solution, and I recognize that.

I do take issue with this:

It seems you spend as much or more time talking about change than you do experiencing the board as it is. This makes me insane.

It's not true. I've been very active, since the first day I registered. First in Firefly, then Buffy and Angel, then a number of the other threads. I've nattered in Natter, litely spoiled in spoilage lite, and Buffisteched, Beeped, and Previouslied as well. In other words, I'm sorry you got the impression that I haven't been experiencing the board, and I know you're not alone. But it's more a result of the (infamous) positions I've taken in this thread than the number of posts I've made here.

So we'll continue to disagree. I'm sorry that my presence makes your experience less enjoyable, and I hope that eventually changes. Because I'm happy to be a part of the community, and I have no plans to leave it.

I don't think just registering is gonna make you a part off the community, but I do think posting, getting to know us on an individual basis, getting known on an individual basis, is what makes someone a Buffista. It's getting to the point where you can go "oh, hey so-and-so is here! blah blah inside joke me too!" and someone else can say the same thing, 'cause they know you. And that can take a while, but that's okay, because I feel that we're worth it.

I really agree with Holli on this. Now, what that means w/r/t voting, etc., I'm not sure. I haven't decided that in my own mind yet.

But when someone posts his/her first post, no matter how friendly and knowledgable, no matter whether they registered and immediately jumped in or if they were a lurker for years, I certainly don't look at Post #1 for New Person and think "Hey, fellow Buffista!" I think "Hey, new person; hope they like it and play with us so I can get to know them."

But, again, I don't know what that means -- in *my* mind -- w/r/t voting.

It's possible that I am more than unusually maudlin today, but prom's in two weeks and I'm in that kind of mindset.

Holli, you and the F2F-ers will be promming it up at the same time!

Holli, you and the F2F-ers will be promming it up at the same time!

Yeah, but sadly not in the same place. You don't even know how bitter I am about that.

I just wanted to chime in and comment on what Allyson said about recognizing trolls within 3 posts, which I assume has come out of her extensive on-line/fandom experience. I found the comment striking in that, while Zoe didn't tweak anything immediately, I think mieskie's very first post set something off in the pit of my stomach. Bad vibes/ dread, I'm not sure exactly what it was, but I got the same damn feeling when schmoker first posted.

Very eerie. This was all back when I was a compulsive lurker, mind you, but I felt like shouting a warning both times it happened. Except, it seemed to me, not my place - and not a good reason to register. And I'm not sure I'd do it if something similar happened now - accusations of trolldom are...bad form? Presumptuous? I don't know - I am still to new too all this as a contributor I think.

Which is why I guess where I thought I actually had something to say, I'm now not so sure I actually did. Except having lurked a few other places very briefly, I do have to say the Buffistas, wherever they have ended up, have been a wonderful anomaly to most of what I've seen on-line. It's what made me finally de-lurk in the first place.

I would rather have every citizen get a right, then require some minimum amount of activity/posting/friend-making etc.

The thing is, I think you're insisting on a model that doesn't fit the observed behavior.

What do the Buffistas do? We talk.

We don't own tangible property. We don't invest. We don't steal. We don't see each other physically more than once a year. All we do is hang around and talk to each other.

So we don't need a community model that is designed to cope with propinquity, with property rights, with violence. We don't need a structure as robust and complex as a government.

What's the worst thing we can do to a Buffista? Stop letting him talk to us. What's the best thing we can do? COMM him.

And that is why too much attention paid to process gives me the hives. Because it (A) distracts from the real purpose, which is entertaining and informative conversation and (B) tends to become far more emotional and personal than any other kind of discourse here.

Oh - so very much what Betsy said.

I agree that ideally those with more social capital should have a greater say. It's just too hard to find where to draw that line. Of course, that's me again pushing for a solution, and I recognize that.

It's not whether someone "should" or "should not have" a greater say. Some Buffista opinions simply are more influential. This is a social interaction, not government. Because it's a social interaction, we're nuts if we think we can draw too bold of a line, to indicate so-and-so's influence stops (or starts) here.

Everyone gets a say. It is influence in the process that varies. That influence varies according to personality, according to which stage of the process in which we find ourselves, and according to involvement in the process.

What newer people say (I number myself among them) in here and lightbulb isn't going to carry as much weight as the words of a proven entity. That is the way of the world, whether we're talking politics, party planning, restaurant choices, or whether or not your butt looks good in those jeans.

For the record - I think we should ease up on process discussion and instead, give it time to see if it works. I don't see this as a "Who Are We - Where Are We Going" discussion, even though I think it has billed itself as such. This is another rehash of voting, consensus, gang-of-14 (or 8 elephants, or the analogy du jour). This is navel gazing, but we're looking at a part of the navel that's already been picked raw. There's plenty of lint in other crevices of this navel.

A "Who Are We..." discussion needs to look at (hopefully more interesting) things like:

• Now that BtVS is over what's our pop-culture focus?

• How M.E.-centric is it?

• How M.E.-centric should it be?

• Do M.E. alum focused conversations fall under an M.E. heading?

• Should they?

• Does it matter?

• How can we love-on Tim?

• How many Buffy threads do we need?

• If we close a bunch of Buffy threads, do we want to open an equal number of new threads, or do we want to let attrition help us fight bloat?

• Where are the donuts?

• What are you wearing? Is that PVC?