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
I don't like the 'social core' words, although I understand them and maybe even agree with them at some level, because I have a gut reaction to the phrase "social core" which is basically "oh, yeah. The thing I will never be a part of".
This sentiment I understand too, Am.
In fact, while I would submit that there are core Buffistas, I think every last one of us would give a different list of who that core was, so it's still pretty amorphous and unquantified.
Also? Not all of us would necessarily prefer talking to that core over some other collection of Buffistas. While there may seem to be a gravitational center, some of us may prefer to look at the pretty satellites spinning around the edges.
Mostly I do think we are physically attractive(I'm a fake. One day you'll unmask me and find the creepy caretaker at the Meyers place.And I'd have gotten away with it too, except for those meddling Bitches.) But that doesn't mean I want to jump everyone.
We've got a frontier metaphor and a space metaphor working here and that can only mean one thing--B.Org IS Firefly.
I don't think it's gauche to say there are some people who have earned respect. What I do think is gauche -- extremely so – is to bring it up in a way that makes it clear you think you're a Special Buffista with Sparkles.
I'm not sure "respect" is the best word. Maybe "context" would work better.
If someone who's been around a while starts to do something strange, we're more likely to think that X is just having a bad day. Because we know X is normally witty, or insightful, or a little too serious, or whatever. So we cut X some slack in context of X's history. Let it slide, or gently ask if something's wrong.
But if newly delurked Y does the same thing, we don't have context. We can't tell if Y is having a bad day or just a jerk. And it becomes easier to do a knee jerk and assume the worst.
And that's normal in social groups. We act on what we know.
Almost forgot, Debet feel free to tag.
Just wanted to chime in that I'm enjoying reading this theoretical discussion very much. And all Buffistas are foamy. And all lurkers should have a vote. And I loved Anne's frontier analogy, especially the porn room. Enjoy the holiday weekend all.
Longtime (since TT) dedicated lurker chiming in here to say I love the community here and the way it solves problems and supports people. As to lurkers' voting, I myself would never feel right in voting here because I am not an active participant. I wonder if other lurkers feel that way.
And one of the reasons I mainly lurk is that the majority of you are so quick-thinking and articulate that by the time I think of something to say, someone else has already said it so much better! All I could add is "Wrod!"
Whoot! It's like I conjured you up, Margaret. Except for the part where you already existed independent of my delusions.
Now I want to just keep namechecking and see who appears.
Welcome, Margaret!
t does the dance of lurker-welcoming
t trips, falls down, gets up fast, hopes nobody noticed
t saunters away casually
