The lightbulb thread is discussing a proposal about how to bring a poster to the point of getting a warning from the community. We are not discussing any individual situation.

So I saw.

Okay. Caught up in I:

I'm not twelve, I'm not peer pressure's bitch.

I never said you were; don't put words in my mouth.

It may have looked like what I was doing, but it wasn't my intent. Frankly, I don't see why it's not an example of peer pressure, or that group rage that makes riots. I also don't remember ever seeing it happening, so I'm at a loss for precisely what you do mean, I suppose. Much like Lyra Jane's "one day there could be a very hostile situation" translating into what I see compromising current optimal procedure -- I'm against it.

Can you take it out of the theory and into the practical?

For me, the practical is that I like to think that when I change my mind, *I* change my mind, due to reflection, or additional information, or the reading of the tea leaves, or whatever. You seem to be implying it's significantly different from that, if I change my mind due to/as part of a pile-on, enough to sway board treatment of a poster.

Honestly, I find my POV swaying, and nudged, as I learn new things about the situation at hand. That's what I call a good thing. I don't understand why it's a bad thing.

Since I think this issue is pretty dead as far as the current proposal, I'm stating here, for the record, that, if no one else wants to draft a proposal regarding time limits for warning effectiveness and the definition of the requirements of moving to suspension after a warning has been issued, I'll do it. I'm a little nervous about it and I will be asking for assistance, but I brought it up, so I'll do it.

Is there any way to get the thread up above BBaBB? If not, that's cool. Thanks.

I don't think so.

Okay. One wee, small, I was gone all day thing...

Those of you who are so upset at someone honestly answering a question, well. That baffles me. Honestly. It just seems like questions were being asked, when the answer would be known, and you'd know you wouldn't like it.

Okay, maybe there's such a thing as too much honesty, but you know what? I think I find (and this goes for anyone, because I brought it up WRT to Zoe, and I brought it up WRT me, and I'll bring it up now) asking someone to apologize like that is, well... counterproductive. All it does for me is get my back up and make me even more stubborn or truculent. Fight or flight. It pushes all my buttons, and I find it kind of offensive, even if I've probably been guilty of it myself.

Just something to keep in mind.

There's a difference between asking for an apology (or saying that one is warranted) and expressing your own personal feelings of offense or affront. The first would get my back up - the second would distress me and likely make me want to apologise for hurt feelings, even if not for the initial statement.

I was seeing a lot of the first.

Pinged my "grrr" instinct.

Allyson, I too am going to ask you to back down on this. You're not sorry? You don't have to feel sorry. We don't legislate feelings. But we do legislate actions, and your actions on this thread and the previous one make me uncomfortable, and I want you to stop.

I'm just not mincing words.

I know you like to claim that diplomacy's not for you, Allyson, but really. If you can't talk nice, don't say nothing at all. It's perfectly possible to make your point without resorting to trashtalk. I'm tired of it.

Back down on what?

People keep asking questions -- she's given the same answer pretty much every time -- an unrepentant one, but it's the same damned answer.

What new is going to happen here? Is it less rude for to ignore the questions?