I'll just add that I've never perceived in anything Wolfram has written the slightest hint of a superiority complex, and in fact, if I was more of a glutton for punishment, I'd start threadsucking right now Bureaucracy 1 (the whole 10000 posts) to see if I can read what others have apparently read so clearly. Actually, I think that Wolfram has always been one of the most composed and level-headed (when it comes to tone) posters that I have read.

If we suspend someone and then the write threatening things about us and publically link to them (it's not like we hacked her private journal), or if they email them to one of us, or if they call us on the phone, or if they stalk us, I don't care whether or not we stipulated it up front or not -- in my book, they get banned.

I don't mean to be unfeeling, but she's suspended here. Why are people from here going to her personal Web site, and then getting up in arms about what she's posting there?

I understand being pissed about the stuff at PF. That's a public forum with the Buffistas name on it. But why are you seeking her out on her home turf and then getting offended by what she's saying there? Z*e's nuttier than a tin of Planter's peanuts, in my opinion, but do you really think she's going to do any harm to you?

In the Bronze community, there's a longtime poster who's caused consistent problems. He was finally banned this week, and people still went to his LJ to see what he was bitching about in regards to the ban. Heck, I was one of them. But I acknowledge, I went to point and laugh. I didn't go and then get upset at what I saw there, because it's his site and I was seeking it out.

There is something to be said for level headedness, sure. But what I've found is that for many, if not most Buffistas, they feel passion for the community.

Wolfram tends to talk about procedure in a very sanitized way that seems to deny the very messy Buffista way of dealing with issues, each other, and the board itself.

Wolfram's feeling that all Buffistas are created equal under da law is certainly not my feeling. Wolfram is not my equal, no one is. We're individuals, here. We should be treated fairly. Equality squares the piss out of me.

But why are you seeking her out on her home turf and then getting offended by what she's saying there?

Monique, she posted a link to her comments about Cindy, Paul and others in one of her PF posts (and posted most of the same comments in PF, so I'm not sure why the link was there). Nobody sought out anything.

Carried over from lightbulbs:

But we're not saying that you can't post nasty things in your Livejournal about other Buffistas, just that if you do, and you link directly to it, that's equivalent to posting the comments themselves here.

Right, but what I'm getting at is if someone doesn't directly link to the specific post as part of the discussion, but has posted the link before, either in a profile or as part of another discussion. I guess I don't want to see someone get a warning for something they thought of as private venting, even if it isn't truly private.

I also share bc's concern about trying to regulate sandboxes that aren't ours.

I think unless the person who wrote it links to it in-thread, anything said off-board is backchannel, and not subject to our etiquette rules.

(I also think that actual physical threats -- actual meaning not hyperbole like "Zoe makes me so mad I want to rip her head off and feed it to to my cat" -- should be an exception to this. If someone fears for their safety because of something another Buffista has emailed or posted about them, that should be addressed.)

But we're not saying that you can't post nasty things in your Livejournal about other Buffistas, just that if you do, and you link directly to it, that's equivalent to posting the comments themselves here.

I don't know that I agree with this. Heck, Jessica, you've listed your blog's URL just generally. After a kerfuffle about grammar, comments about me showed up in your blog. I went to read it even though you didn't link to it here. I already knew the link and I thought I might be there because you and I were both hot under the collar that day. I assumed you did that to vent with the assumption that you didn't really expect me to read it. I also didn't think that I would have a right to get all up in arms over it and so never brought it up.

I'm thinking if backchannel is really backchannel we don't use it enforce our CS. Even if someone wants us to see it, we can't get upset about.

Or What Monique Said.

Yeah. Physical threats are different. I didn't see physical threats in what Zoe said, but I couldn't make heads or tails of it. I'm sorry that she made Cindy et al worried and I totally relate to their feelings of unease.

So, it's been decided. She's banned now, yes? I want to be sure it is clearly stated that It Is So.

Kat, that's why I said in-thread, as part of the discussion. (Which, now I see, I didn't say in the post you quoted, but it was what I meant, so I'm clarifying now.) Like how Plei sometimes links to her LJ ep analyses -- she clearly means them to be part of the discussion about the show. Zoe's link in PF was clearly meant to be part of her tantrum-throwing about us.