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.

Ah. The in-thread piece makes sense.

But I think I'm more pissed aboout the tantrum throwing she actually did in thread at the PF. If that makes sense. Ban her for that, not what is said on her site.

Or ban her because she's not a good community member.

She is banned, right?

Speaking quite only for myself, Wolfram, your civil manner to me feels dismissive of what came before. I'm not speaking to your intent, since you say that's not so, but it just feels "Okay. I'm here now. Let's fix things."

ita, I took a couple of unpopular stances regarding voting, thread proliferation, and previous consensuses (sp?), and I thought those opinions were welcomed even if not agreed with. I don't think the board is broken. I'm not big in fandom, but of the few sites I've been to, this is the most amazingly run site I've ever seen. And a ton of the credit goes to you.

I frequently take issue with your stances in this thread because you seem to operate under the belief that nothing that happened on this board before you showed up is relevant. And I find it completely offensive to those people who have been here for years, myself included.

No, I wanted old consensuses to be re-voted on. It was an opinion. The issue never made it into Lightbulb, which bothers me a little, but I'm not going to bring it up again. And other than saying I really don't feel that everything that's happened before me is irrelevant and once again I never intended to offend, I have nothing to add. I'm sorry you feel this way.

Wolfram, my issue with the things you say has nothing to do with how long you've been posting. If some "old-timer" or "long-term poster" or "true Buffista" (or any of those other terms I hate) started trying to change the way we do everything, my hackles would be ruffled too.

Where did I come across as trying to change "everything"? Apparently I've given lots of people that impression. I don't want to change anything. The board really is amazing as it is. I was just trying to help with the tweaking. But I'll stop.

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.

Thank you.

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.

That's true. I'm an attorney, we're programmed that way.

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.

I don't think we're all equal. When I asked for equal treatment what I meant was fair treatment. And fair treatment to me means the rules apply equally to everyone, even unequal individuals. But this is just simian-antics, methinks.

Yes, she's banned. DX said so, because she violated ettiquette after her suspension.

I'd link the post, but occasionally I'm lazy and unhelpful.

Yeah, she's banned. Posting in PF was a violation of her suspension.

And most of what she said on her webpage was x-posted to PF anyway -- I think the only thing that wasn't was the actual naming of Cindy, Paul, Jim, and Consuela as people she for some reason felt like naming.

Yes, she's banned.

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

Regardless of anything she said on her own own site, her postings on PF are sufficient. Regardless of the incoherence of some of the stuff over there, she attacks Julie. She's banned.

Where did I come across as trying to change "everything"? Apparently I've given lots of people that impression. I don't want to change anything.

You're right. I'm sure it's not everything. I think it maybe tends to be hot-button issues, that we've sweated blood over, and then to have you seemingly blithely dismiss the results of our sweating really hurts and frustrates, you know?

There were endless debates on how the board should be run when we were back at WX. Those of us who were around then set up the structure, the wording of the ettiquette pages, the how-to, the thread names, the slugs, the headers. It was a damn lot of work, and I can say that as one who did very little of it. And the board's been around six months, and it seems that we're almost constantly revisiting those issues.

I'm not saying it's entirely rational. But it's still a valid feeling.

It seems that the Buffistas have a politics thread at long last.

Actually, we have a poltics thread.

Enormous hugs and hands in new places to Julie, Cindy, Paul and whomever else she slagged.

That would be me, Consuela, Matt and Jim, though I seem to have escaped the especially vitriolic post. I think I was being used more as a general example. It is still a little bit unnerving, however.

Where did the decision stand on posting notification of banning in Press?