I probably spent more social capital on Prfffffl than I should have

Hey, look, everyone, the shock treatments worked! Jon can't even say the words anymore!!

Nah, seriously, I hope that suggestions are always welcome around here -- but tone is just so damned important. And I think that's sometimes a little less obvious around here than it is in a lot of places online, just because we are so closely knit, and so many of us know each other IRL. We do hear the tones of voices in a lot of people's posts, and when we can't "hear" someone that way, that's jarring in itself.

So, Wolf (although you're probably gone), I'm chiming in with another round of What Deena Said. I'd much rather get to know you better and learn to hear you as you intend than get annoyed that That Lawyer Guy Is Being Argumentative Again. And I'll admit I've thought the latter at times in the past.

Just FYI, our back-up boards on WorldCrossing and PeoplesForum are also Buffista Zones, and are subject to the same etiquette rules as the Phoenix.

As suggested, I added this to the short-etiquette page.

silently passes freshly-baked virtual chocolate chip cookie through the ether.

gobble snork gulp gobble chomp chomp gobble

oooh, cookies!

And I'm in favor of posting the suspension/banning in Press, so everyone knows, and there the matter will rest.

Bureacracy 1 is showing up in my message center. Is this normal? I'm probably subscribed; I'll go unsub.

Edit: that did the job.

Edit 2: thank you Jon.

Is this normal?

It was moved from the sidebar to make room. Unsubbing should do it. t edit And it did!

What kat said, basically. (incidentally, you know another word for "social capital"? WHUFFIE!!!! IJS...) I've found the endless wrangling in Bureacracy recently a bore (as I my have mentioned) because this site is, from my POV, right - I share the assumptions about what this community is, where it came from - hell, even how the site should look and feel. But for someone who doesn't (to use a notional example) realise that our Message Center is a much improved version of the TT one, then it just seems like we're working from a bunch of fuzzy assumptions.

I think that there are a few posters (and fair play to them) who feel we should have a written constitution. But, probably 'cos I'm British, I think the Buffista Common Law worked perfectly well, and don't see much point in codifying it. The rules of Buffistaville are whatever we say they are. "We" being all the Buffistas, from Agnes, Dr Satan and Hellish, to Wolfram, Deena and whoevers just registered.

Back from an interview:

Thanks to those who clarified that Z*e was linking to her site within her babblings at PF. I was getting prepared for my interview earlier and saw mention of posts at PF, then mention of posts at her site. I didn't realize the one was linking to the other.

Re: Posting bannings in Press:

It makes sense to me. This thread moves fast, and it can get bogged down in discussions about things and then BAM! A decision feels like it's happened. For example, I left my computer at 5:30 yesterday. Returned at 9. There were 74 new posts, and I had to scroll 20 or 30 in to learn Z*e had been banned. If I had a job, I probably wouldn't be able to devote the time to scrolling through 500 posts to learn the outcome of something.

That's why I very rarely participated in the community back when I was gainfully employed; you all talk a lot (not judging, just saying) and it's hard to keep up unless you've a. got the time and/or b. are dedicated. I think posting things in Press is beneficial to those who find this thread difficult to endure, as well. I know you may think "If they care, they'll scroll," but when the voting talk was going on, my eyes rolled back in my head and I left for three weeks. It's not that I didn't care, I just couldn't keep up with the topic at hand then.

I know Wolfram's long gone, but work intervened before I could finish this:

If you read my posts from back then you'll see that I didn't accept what people said as the "end-all, be-all" because there were other people who said otherwise and the discussion was open.

As one of the "other people" who agreed with you, Wolfram, I appreciate your arguing on behalf of those positions. I gave up and abandoned you because I couldn't handle the fact that people were getting angry because of my arguments. I couldn't take the heat. I applaud you for standing your ground, and I don't think you have anything to apologize for.

PaulJ:

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.

What Paul said.

I never read or participated in Bureaucracy or Roll Your Own on WX, being mostly a show thread lurker in those days. So I wasn't aware of the arguments that went on in those threads. As a longtime lurker, I had an illusion of understanding the culture of board, but not venturing out of the show threads gave me a limited view of the picture. Once I did get involved in Bureaucracy here, I honestly wasn't prepared for the vehemence of the anti-change crowd. (And for the record, I'm cured of proposing any changes from now on.) And maybe there ought to be something in the FAQ or the Bureaucracy header: "Be wary of coming into Bureaucracy proposing a bunch of changes, because most Buffistas like the board the way it is."

Bureaucracy fwiw tends to be the thread where people lose capital and not gain it.

Hmm. That would have nice to have known on, say, the afternoon of March 20, before I dug myself into a deep dark pit, board capital-wise.

Deena, to Wolfram:

I want to see you in another thread. I want to know how you feel about the fact that your wife will be having a little wolfie in June, and whether or not you're prepared to name him Buffistino Monkeypants Wolfram. I want to know if you like practicing law and what kind you practice and whether or not you give change to bums on the street. I want to get to know you outside of preferential voting or revisiting old issues.

I understand this, but some people might like to keep their private lives mostly private, and still feel like they can participate in the decision making on the board. Maybe I'm a little paranoid, but the recent ugliness (banned poster making threatening noises) makes me feel like staying mostly in the shadows. On the other hand, I posted in Natter for the 1st time ever yesterday, and the 2nd time today.

I heard back from Lance at PF. He says moving threads from the open area (where they are now) to moderated (where we could control who posts) is sticky. I told him not to think any of *us* would contribute to the stickiness.

Mostly, I'd recommend those distressed avoid that neck of the woods as long as possible, in hopes of a burnout. That was his suggestion, but I've urged him to reconsider moving.

What were the other options? Deleting? Removing the Buffista from the titles?