I'm of the school of thought that until she can work up the nerve to come forward and ASK for reinstatement then it is a non-issue. If she can only hint around at it, then she's not ready to come to terms with the destruction that she caused here, whether it be the results of a episode or not. Yes, I do deal with this stuff, a roommate of mine is bipolar, going off meds is not fun, we have a incident with a dead pet to prove it.

I appreciate that Zoe has apologized for her behavior earlier this year. I appreciate that she did this, also, without apparent ulterior motive, that is, without requesting to be taken back on the board.

I do not think we should ask her back. Her behavior *was* extremely disruptive and despite the apology I do not feel confident that the disruption would not recur.

I, too, appreciate the apology/explanation. I wish her good health and much happiness. She didn't ask to come back. If/when she does, it could be discussed. I personally doubt such a request would be granted.

(FTR, I was an active advocate for Zoe at the time)

I was just a lurker when the thing with Zoe happened - but I just wanted to say how happy I am to see that she is doing better. And I'm glad she let us know. My sister has schizophrenia and recovering from medication lapses, for whatever reason they happened and for however long they last, is really really hard work. Anyway, her note touched me and I'm happy for her.

And, uhm, that's all.

FTR, I wholeheartedly agree with Trudy that eventually the banning forever issue needs to be addressed. However I also agree with everyone else that it should wait until it's an actual situation and not just a hypothetical one.

I, too, was touched by Zoe's note. And I'm very glad the Stompies shared it with the rest of us, even at the risk of a mini-kerfuffle. I hope this reaction hasn't caused anyone to regret sharing it with us in the first place.

Didn't we already define our disciplinary process? Aren't warnings and suspensions the things from which you can come back, and banning the thing from which you couldn't come back? As far as I understood when voting on it, banning is a permanent action.

ita "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Apr 19, 2003 12:09:12 am PDT

and

ita "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Apr 22, 2003 12:20:51 am PDT

This is a hypothetical question. Nobody has asked to return. It is also a very emotional question, as has been proven in the past.

That's a bad combination. I suggest we abandon this until the issue is actually raised.

I'm with Betsy.

Betsy is wise. Please. Time enough when we have an actual request.

I appreciated reading the note. Standing in the no response required corner.

And again, Laura is my Bureaucracy doppelganger.

I suggest we abandon this until the issue is actually raised.

And agreeing with Betsy.