I am not having sex with Spike! But I'm starting to think that you might be.

Buffy ,'Dirty Girls'


Bureaucracy 2: Like Sartre, Only Longer  

A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.

Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych


Jesse - Mar 30, 2004 8:32:42 am PST #7953 of 10005
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

Megan, do you often wish someone else would make your point? I mean, much of the time if I wait before commenting, someone else makes my point, and I feel fine about not putting my 2 cents in. Is that your experience as well? (Seriously, I'm just wondering what the experience of less loud-mouthed people is. Because god knows, nine out of ten times, I make my own point.)


Michele T. - Mar 30, 2004 8:32:57 am PST #7954 of 10005
with a gleam in my eye, and an almost airtight alibi

Jesse, above, posts for me.


Megan E. - Mar 30, 2004 8:34:39 am PST #7955 of 10005

Yes, Jesse I do. and if someone does post my feelings, then I will generally say "me too!" If not, then most likely I'll keep quiet.


DavidS - Mar 30, 2004 8:35:07 am PST #7956 of 10005
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."

Either option produces a board that seems less tense. But if there is any truth to the latter, at what cost?

Honestly, what are you proposing? Putting a gag on people who post....assertively?

Like, msbelle, I prefer the civil and thoughtful discussion (laced with wit) to the hot exchanges. When I thought the board as a whole could be less harsh with newbies, I raised the issue over here. Not because I expected it to be acted upon by a vote, or consensus - but simply to raise the issue. To bring attention to the idea of tone. Because, as Shawn notes, we will always revisit the issue of who we are and how we behave. We need to, because the population turns over and the context of the board changes.

We've been through this before. When Joss first posted here, it brought on a huge influx of people who weren't in tune with our culture here. Some people became alienated and left. People left when we instituted voting. People left when enacted disciplinary measures. And people leave because it's a big (beautiful) timesuck. But the community remains.


msbelle - Mar 30, 2004 8:35:10 am PST #7957 of 10005
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

Rafmun - I really appreciated your earlier post, because it made me think, but...

Or perhaps it is because a few very prolific and increasingly agressive posters have succeeded in marginalizing some very long-term members who were happy to engage in productive and constructive discussion when it was truly about give-and-take, but who became frustrated that their willingness to concede points and move to compromise seemed increasingly exploited to satisfy the few, to the point where they just don't bother even debating much anymore b/c they see the conclusion as forgone anyway.

have you considered that the long-term posters who are marginalized are in the minority?

Also, it cannot be about give and take if one set of people remove themselves from the discussion.

The most recent ACTIONABLE thing discussed here (I believe) was the posts in Press. Nothing was actually decided as a change in rule. People expressed opinions and I am sure people were bothered on both sides, but nobody had to change anything. I could post everyday that I want the background pink. It would not happen. I could say the white annoys me, I could say it is fucking stupid, I could say it causes me anguish and I don't have the time to have my moments here at b.org not be as pleasant to me as possible. It wouldn't change.

To be more specific. I could ask Jesse to make her tag read "msbelle RAWKS.". I could even tell her to change it. I could bitch, whine, plead, beg. She is the only one that can decide to change it.

Neither situation would ever move to a vote, and my behaviour would not be in violation of any rules.


Allyson - Mar 30, 2004 8:36:03 am PST #7958 of 10005
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica

As a LOUDMOUTH, I often wonder why people are afraid to speak. I wish everyone would.

What's the fear, Megan? Where in a debate to you feel afraid or unheard?


Rafmun - Mar 30, 2004 8:37:18 am PST #7959 of 10005
I'm made of felt and my....hey, who's hand is that?

I care about this community.

Kat, I think you found the key distinction. Not all activism is bad. When it is done with the good of the board in mind - it's excellent.


Jesse - Mar 30, 2004 8:38:46 am PST #7960 of 10005
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

Neither situation would ever move to a vote, and my behaviour would not be in violation of any rules.

If you continued to harrass me (you BITCH!), I would eventually ask that you be warned, or whatever the procedure is.


Allyson - Mar 30, 2004 8:39:59 am PST #7961 of 10005
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica

Not all activism is bad. When it is done with the good of the board in mind - it's excellent.

But are you suggesting that people post with the destruction of the board in mind? And then you have to define, "what is the good of the board."


DavidS - Mar 30, 2004 8:40:58 am PST #7962 of 10005
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."

When it is done with the good of the board in mind - it's excellent.

I guess I've got a very different perspective, because even the people I've strongly disagreed with only bother to come in here because they have the good of the board in mind. Their idea of "good" is just different than mine (and obviously, WRONG) but I still respect their motives.