Oh, and the warning procedure doesn't even take a "popularity contest" -- it just takes 10 people to agree with you that someone crossed the line. Doesn't matter if 900 disagree.

(psst, Teppy, it's "Kiwanian". Unless grandpa's been lying about it all these years.)

Damn! I knew I shoulda joined more groups....

I wouldn't assume I knew the culture well enough to go in and insult the whole group. It's rude to go in to a group of people who are strangers -- or to whom you are a stranger -- and assert the ways in which they suck. It just is.

I'm part of the group and was not insulted. I also think you're raising the temperature by paraphrasing his concerns with a single four letter word ("suck"). I think he's raised some interesting points that have been worth discussing even if there are no solutions.

There was no matching attempt at compromise, and there didn't seem likely to be.

See, I don't think she pursued the matter thoroughly enough because Ple and I have both mentioned a compromise that would have cut down on the volume of notices without eliminating them. And it was volume that was the issue.

Why should we give any weight to your assertions? I'd really like to know.

Yeah, I don't like questioning anybody's right to post here or make observations or criticism. We can talk all we want about newbies and veterans, but anybody who is registered can participate.

Beverly, this is why I summarized the problem as selfish assholes:

A few posters are definately quite selfish and unwilling to accomodate the wishes and needs of others, and instead persistently require others to accomodate their wants and opinions.

If that is a particuarly unfair description, I'm not sure how.

Regarding Rafmun's term here as a poster. He has the right to speak his mind, surely. But one of the foundations of his post is his authority as a long-time observer. Asking for more concrete evidence than just his word, or his subjective assessment of "long time", is a perfectly fair request. I thought Rafmun was trying to persuade us?

Rafmun, I have to be honest here. I haven't seen you post anywhere but this thread. I don't know what basis you have for being so critical of this community. You haven't been a part of it at all, and yet you come in and post really insulting -- yet vague -- assertions about this community.

Why should we give any weight to your assertions? I'd really like to know.

Well, to be honest right back, Steph, I don't expect you to give any weight to my assertions.

That is kinda my whole point.

Let's look back at the thread to see what we know - just from this thead:

1) Suggestions/issues from newbies like me don't count, b/c they're new and don't know the culture.

2) Issues raised by sensitive posters like Gloomcookie don't count, b/c darn it, there are policies in place to deal with their issues, and if they don't find that enough, tough.

3) Issues raised by avoidy types like Beverly and Sue and MeganE and others can't count, b/c they don't raise the issues loud enough, or often enough, and when they do, loud types are more than prepared to be louder and post more.

4) Long term activist posters like Elana and Trudi who have compromised again and again, but who grow frustrated with lack of reciprocation on behalf of a few self interested posters don't count b/c they should "arse up" and stick it out, and if not, it's on them.

So, who carries the day most of the time? Seems like a small group of activist posters who are able to discount and deluge the opinions of the rest.

I also think you're raising the temperature by paraphrasing his concerns with a single four letter word ("suck").

Well, I really don't want to do that. Honestly.

Having said that, I think what Rafmun described -- a minority persisting in pushing their agenda until people are driven away -- does qualify as sucking.

FWIW, I think Minearvearse has sucked up a lot of the activity lately.

Yeah, and I've been bummed about it, because I watched Wonderfalls twice, went "ehh" both times, and decided it's not for me, so it doesn't seem like a thread where I'd hang out.

Gloomcookie, if I hadn't literally been on my way out the door yesterday evening when the name kerfluffle came up in Bitches, I would've spoken up, even though I'm also very persnickety and opinionated about names and would never have considered an ambiguously gendered name for the Player despite my tomboyishness. Because it's one thing to have those discussions and opinions in the abstract, or in the early stages of narrowing down a list of choices, but another thing when the actual name of an actual baby is involved. But I try never to step into something like that when I'm about to disappear for a few hours, so I didn't.

Which isn't so much about the specific issue--just that lack of a supporting post doesn't necessarily mean lack of support, or that someone has chosen the other poster's side. Life intrudes in all kinds of ways.

Why should we give any weight to your assertions? I'd really like to know.

Yeah, I don't like questioning anybody's right to post here or make observations or criticism. We can talk all we want about newbies and veterans, but anybody who is registered can participate.

Ach. I recognize that I'm in the minority on this, and I will defy expectation by not pushing it. It's something I'm uncomfortable with, but other people aren't, so good enough.

I really don't need to lose any more social capital, apparently, so this is backing off on that particular opinion.

1) Suggestions/issues from newbies like me don't count, b/c they're new and don't know the culture.

That's not my opinion and I just said so.

2) Issues raised by sensitive posters like Gloomcookie don't count, b/c darn it, there are policies in place to deal with their issues, and if they don't find that enough, tough.

They count. She's got the right to pursue. If she doesn't, that's her choice. That's not "tough noogies" - it's just that people fought hard to create procedures that made people feel enfranchised. Moreover, the preferred "in-thread" objections also happened - so I don't see how that's ignoring her concerns.

3) Issues raised by avoidy types like Beverly and Sue and MeganE and others can't count, b/c they don't raise the issues loud enough, or often enough, and when they do, loud types are more than prepared to be louder and post more.

Bottom line: you have participate. You can bring an issue to vote without a long debate. If you don't participate...nobody's going to read your mind.

4) Long term activist posters like Elana and Trudi who have compromised again and again, but who grow frustrated with lack of reciprocation on behalf of a few self interested posters don't count b/c they should "arse up" and stick it out, and if not, it's on them.

It's on them to work for the changes that they want. Again, I think Elena could've found a compromise instead of a capitulation.

I'm willing to make a lot of accomodations to make people feel like they have a voice here. But mind-reading isn't one of them. If they don't use their voice, that absolutely is their responsibility.