Mal ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
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
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.
If I were married to a long-time Kiwani, 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.
Misdirection again. This is how discussion gets derailed so often.
Anyway, my term here became irrelevent when other, long term posters agreed with some of the points I brought up. Discount my opinion completely because I'm new - that's fine with me. But do you dismiss those that have been here longer, and agree with some of my observations?
I think what Rafmun described -- a minority persisting in pushing their agenda until people are driven away -- does qualify as sucking.
Unsurprisingly, I agree with Steph, and I would say that it happens more often than people are aware of.
It's part of being in a large group. Culture changes, boards change, people change.
Disagreeing is not the same as dismissing.
No problem, Susan. I'm sorry that I inadvertently took the discussion from your coming baby wonderfulness to a bad place.
Disagreeing is not the same as dismissing.
Exactly.
1) Rafmun you have been defended by many of us on your right to post.
2) What exactly should we do about Gloomcookies concerns except express how the board has chosen to deal with them? Really I am open to hearing this.
3) People thanked Beverly and Sue and Megan. We also agreed with them and continue to push some of their points.
4) You are the only person that I have seen say they don't count.
Not one person on this board has gotten their way 100% of the time. Why are the people who disagree with you or who feel attacked by your posts getting all of the credit for running things.