Rafmun, you still haven't proposed what it is we should do about our apparent shortcomings. So far all I see is pointing out a problem, in increasing critcal tones of the board and a majority of its active posters without any solutions.

That's what tends to piss me off. I have no problem being asked to think about my behavior if its offensive to someone but your criticism doesn't strike me as particularly constructive. It's just upset a whole lot of people on both sides of the issue.

the hell is going on in here?

t backs away slowly

No, that won't work. So I'll just address this:

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.

Rafmun, assuming your thesis is correct, what would you have us do?

We do have policies in place to handle offensive posts and posters, Gloomcookie's reluctance to use them notwithstanding. If you're a long-time lurker you witnessed the endless constitutional conventions over policy and process during which board function and structure were hammered out.

You seem to be saying, and pardon me if I'm misrepresenting you, "you're not nice enough!"

And, well, that's probably true. The world isn't nice enough either. But how can that be rectified? We can't protect the voices of people who will not speak. We can't make the lurkers talk, no matter how much they may support us in email.

Do you have a concrete suggestion for handling the problems you have identified? This board is in constant tension between the need to keep ourselves civil and the need to communicate clearly, and none of us are always able to do both at once. Those of us who are willing to post at all.

Beverly, rafmun said upthread that some people are selfish and don't have interest in the board health in general, I think this is what Shawn is talking about.

Thanks for that. And thank you, too, Shawn, for the clarification. Plei, no ack! The hasty retreat sounded a little passive agressive (Srew you guys! I'm goin' home!), and I really hope it wasn't taken that way. I just am not built for the endurance arguing, however much I might wish I was. Am. Were. What.ever.

I'ma go read some fantasy porn, written by my lovely and talented DH. Bet I have a better afternoon.

You are starting to sound like the voice of a silent majority. This does not garner you credibility. I should know.

Aww, hon. You *know* the lurkers gots your back.

David, thanks for the clarification.

I have to say, too, that I'm a little uncomfortable being classified as "sensitive." I did call said poster on her rudeness in-thread. I dare say that anyone who was addressed in the way I was in this instance would be offended. Anyway, that's all.

I wasn't insulted either. I may not agree with everything Rafmun said, but saying it feels TO HIM as if there is a vocal minority driving the direction of the board is a valid question to look into. I am a bit sad that almost no one responded to his (or Hec's or Trudy's) posts by saying "IS there?" "Am I possibly making people feel disenfranchised?" "Is there a way to make the amazingly cool doscourse on this board even MORE cool?" "How can I understand these folks who feel so differently from me better?" but instead went right to defensiveness.

I'm not one of those peeps who hates conflict. I like it and I'm gabby. Because of that, I know I have run roughshod over others in the past and thereby missed out and what they could teach me. I still do on occaision, but I'm aware of it and trying to deal as fairly and openly as possible with people, even those who for some inexplicable reason do not think, feel, or react the way I do. It's not easy (for me, at least--I think it's easier for many sweeter-by-nature people here on this board) but it's worth it.

someone else may not want to say "Jilli, I think you're crazy and need to stop having your stuffed bunny post"

What does the one have to do with the other, unless...

*gasp*

...are you saying clovis isn't real?

I don't know whether to cry or move my troops south to take New Zealand.

I haven't been insulted yet today and that might be a miracle.

and disagreement absolutely positively does not equal discounting.

t tangent

...are you saying clovis isn't real?

We have photos of you with him. You know damn well he's real.

I don't know whether to cry or move my troops south to take New Zealand.

Just you try it, bucko.

t /tangent

I may not agree with everything Rafmun said, but saying it feels TO HIM as if there is a vocal minority driving the direction of the board is a valid question to look into.

As usual, Scrappy is wise.

But my earlier point stands. What do we DO about that? The board is built on discussion, which means talky people will be more visible in the process than less-talky people. But we also have voting procedures in place so that big decisions don't get made by bullshit consensus and so the less-talky people don't get left out of the process entirely.

Do we implement voting for small decisions too? Rather than that, I'd follow the Allyson school of thought and rather have the Stompies make the decisions. But I know that's not going to happen either.