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
and as I leave for 10 minute walk home:
> I also think a Newbie might come away with the assumption that there are some posters who are annoyed at and/or are holding grudges at other posters.
Yup'
this exchange should be dealt with. If this whole thing has been about posters not liking each other I might actually laugh and throw up at the same time.
We all don't get along, some of us actively dislike each other. we leave threads for it, we backchannel, we make faces and we are not nice all the time. But if someone started something like this towards me because we don't like each other, it is just beyond my ability to express as sad making.
And it has brought me to a fianl point. If being here is so frustrating and horrible and filled with powerful hostile posters, why on earth would people want to stay?
Thing about the board's congenial roots is that the board started on Table Talk, where things were much more open and likely to involve outright flames. TT was fun, and wasn't Usenet, but it wasn't a tiny little enclave with only sweet kind people, either. Anyone with a Salon membership could drop in, and many people did. Some stuck around, some left (I'm sure David and Betsy remember Hellish and Dr. Satan...).
If being here is so frustrating and horrible and filled with powerful hostile posters, why on earth would people want to stay?
For the jalapeno poppers!
Mmm...those are some damn good poppers.
But you know what? I bet if it came down to naming names, very few people would agree on who are the posters doing that.
Rafmun has named Plei and Steph and made no other examples. AFAICT, his entire complaint is about the DM thing and I find vaguing up the complaint to accuse people offensive and really uncongenial to the spirit of this board and this thread. I am angry on their behalf. The following is why I think that:
Maybe I just think that it would be good to recognize when compromise is made from one quarter that sometime in the future harmony and balance might require compromise to be made from another quarter.
To those who get their way most of the time - back off on things that aren't critical to you. Let people with soft-voices have their way sometimes. When someone is doing something positive for the board, don't get all grumpy about a few extra posts in a thread. Be bigger than that.
I know other people have posted that there is not enough congeniality. But, correct me if I'm wrong, have we bullshit consensed on whether it's even possible to have a cabal enforcing their will on everyone?
have we bullshit consensed on whether it's even possible to have a cabal enforcing their will on everyone?
We have not. I don't really think it's possible, myself.
Because the board's too big, with too many little subcommunities forming and breaking and shifting around. Absent having someone commit vote fraud, I don't think it can be done.
What if we put the monkeys in charge?
Oh, Wolfram? I wanted to say that I'm very happy you stuck around.
I miss Dr. Satan.
Me three. And Knut, and John H., and Jen K. and Cindy and Rio and Theresa and...folks.
