It's just that Hickok on Deadwood is kind of a morally bankrupt drifter/parasite who coasts on his reputation and people being scared shitless of him.

Oh, good. Yeah, that sounds about right.

Look, I can be just as morally bankrupt as the next person. Stop trying to limit my potential.

Sorry about that, eh? Or are you just assuming from my implication that I consider moral bankruptcy to be a negative character trait?

Now I'm the one feeling hedged in.

Hi, Karl. I miss you.

Now I'm the one feeling hedged in.

t buys protective put on JohnSweden

Upthread now, but beautiful post, Matt.

And Nutty...where were you all day! Couldn't you feel the incipient shit flinging about to happen at the monkey house? Your apeish brethren needed you. Anyway, I'm very glad you arrived to excavate the thread with your mighty shovel of clarity.

Elena, of course tone can be misinterpreted and it is wise to check first before you jump on somebody. Which...I think is what tends to happen around here. Or if people get pissed off, they hop on AIM and vent, but they don't kerfuffle all that much in-thread. Sometimes, of course, and a little more often lately.

Also, I wish that you had worked through to a better compromise on the deathmatch notices, because in part - you were in some ways the representative of the Death Match peeps. And I think it didn't have to be an either/or decision, and that merely cutting the volume would've been a satisfactory compromise. I did appreciate your gesture to simply stopping posting in Press, but in retrospect it feels less like something that was generously given, but resentfully given up. I don't think it had to come to that.

You know, I've been going over some of my guacs of old in a minor fit of self-indulgence (good times), and you could smell the moral indignation a mile away. So I can certainly see how Rafmun feels at this moment. At some point someone, I think it was Deena, told me to start hanging around a bit more in other threads, talk more about myself, my life, my family etc. and just get to know people outside the Bureaucrazy thread.

Rafmun, I pass the same on to you. Play with us in Natter. Curse network execs with us in Angel, Firefly and Minearverse. Share TMI with us in Bitches. Overanalyze movies, music, tv and books with us. Send and receive ma for no reason at all. Enjoy us and let us enjoy you.

As often as this thread is the solution, it can also be the problem.

David, I don't want to get into that again.

Aw, Wolfram. Go you with the Buffista-ness.

(This was an exceedingly long thread to get through, for a day of posts.)

Nutty's [Very Own!] Law: In an unmoderated board environment, you are exactly as oppressed as you choose to be.

Love it. Which is basically what I would have said 10 hours ago, had I thought of it.

Also? What Karl said:

If what you really want is for peple to be more civil and to avoid 'running over each other' in text, then I'm afraid that the only way to lead is by example.

Rafmun, I tried to respond to you based on your words, but the words you chose, despite your assertions of dispassionate academia, conveyed to me the idea that you didn't much care about convincing me of anything but that we were all mean and should be ashamed of ourselves. Now, this may indeed not have been your intent, but if more than half the people responding to your posts took offense at the words you chose, then maybe it was your choice of words. On the other hand, if you really did intend to piss people off, you got it done. Go you.

Anyway, since Rafmun is so convinced nobody's listening to his original point, which is that an unnamed cabal of loudmouths is ruining the board experience of an unnamed group of marginalized quieter folks (okay, possibly hyperbole, it's late), let's reconsider that.

1. Karl and a few others stepped forward and said, yes, they felt marginalized recently, possibly talked-over or ignored by others. (Pause to hug Karl, who gives great hugs.)

2. Others disagree with this assertion. For myself, I expect it's possible, not just in Bureaucracy. The board has over 1200 registered posters (right?), twenty or so active threads, and the most active threads move like lightning. Not only is it possible for someone to get ignored, it's positively likely. It's not like you can make a single post in Natter nowadays and get a response (unless you're Rio).

3. Is this an actual problem? By which I mean, is this a function of human failings, or is it a function of board volume? Are we actually meaner than we used to be? And is there any way to measure that?

4. If it is an actual problem, or even if some of us think it is, what can be done about it? I offer Nutty's resolution, which ought to be memorialized anyway, because it's faaabulous:

RESOLVED: that all Buffistas shall forthwith, unto the ending of the world, (1) strive to speak and listen with a minimum of obnoxiousness, and with a maximum of empathy; (2) consider before posting anything, and double on anything composed under circumstances of high emotion; (3) acknowledge that word choice, phrasing, amount and extent of quoted material, and even those stupid emoticons constitute "tone" as practiced in an online environment, and that the sum definition of "tone" as set forth herein matters; (4) speak outright and specifically any resentments, dislikes, grudges and feelings, or not speak about them at all, an honest debate being greatly preferred to a veiled one; and (5) strive ceaselessly to groom one another verily like unto monkeys, preferably the nice soft giggly kind and not the kind that throws its shit at people in the zoo.

I bet I'm exceeding the post limit here, let's see what happens.

David, I don't want to get into that again.

It doesn't need to be revisted, I just wish it had played out differently.