I guess the main point was that there are certain posters who feel aggrieved because they don't have the desire or the will or the ability to be heard and other posters get their way more often and are driving the first group of posters away. and that by discussin it ad nauseum, we are making it difficult for the "soft posters" to talk.

Or that's what I took out of it.

Here's the thing, I feel put upon more not because the board is a more snipey unwelcoming place. But because (1) I've pissed off people and they are justifiably less tolerant of me (2) I have less time to spend and less time means less posting which makes me less known and (3) I'm not as popular as I was or maybe my own perception of my popularity is wrong.

People haven't changed. The people I feel aggrieved by today are the ones who are saying that there is a small handful of aggressive activist posters who force board culture to be X because that conversation is derailing us from a greater conversation of what to do if people feel upset. By framing the debate in that manner, defensive has been the result, predictably.

So, what should we do when even long time posters feel unhappy?

But I don't care that I'm aggrieved. It doesn't drive me away, per se. Though the tone of this discussion especially from Rafmun's side (intended or not) has caused me to not want to post, because what's the point?

He's sees X. I see Y. We aren't going to agree. For him to continue to argue with just me (which he isn't) would be ridiculous. It would be like arguing with the refrigerator. The light goes on. The light goes off. But there isn't much more that will occur that hasn't been mechanically programmed to do.

I guess I'm misunderstanding you. What exactly was your main point? Because, from my perspective, we've spent the past several hundred posts discussing your post. What were we supposed to have been discussing from it that we weren't?

A number of people have asked this question of Rafmun, and he hasn't answered it. That's not helpful to discourse.

A failure to agree with you does not constitute bullying.

Yes. This ties into Jilli's question from yesterday as well, about whether part of the issue, insofar as there IS an issue, might not be unresolved bad feelings about earlier decisions from people who'd been in the minority faction when the decisions were made.

I've been gone for a couple weeks and am many thousands behind in all threads. No sense even trying to skim, it is skip to recent time for me. I had popped in to peek at the right hand threads to give a positive thought and/or YaY privately when appropriate. Imagine my surprise when I saw over 800 posts here.

I also had been skimming F2F since it was not as burdensome post count-wise as say Natter or Tim's thread. I saw the newbie posts there and quietly smiled at her enthusiasm because I felt much the same when I first discovered this place so long ago. Personally I feel she would have been a valuable member of the community if not for the way things were handled.

Way back at post 7676 Hec wrote:

Ahh, the dreaded right-hand threads where sour stomachs are fomented.

So, after watching Beej get the smackdown in Minearverse I would like to broach (to a chorus of groans, no doubt) the issue of newbie handling and indoctrination. I know she caused bristling and, as accurately noted in the rebuttals, crossed some cultural lines which are known but invisible.

Could we be a little gentler with the newbies, though? It takes a while to get the lay of the land, and her posts were not flamebaity or purposefully offensive, but shading towards lecture-speak. Which we're all familiar with. It was her second smackdown in a short period of time, and she apologized for the first one. I realize that the surest way to rile the board is being patronizing, but I don't think she intended offense.

While I agree that it helps to get to know the culture for a while before posting, we can probably afford to swallow our ire a bit, and more gently redirect folks.

Tone is subtle and I think the tone that we cultivate here (with much work) has a great deal to do with our community's longevity. It encourages interest and engagning talk, but is respectful and civil at the same time. Plus funny.

Even in a fraught political debate, though, I think we could rise above and make the effort to suggest how things could be better worded, instead of simply saying, in effect, shut yer yap until you've earned your stripes.

Otherwise, instead of being inclusive and welcoming new blood, we run the danger of being insular.

What. David. Said.

I think a lot of examples have been provided in this discussion where words and actions have driven people away - new and old. The point that could be taken away from this, or the constructive criticism? Let's all try to be a little more considerate before hitting the Post Message button. Maybe not everyone has seen this as a problem, or even considered this, but it's happening. If this is really a "community", opinions would be respected and comments would be clarified before people were taken to task.

When we built this board I was hoping that it would stay insular, but people wanted to open it up and welcome new posters. This has proved to be a great asset to the board and I'm 100% behind it now. I was wrong. But if we're not going to give people a chance to fit it, what was the point?

My tone? Resigned and tired.

I Got drawn into a debate on the minutiae even after stating upfront that I thought such misdirection was part of the problem.

Discussing minutiae around here may be a distraction, but it's also been an element of the board from the TT days (where I lurked until the migration and followed to World X and then here). Calling it misdirection implies a conscious intent. Implying a conscious intent, given the topic at hand, implies malicious intent, as do comments about selfish behavior at the expense of the good of the board. Do you really have to ask why general observations implying malicious intent would put people on the defensive?

Also, ascribing motive is not what I would call "objective" observation. YOOMV.

Conveniently allowing you to not address my comments. Very nice. >And by the way, the tone on "very nice" was acidic.

In response, let me simply suggest that the fullness of your comments and tone, both in this post and throughout the discussion, provide more enlightened commentary than I could offer up in 500 posts on whether or not a small minority of people get unreasonably snarky and unduly influence the direction of the board by sheer volume of posting and by doing so, discourage and alienate more reserved and moderate posters, and generally diminish the feeling community here for a number of posters - both newbies and long-termers.

Please respect my choice to move on.

Now, that's more like it.

Seriously -- please note that I intend my tone in this post to be serious and genuine -- I wanted to know, explicitly, if *I* was one of the posters you describe who make this community harsh and unwelcoming, and you seem to indicate that I am.

unduly influence the direction of the board by sheer volume of posting

I didn't realize that how often I, or anyone, posted influences the direction of the board. We used to run totals of who posted the most in a given month -- perhaps we should do so again.

and by doing so, discourage and alienate more reserved and moderate posters

By posting too much, I discourage others from posting? Again, I didn't realize that.

generally diminish the feeling community here for a number of posters - both newbies and long-termers.

And, again, since you did reply directly to me, I didn't realize that I personally, Steph Lang, diminshed the feeling of community here.

No one has brought it up with me, either in-thread or backchannel. I wish now that someone would have, because this community is very important to me -- more than you can imagine -- and I in no way want to damage it.

You might, however, be ascribing much more influence to me than I deserve.

I think this place is like any group environment--say, college. In any group there will be those who respond to the lost freshman by rolling their eyes and pointing at the Registry office. There will be those who say hello and walk them over there and maybe ask them where they're from. There will be those who say "Didn't they give you a map?" and look at them as if they're morons. I would prefer that the first repsonse to anyone who is lost would be to be welcoming rather than cold or punitive, but I can't legislate others' behavior, nor would I want to. The only behavior I can be responsible for is my own.

Speaking as a reserved and moderate poster -- Rafmun, please stop putting words in my mouth.