PS: Steph, I don't even know what you're talking about, but it seems snotty.

Actually, it's not that I saw a specific person being pissy as the problem, but rather repeated incidences of pissyness becoming more accepted, and hurting more people - newbs and long termers alike. Naming names of past problems didn't seem like a positive thing, but rather asking for a slight refocussing on issues/tone/approach that at one time was the norm here - friendlyness - seemed like the way to go. Perhaps I did that poorly.

Well, yeah. *g*

Coulda saved a million posts and a lot of hard feelings if you'd worded it that way in the first place, even if the perception of "the norm" is probably slightly shaded by nostalgia. What it ended up feeling like was that people you knew and cared about were feeling slighted and put-upon by a couple of people, and you were there to issue the holy smackdown from on high.

WRT the increase in brittle behaviour, I don't know that there is a solution. The combination of the political reality of right now, the economic reality of right now, and the increased size of the board means that comfortable's not a place we can easily get to.

I really hope the people who think the board as a whole is getting snotty will call people on it, when specific things are said.

(italics mine)

Yes. This. Otherwise, I think people will continue to get defensive, which only breeds rudeness, snippiness, misunderstandings, etc.

It is not always easy for some people (me included) to speak up. If you choose not to speak up, be it on the board or in backchannel, then people won't know your opinion on a matter, and there's a chance that some people will think that silence equals consent.

Do we need to add stuff to the site ettiquette along the lines of "just about everyone feels ignored at one point or another" and "no one person speaks for the board" and "we value our independence, so anything that smacks of preaching will garner a very bad reaction"?

I think that could help. Also love Nutty's Corollary (dear god how do you spell that?) or Law, whichever it was (the thing she just posted; is it FAQed? It's been too long since I've delved there.

Didn't get the Yoko Factor thing either.

Teppy, what are you talking about?

The Buffy episode The Yoko Factor, where Spike split up the Scoobies, but told Adam that he just exacerbated tensions that had already been there.

That's what this entire thing feels like to me.

PS: Steph, I don't even know what you're talking about, but it seems snotty.

Erk. Didn't mean for it to be snotty, really really. It had just occurred to me all of a sudden, and as is my wont, I posted without thinking how it sounded.

I think I'll stop posting here.

"no one person speaks for the board"

While I see why this might reassure some people, I also don't want to make that part of the Official Statement of this site, if only because new people might be better off assuming that a chucking under the chin may be because one has transgressed on community standards. (IOW, they are kind of speaking for the board.) If another person disagrees with the chucking, that should show to the new person that it's a colorable point.

I think, though, it may be helpful to say that everyone feels ignored at some point. Although that may also have unintended effects for [for us, because of] people who might be deliberately ignored.

I'm a meanie.

Anyway, in describing this thing to Bob last night, he said we're kind of like an anarchic collective. Which in some ways is true, because anything that smacks of domination tends to get shot down real quick.

eta what is in brackets

WRT the increase in brittle behaviour, I don't know that there is a solution. The combination of the political reality of right now, the economic reality of right now, and the increased size of the board means that comfortable's not a place we can easily get to.

Is that kind of what you're talking about with "The Yoko Factor," Teppy?

If so, I agree with you. I'm not just seeing it on the board, either. I'm finding that people in general have recently been much more on edge, tense, worried, snappish, and ill-at-ease than I would expect.

The combination of the political reality of right now, the economic reality of right now, and the increased size of the board means that comfortable's not a place we can easily get to.

Sure we can, but people need to let things roll off their back a bit more easily, and that's something people can only do for themselves.

I love this board, and have been a part of this community for a long, long time, and know many folks around here IRL. Even used to be a stompy. I'm invested.

But at the end of the day, it's just a posting board. I'm near incapable of taking too much personally. But that's my damage, no one else's.

We've been here before. Repeatedly.We'll be here again. It all blows over. Love y'all, but I think this--as far as I can tell, and I'll admit I'm having trouble following-- all has had little to do with any board policy or cultural problem than it does folks wanting to talk about their feelings.

As Dana said Jen K and John H have both left. msbelle has noted that she had left for a few months and Karl posted himself that he has moved on due to board issues. Cindy has left as well. Newbie beej is now gone, possibly dissuading other lurkers from posting. We're not to know, but there are over 1000 registered participants here. Personally, I have cut back my posting because I either am afraid to post, or feel ignored. Maybe that's my failing, I'm happy to acknowledge it, so I'm ready to move on.

These people left for a variety of reasons, not solely and specifically because of a more aggressive posting style. Also, they left over a long stretch of time - not indicative of a recent sea-change at b.org.

Sean, Steph - y'all are getting all riled up and bringing the hot rhetoric. That's your prerogative, but I'm getting more heat than light at the moment. I do understand feeling protective about the board, and perhaps resentful about Rafmun's allegations, but the board's fine and it didn't do any damage, and I think some useful things have come out of this discussion even if they are not directly related to either my original post, or Rafmun's points.

Useful Things I Got From This Discussion:
Matt's history of the Bronze: I've really come to rely on the perspective of people with longtime experience in different communities. Ple's tales of running boards are always filled with rueful wisdom and, Matt's story is another excellent example of both what's wonderful about an internet community and also its limit and scope. It seems very important to me to reiterate - we can't be all things to all people. It's best for us to nurture those things which we have come to identify as distinctly our own.

Shawn's Good Citizenship: I got knocked around a bit when I first used the phrase "social capital" in Bureaucracy, but it's really not such a bad thing. It makes people feel anxious about being judged, I guess, or worrying about hierarchy of people that are esteemed, but Shawn's point is that it's not about how you lose your social capital. It's how you gain it. People that organize the F2F get it. People that organize charities get it. People who reach out to other Buffistas get it. People who, by the quality of their writing, their wit, their erudition, their insight, their compassion, their snark - get it. We know what we value. When you add to the community, the community values you. That's not so abstract or scary. That's a positive.

Nutty's corollaries: Her quick summary of what went right and awry in this discussion articulated (for me) some of my inchoate objections. And as many people have noted, there's nothing at all wrong with aspiring to some level of graciousness, to reflecting on whether I'm adding or subtracting to the discourse. I remember a time when I'd been backbiting in the threads, and seeing one of Nutty's posts in Bureaucracy (long time back) and just thinking, "Yeah, I need to quit crapping on things. What can I bring to the board, insead of bitching about it."

Elena's point: The US constitution is designed to prevent a tyranny of the majority. It's wise and useful to be accomodating to the minority at times. To bend a little makes a lot of thing work.

Something I articulated: The idea of the center and the edge. Sometimes you are going to be in the minority and digging in your heels against a tidal flood going the other direction is not the best response. We will differ in opinion. Not everybody gets what they want. That's not the point - the point is about maintaining a center place where we can (see above) nurture the distinctly Buffista values. Which includes free discoursee, snarking, civility, discursive riffing, courtesy, play, kindness. We will risk offense, but we don't go out of our way to give it.