Jayne ,'The Message'
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
Any ten posters can (upon stating publically within 24 hours of each other) for any reason officially censure (and ultimately ban) another poster.
But it's not "for any reason." The first person has to provide reasons why, and it has to have been discussed in-thread first. I also think that people here have enough sense that something that's obviously for no reason will be ignored.
If I and ten friends officially had a problem with, say, the word "cunt" and the offenders refused to stop saying it they could be warned, suspended and then banned.
If I and ten friends officially had a problem with, say, the word "cunt" and the offenders refused to stop saying it they could be warned, suspended and then banned.
But you don't. And "cunt" is not in any way a violation of the community standards, so it wouldn't really be a valid complaint anyway.
And "cunt" is not in any way a violation of the community standards
Unless what we've done is change the way "community standards" are determined.
I ask George to stop using the word "cunt".
He doesn't.
My friends do too
He still doesn't
I lodge a complaint. I link to the refusals as evidence. The other ten people second me. The letter goes out.
It doesn't matter that the vast majority of people have no problem with the word "cunt" because there is no place in that scenario for them to stop the action.
No, what we've done is provided a process for dealing with what happens when they've been broken. When to warn, not what to warn about.
If ten people agree that they've been broken they now have.
If ten people agree that they've been broken they now have.
Trudy, WTF?
Your logic is totally escaping me here.
If someone complains in thread that BuffistaX is using cunt, not caring about context, the complainer is a hell of a lot more likely to get slapped with "we swear. deal."
FWIW, this has happened in Spoilers, and semi-recently.
If, however, BuffistaX is calling, say, Character or Actress Y a cunt, or using it to describe BuffistaZ, I can see action happening.
If ten people agree that they've been broken they now have.
No, if ten people agree that the brokenness is enough to neccesitate a warning, it now does. If they weren't broken in the first place, then it doesn't matter.
Trudy -
You (correct me if I'm reading you incorrectly) are concerned that a gang of ten can do an end run around our process.
Although I don't find it likely, I also don't think you are delusional. Because we've purposefully left our community standards vague so we can guard against rules lawyer-trolls, your concerns have a basis.
Most of the responses to your concerns, seem to be counting on the common sense and good will of the Buffistas to prevail in the sort of situations you are describing. You seem concerned that common sense and good will won't prevail. Gar mentioned similar concerns in the lightbulb thread, last week.
Your concerns (to me) seem unlikely to come to pass in the short-run, because of who and what we are. However, because I was a Bronzer and have seen the downfall of that community, I know communities change, so I don't rule out anything in the long-run.
Review our standards.
Review the procedure we just enacted.
If you think we need some sort of immediate relief process, propose it.
Unless you propose something completely crazy or something that just seems to want to negate our process completely (which is the same process we had before we voted, except now we have benchmarks that let the stompies know when to act on our will), I will second you, on the principle that I believe if a Buffista wants the community to consider something, the community ought to.
Because of our issue moratorium, your proposal can't be crafted to negate our process. But if you're designing a separate procedure based on real and separate concerns, I personally don't see a problem.
A lot of people don't vote because they are too preoccupied with other things in their life and don't feel like voting, and by the time they do seek it out, the voting is usually over, so they give up and don't even try anymore.
IJS.
Daniel -
I'm wondering if maybe you hadn't been in this thread enough (and I can see why) to understand what the whole process is, and how to know when to vote. In case that is the case, I'm going to outline what happens when. If you already know, please ignore me.
In all but extraordinary circumstances, there is plenty of time to discuss (4 days) and vote (3 days), and there are very obvious and clear notices posted in Press both --
a) at the time the discussion begins, and
b) when the voting period begins.