Posted by Dr. Bob on March 13, 2002, at 21:08:23
In reply to Re: Man, this is getting Krazy... » johnX2, posted by Krazy Kat on March 13, 2002, at 14:34:04
> I suggest the civility rules be overhauled. A statement such as "post anything that others could take as accusatory" is just too general.
But it's a general concept...
> Is there a way to list very specific criteria and leave it at that? Then when folks are blocked, that # could be referenced and that would, hopefully, be the end of it.
>
> - KKIsn't that kind of what I do now, except not with numbers? "Specific" is in the eye of the beholder. It took me a long time before I gave in and tried to spell out civility at all...
--------
> At that web site you had to pay money to post (but not read) the news group, so no multiple votes.
Well, multiple votes only if you paid for them... :-)
> It worked out nice because people who were rell reputed could blow off some steam every now ... and then and not get booted (as the avid readers would never kick them off). If someone was admonished, generally the person took it well, as he/she new it was a group opinion and not one persons subjective viewpoint.
>
> -JohnHmm, maybe it would be an interesting experiment. It would mean less work for me, at least...
However, I'd have some concerns:
1. People might feel like those who were popular got to post whatever they wanted.
2. People who were admonished might in fact take it worse, like the whole group was against them instead of just a single subjective inconsistent individual.
3. And maybe the main reason, I'm afraid inviting people to vote against each other would make the atmosphere less supportive.
--------
> I was actually defending Dr. B believe it or not. ;)
I believe it, thanks! :-)
> He's wasting an enormous amount of time defending his decisions, and, I agree, they are his decisions to make. However, if he could simplify the whole rule system, he might not get so many dissention posts.
It does take time, but I don't think of it as wasted. If I can explain my decisions then they might be more likely to be accepted...
Also, it helps me clarify my own thinking. I try to think of it not as dissention, but as feedback. Which I think is good for everyone involved.
> maybe we could have a moderated and an unmoderated forum...
>
> - KKIt's easy to create an unmoderated forum, you know, just go to Yahoo and create one! I'll even link to it from here, so it can be the "official" unmoderated forum, how about that? :-)
Bob
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:3455
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020308/msgs/3473.html