Posted by Dinah on January 21, 2004, at 18:41:03
In reply to Re: Survey Question on PB Justice System » Dinah, posted by Ron Hill on January 21, 2004, at 17:55:57
Well, the "check" on the balance of the system is Dr. Bob. He can, and has, gone back and increased the duration of a block or gone from a PBC to a block on my administrative actions. He could also decrease a deputy's actions, which I always try to make clear if I block someone. His is the final word, and deputies are just an interim measure. But in this case, the fact that Jai had already apologized for a PBC given probably weighed on his decision.
Don't I remember recently an occasion on Babble (maybe the meds board) where someone self-corrected a potentially uncivil remark before Dr. Bob got to the board, so Dr. Bob didn't do anything but thank them?
Dr. Bob frequently errs on the side of mercy and issues more than one PBC before a block, or a PBC after a block. I can't really object to that... And if deputies had an administrative list and instructions to use that, we probably wouldn't feel as free to use judgement since we're supposed to follow instructions, so overall there would be less mercy shown, unfortunately.
I can't really answer your question, because I don't recall the administrative actions prior to this one. In an ideal world, both posters would receive the next step in their administrative action progression. And perhaps I short-circuited that by making the decision that this was an escalating situation and that I should intervene. But I don't think Dr. Bob should take a lot of heat for any inequities that resulted from my decision (assuming there were inequities).
I still think the problematic block was the prior one. I have looked at that post upside down and sideways and don't really think that it deserved a PBC. Lar was clearly attempting to remain within the civility guidelines. And there's where I disagree with Dr. Bob. I see a difference between an obviously uncivil post and a post that could have been worded a bit better. Moreover, in the past Lar had been willing to do a Please Rephrase in a way that allowed him to maintain his integrity (which is clearly, and to his credit, important to him) while satisfying Dr. Bob's guidelines. I think, in fact, that he went to a great deal of effort to do so on one occasion at least that I recall. So my opinion is that on the last block, it would have been more appropriate to give a Please Rephrase, which probably Lar would have been happy to comply with, as he had no intent to be uncivil, and all this could have been averted.
I thought so and said so at the time.
But I will say this. Just as trying to decide when a situation is escalating, it's also tough sometimes to decide what merits a PBC. There have been posts I would have PBC'd if the situation had escalated, but Dr. Bob didn't and everything was just fine. I would have made an error if I had PBC'd them. And there are times when Dr. Bob PBC's something that I wouldn't even notice. It's harder than it looks. I think maybe part of it is that people read things differently. Perhaps Dr. Bob put the emphasis on a different word and came up with a completely different meaning than I did.
I do think, however, that when a majority of posters seem to feel a PBC or block was unwarranted, possibly by reinstating the poll process he had at one time so it would be anonymous, he should give serious thought to using the poll, or the admin board, as the equivalent of a pardon or appeal recommendation and seriously reconsider his decision.
But what I think doesn't matter a whole lot. :) I don't plunk down the cash or take the responsibility for this site.
poster:Dinah
thread:296523
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040112/msgs/303876.html