Posted by mair on June 27, 2004, at 21:46:56
In reply to Same song, second verse, posted by Shar on June 26, 2004, at 23:40:44
The way the system of blocks has evolved leaves much too much to be desired. The whole double sentence system has all the same problems of gross inequity posed by the ridiculous "3 strikes and you're out" laws. A supposed first or second time offender who is deliberately and maliciously creating mayhem, gets a virtual free pass, while people who are wonderful sources of support and critical only of the moderator risk blocks of staggering duration. It's tough maybe in this country in particular, to abide a system that potentially penalizes so harshly criticism of a system of governance.I believe that as a general rule blocks should not be applied in instances where a poster has, in good faith, criticized the moderator, and in instances where the perceived slight is one which is the subject of very different interpretations. I don't think anyone should be bounced for a statement which only the moderator finds to be unacceptable.
Mostly I wish you would spend more time dealing aggressively with the people who very deliberately hurt other posters whether it be simply to stir things up or to grab some attention (even your attention), or simply to be mean and less time splitting hairs in an effort to keep the lid on those who are critical of your administration of the site.
It seems pretty obvious to me. There are lots of PBCs and blocks handed out here that barely generate any discussion because no one questions the legitimacy of the punishment. If a block, or the length of a block, or a refusal on the part of the moderator to intervene when others feel that they are being attacked causes emotional upheaval and leaves valued posters scurrying for the sidelines, chances are it was a questionable action to begin with. Why try to defend it as being inviolate? Why wouldn't you want to avoid the kind of upheaval that makes so many people here feeling scarred and unsafe?
You're pretty big on trying new things. Why not try out a system of governance that reserves the harshest treatment for only the most egregious (and obvious)cases? You can still introduce and promote discourse on all the shades of gray so everyone continues to think about issues of civility. You can still point out to us ways things could be stated more carefully or encourage people to be careful to avoid the unintentioned slight. Why not give it a try? You might just find that there is far less emotional upheaval and far less criticism of the administration of the site.
Mair
poster:mair
thread:360326
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040527/msgs/361131.html