Posted by SLS on September 5, 2004, at 10:42:10
In reply to Re: A monologue upon The Rules » SLS, posted by Larry Hoover on September 5, 2004, at 9:21:50
Hi Larry.
> > > So many times, I see massive violation of civility on one side, and minor technical violations on the other, with equal penalties distributed. Unequal crime, but equal penalty.
> > I think it would be very difficult to assign gradations of inequality among specific violations.
> It would be different, not difficult, IMHO. A point scale was suggested, as an example of a different method. In a sense, one is already in place, as Bob can assign severity of violation differences already. (PBC; please rephrase; block, but not increase; block, but double the prior; block, but triple the prior).I think such differentiations are necessarily dependent upon the subjective interpretations of the enforcer. Of course, this does not become a problem as long as everyone agrees with the judgments of the enforcer or agrees to accept the judgments of the enforcer as official government.
I sometimes feel that the current system is constrictive and choking.
> > Perhaps it makes sense for Dr. Bob to consult with a sociologist and a lawyer to help create a protocol or a set of guiding principles for handling matters of civility.
> I think that most of the people arguing about what has happened are arguing from a perspective that they would prefer that mitigation and aggravation are more formally recognized. Or, at least, more overtly when they are applied. The "cut and paste" of recycled phrasing (from the FAQ) that Bob currently employs totally obscures whether or not he did apply either of those two factors.Do you think the overall tone of moderation should be relaxed, or to be exercised with a strict precision based upon new standards and regulations?
- Scott
poster:SLS
thread:386374
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040902/msgs/386654.html