Posted by confuzyq on June 18, 2007, at 20:52:57
In reply to is that the case now? » confuzyq, posted by karen_kay on June 18, 2007, at 20:22:54
Nope, always has been that way! That's another of the things that many historical admin protests have centered around, when unequal rules application is being alleged: How some get warning (after warning after warning, in some cases), but others... BOOM! outta nowhere (or at least far-away-where), if they've ever received a PBC.
(Mostly this is when bob is active, to my recollection.)
Even if the same person does keep doing what is clearly a violation, I still think that including "didn't understand PBC and made effort to reply: no" in every block calculation post can be misleading, as it could be referencing a reaction the person did or didn't have months or years ago. Unlike the other lines of criteria in the block formula, which always do apply to that particular instance.
In cases where it's apparently been decided that no more warnings are deserved, that line should be removed or altered. Or just have "N/A" after it. (But we never do "give up" on anyone, do we? So let's not auto-insert that line which will make it look like once again, they could have learned/halted the escalation to block; could have "not understood and made effort to reply," but didn't.)
As far as the blocks on this thread, which aren't cases of the above (so why did I put this here, go figure!), normally I would have commented that it looks like there is now one more thing people can worry about being applied inequally: the possible length of time between transgression (in these cases, April) and reprimand coming down. Because til now, it has always been almost a de facto rule that if bob missed something uncivil, he would "leave the past in the past" and not revisit any situation beyond just days later.
But, I didn't say that, due to the new "notify" procedures and all that. Whereby bob & deputies must go through what could be tons of notifications about possible incivilities, then make determinations. I guess that's going to make the window of opportunity for reprimand a lot bigger.
Oh, here's a smiley so you know I'm a nice fun person... :0)
> well then.....
>
> i wasn't aware of that.. i always thought one was given a warning (pbc, please rephrase, ect.) on each thread before issued a block.
>
> didn't that used to be the case?
>
> severely confused!!!!
>
> kk
poster:confuzyq
thread:752323
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070605/msgs/764032.html