|
by BooMan
I've looked over the proposal that was submitted for changing and clarifying and enforcing the rules of the site and I am going to post the full content of the proposal below the fold.
There are a few different points to address. The first is defining what it means to be a prick. I have heard some criticism of using the term but it has been in place for so long, I think we should just stick with it. In the past I defined it as doing something you wouldn't do if you were a guest at a dinner party. Yeah, you might get drunk and boisterous and argumentative, but you wouldn't yell slurs at the hosts or tell the other guests they are f*cking pigs. The basic definition still stands. But there are also specific concerns that have been raised. Advising someone to seek psychological help can be a debating device, but if you are making it into a personal attack it is inappropriate. Telling someone they're a moron is asking for a flamewar. We want to try to keep these threads as civil as possible. But it is only vicious, personal, and sustained attacks that are strictly forbidden. And the advice crew came up with a pretty good set of procedures for dealing with a problem member. I want to add a little preface to it. If you see two members starting to get into it, there are three things you can do. You can make a comment reminding them to keep it civil. You can issue a '2' warning rating to their comments (or a lower rating depending on egregiousness), and you can contact me or other site administrators either by email or tracking us down on the site. Please don't take it all on yourself to resolve a flamewar. Remind, warn, and report. Site administrators will look into a report and issue a warning if it is deemed the rules have been broken. A second offense will bring a 24 hour suspension of posting privileges. A third offense will bring a two-week suspension of posting privileges. A fourth offense will bring banning. An appeal of a banning can be made after six months. The administrators will be the judge. The advisory group suggested setting up a community board that would act as as arbitration body. They put a lot of effort into thinking about how to do this and so I put a lot of consideration into it. I do not believe it is workable and I think it could cause some problems, perhaps more problems that it can solve. The only thing I can be certain of is that I will be here. A board would rely on the retention of its members and their availablity, and it is not something I want to have to worry about maintaining and keeping fully staffed and managing. I'm still open to ideas on arbitration for banned members. But unfortunately I don't think we can use the system that was suggested. They did a great job trying to make a system that would work and I applaud them for that. There is one other issue, and that is privacy. Some of us are anonymous, some are semi-anonymous, and some of us go by our real names. Regardless of what status someone has, any effort to disseminate personal information about a member, particularly about someone's employment, but about anything, without that member's consent is strictly banned. Sharing of personal email without consent is banned. Doing these things can lead to an immediate permanent banning with no appeal. You cannot do these things even if it would point out that a member has misrepresented themselves, you cannot do it in revenge, you cannot do it to try to win an argument. If you do it, I will consider the precise circumstances, and banning is the most likely outcome. Even if a member is a public figure or is doing nothing to hide their identity, you cannot use that as an excuse for divulging personal information about them, even if that information is readily available through google. It is totally off limits. Do not post pictures of people without their consent, and if they complain please notify an administrator and we will erase it. If, at any time, you feel like you have been indiscreet in posting about yourself or another member please advise me. I will help you resolve your privacy concerns. Many sites strictly prohibit the deletion of a diary by the author. I do not, but I highly discourage it. It is very poor form to erase a diary that people have commented in. If you ever become disenchanted with the site and decide to leave, please do not ask for your diaries to be deleted. I will delete anything that might create problems for your privacy or future employment, but I will not destroy all the comments or the public record of your history here. There may be some topics I have forgotten to discuss. So I open the floor for feedback. Based on possible modifications from feedback, I will post these rules in the Frequently Asked Questions or may even create a link for rules that people can use for easy reference. I want to thank everyone that put time, thought, and effort into trying to make this a better site. The proposal I worked from is below the fold.
Site Rules of Conduct
A Word on the Rules | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
A Word on the Rules | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
|
Login
We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris
|
||||||||||
Booman Tribune Homepage admin@boomantribune.com powered by Scoop 
More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.
|
||||||||||||
