Posted by Dinah on April 13, 2006, at 8:21:15
In reply to Re: the blocking policies, posted by Dr. Bob on April 13, 2006, at 3:36:11
Thank you, Dr. Bob, for giving my post the time for thought.
> > Isn't the cooling off block now in effect? So that if someone has followed the rules for (insert number of months here) and the civility guideline breach wasn't incredibly egregious, they could be blocked for one week no matter how long they've previously been blocked for.
>
> Right. But (a) it can get kind of black-and-white, for example, 1 week if it's been more than x months or 1 year if it's been more, and (b) "cooling off" implies they were hotheaded, but that isn't necessarily the case.Ok, it could be renamed. :) Perhaps an evolving policy, referred to and refined as circumstances apply? It's always hard to understand those things out of context anyway.
>> 3) If someone is blocked for one thing, then later commits a completely different violation, everything starts over at PBC. So Dr. Bob could add a column to his spreadsheet so that Poster X (posting an illegal source of nonprescribed drugs) is on a different line than Poster X (uncivil to another poster)
>
> I do kind of do that already. Grouping together, as above, different types of incivility.Well, even after years of watching you administrate, you still can surprise me. I didn't realize that your spreadsheet (or perfect memory or whatever it is) was so nuanced.
> > 8) Additions to the standard language on those warnings, and on PBC's and posts that are reactive in nature, that posts be reported on Admin (with only a single line URL and a "Please review this") or by emailing deputies and/or Dr. Bob.
>
> Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean there. Warnings are different than requests for review...Sorry, I jumped topic I suppose. I meant that until you create the report this post button, that people should be encouraged to just simply report a questionable post by email or simple URL on Admin rather than respond protectively, or angrily. Because I don't hear about some situations until after they're very large situations, while if someone drops me an email or mentions it neutrally on Admin, I could see it earlier. Just trying to keep some situations from getting to be very large.
> > 10) New posters should have added to their PBC's the consequences of further rule infractions, or a very specific link to the FAQ on that.
>
> That's a good idea, too. Which I think you've been putting into practice yourself. :-):) Wasn't sure you'd approve. Glad you do.
> > 6) The Please be Sensitive guidelines should be beefed up a bit for those very very few posters who avoid making technical fouls but appear to somehow arouse in others the impulse to commit technical fouls. So that a new rule wouldn't have to be created each time, but a more general "Please be sensitive to the fact that this is causing a great deal of distress." can be instituted.
> >
> > Dinah
>
> I like that idea a lot, those are really difficult situations for this community. However: if a number of people foul Poster X, does that necessarily mean it's Poster X who should be asked to modify their behavior?
>
> Also, wouldn't the behavior to modify need to be specified? And if that were a reasonable request, wouldn't it be reasonable to make it a new rule and apply it to everyone? IMO, a new rule is more balanced. Poster X is asked to follow it, and those who commit technical fouls are asked to stop doing so.I know that we differ on this topic, and that you prefer to develop general rules in response to specific situations, while I'd prefer you keep the flexibility to recognize it when you see it, and just ask to cease and desist any particular thing without creating a rule about it. Perhaps it's the mom in me and the teacher in you. I know that even the best of people can find ways to violate the spirit of family rules without technically violating them, and that sometimes it's ok to just ask "Could you please stop that" without adding it formally as a rule. Especially since sometimes context counts. I mean, you can't make a rule about looking at someone, but sometimes you can say stop looking at someone for the time being.
poster:Dinah
thread:628886
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060412/msgs/632530.html