Posted by Lou Pilder on October 16, 2006, at 14:00:07
In reply to Re: if something isn't sanctioned, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2006, at 11:12:33
> > I think one can reasonably conclude that it is not possible on a board this large to sanction every instance of a rule infraction, and sometimes there is discretion as to whether or not to do so. I don't think that anyone should assume that just because something isn't sanctioned it is by definition civil, just as in life one cannot assume that just because all laws are not enforced all the time, it is okay to sometimes break the laws.
>
> That's the way I see it, too, thanks,
>
> BobFriends,
It is written here that,[...just because a post is not sanctioned, that does not mean it is civil...].[...I (Dr. Hsiung) see it that way to..]
Now this brings up the following, that a member requesting a determination for acceptability does not know if the unsanctioned post is civil or not, for it could be civil, or it could not be civil. So could not asking if it is or not, IMO, be a reasonable question by a member here?
Then could not asking be reasonable and also be conscientious?
I base this on the mission of the forum, that it is for support and education and that those depend upon civility.
I ask,
A.Is it civil or supportive to limit a member to ask the deputy or owner of this site to find out if an unsanctioned post is uncivil?
B. Is it good for the community as a whole to have a policy that states that the deputies do not have to intervene?
C. Is it supportive or civil in a mental-health community to allow statements to remain unsanctioned if a member requests that they be sanctioned, if the statements are uncivil?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:692964
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060918/msgs/695322.html