Posted by muffled on November 8, 2010, at 14:52:02
In reply to Re: A thought from a newcomer..., posted by Solstice on November 5, 2010, at 13:57:13
> > We also kept it respectful, or at least I tried to.
> >
> > Should other dialogues take place respectfully, there would be no impediment from Dr. Bob.
> >
> > It's not against site guidelines to disagree. It's not against site guidelines to be angry. Incivility may be more likely to take place under those conditions, but it isn't a requirement.
>
>
> I wonder what it would be like if there were a process where Dr. Bob's rules remained, but there were members who have demonstrated balance and the knack (and interest) in stepping in to mediate the issue. Instead of Deputies to enforce, there would be Mediators to intervene. I'm envisioning something like this:
>
> 1. An infraction occurs.
>
> 2. A PBC "warning" is given each time (no immediate harsh discipline for a subsequent, but different offense... my reasoning is that many people with mental health issues also struggle with an internal sense of time and place... as well as some whose brains simply do not allow them to make the connection between punishment yesterday for an infraction, and the behavior choice they make today.)
>
> 3. If infractor does the rephrasing, apology, whatever that's required.. then all is well and no block will happen.
>
> 4. If the bock-preventing behavior is not forthcoming, a Mediator steps in to work toward resolution. PBC's seem to usually involve someone who was not civil by site guidelines toward another specific member or members. Mediator can assist both parties in resolving it, all the while modeling the civil thinking and behavior expected.
>
> 5. If the infractor is cooperative with that process - then all is well. No block happens, and the infractor doesn't feel rejected or shocked - and may receive tremendous benefit from the caring that takes place with a Mediator 'virtually' taking them by the hand to lead them back to Psycho-babble's 'straight & narrow' road.
>
> 5. If the infractor is not cooperative with the Mediator-assisted process - if they don't agree with it, or just don't like it, etc... then they are opting for the currently practiced PBC/blocking process, which would be done by Bob That gives the infractor who got PBC'd the power of where it ends up. They can cooperate with Mediator assistance, or they can throw themself at the mercy of the current PBC/blocking process. Their choice.
>
> This might involve some tweaks to the current structure such as:
>
> a) When a PBC/block warning is issued, the infractor's status is in suspension for a specific period of time. Say, one week, or ten days, whatever seems a reasonable amount of time for the infractor to sleep on it, wake up realizing they'd like to rephrase/apologize, or for a Mediator to step in and assist through to resolution. The suspension doesn't change anything about the infractor's ability to post, it just means there won't be any immediate blocking going on. Seems like it kind of works like that now - in that Dr. Bob generally gives a person time to repair... I just think a specific and consistent amount of days would be good.
>
> b) Medsiators should gave the ability to turn a poster's posting ability off. That way, if a poster-in-suspension is so angry that they are escalating and really losing control, a Mediator can stop the damage while offering assistance. If the infractor refuses, then they are opting for standard Dr. Bob-blocking. If they are responsive to assistance, then Mediator turns them back on and the mediation process starts or resumes.
>
>
> I think there might be several advantages to this that will address the values Dr. Bob has that Dinah mentioned, as well as the legitimate issues that many in the community have consistently brought up:
>
> i) People who join this site are often in pain, are in stressful situaitons and have impairments in their ability to function optimally, etc. It seems unfair to expect people dealing with those things to first, maintain optimal civility at all times, and second, to extract themselves from a hole the dug while they were affecteds by a condition they don't even want to have (i.e., depression, anxiety, paranoia, etc.) The expectation that they can figure out how to extract themselves places a great amount of pressure on what may be a profoundly weak area. The Mediation process would be a bridge over that weak area. A way to comply with site guidelines... simultaneously respecting the legitimate responsibility Dr. Bob has to protect the community from harm, and also respecting the special fragilities of functioning found in a community of those affected by mental health issues
>
> ii) The members - the infractors themselves would be making the decision - they would have the power to determine the outcome. They can opt to cooperate with Mediator guidance, or they can opt for Dr. Bob blocking mechanisms. That way, the power is where it belongs. The infractor is in control of where they land.
>
> iii) Mediator-assistance will likely lead to LESS blocks, particularly the ones the community seems to especially despise - the ones for relatively minor infractions.
>
>
> I think Sr. Bob gains in this scenario because:
>
> 1. His rules, policies about civility, etc. remain intact.
>
> 2. He's still in control.
>
> 3. It will eliminate what has got to be uncomfortable for him - blocking for minor infractions just because the infractor hasn't rephrased/apologized (in Mesdiation-assistance, the Mediator would help the infractor understand where they got off track. If infractor rejects assistance... they are opting for Dr. Bob-blocks). So bottom line is - if a he blocks someone, it's because THEY OPTED to be blocked.
>
> 4. He seems to like the community assisting the community idea. This is just another version of it.
>
> 5. I think he'd like that infractors opting to cooperate with Mediator assistance will be learning through Mediator modeling the kind of self-restraint he wants to see - and everyone grows from that.
>
>
> Sorry this is so long - and I know there may be problems with it that I haven't thought about - - but it's an idea. I think it might work. I think it might honor the values Dr. Bob has, as well as the values of the community (self-autonomy and more merciful implementation of site guidelines).
>
>
> Solstice
>Some good stuff here...
poster:muffled
thread:965628
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/969241.html