Posted by Solstice on December 14, 2010, at 0:25:35
In reply to Re: My take on where it stands, posted by muffled on December 13, 2010, at 23:23:15
> *why? why do we have to tolerate alot of unclarity????It's part of the process of making big changes. There is no way for us to get from where we've been to a better place without going through a period of unclarity - even chaos.
> > A blocked poster would be responsible for contacting Council and asking that their block be shortened.
>
> *I think I might ask sometimes, but I think the majority of the time I would be so locked in shame I couldn't. I would just hide away and punish myself.
> I think its very commonly very hard for people to 'ask' for stuff. For parts of me to 'ask' is to expect to have something bad happen to me. I don't think I am alone in this. For parts, to ask is to beg. For parts to ask is far too much cuz who the f do I think I am, I am bad. etc etc I think this would be tough for MANY and they would just suffer in silence.I understand, Muff. Really, I do. I had an excruciatingly long period of time in my life where, because of my own past traumas, having to ask for anything would just paralyze me. It was a mighty, mighty struggle for me to overcome that - so please know that I feel every word you wrote here.
> Thats why I am so adamant about a cap on basic blocks. Then there wouldn't really be the need to appeal, if its only a week, that can be hard, but its doable...You've got a reasonable position on what you're saying here. Bob did say that he wants Council's second 'job' to be a consult to him. I'm guessing that he might run ideas (like the infamous twitter/facebook thing) through Council first. Maybe he'll rely on Council to bring up and discuss with him issues like this. So maybe this is something that could be addressed after Council is in place. Remember - it can't get worse than it is right now. And baby steps are still steps!
> Also, could others appeal a persons block on their behalf, if they know that person had more going on than the council knows....? Can they support fellow posters in that way?I think you make a good case for this being an immensely legitimate need that deserves to be addressed. I don't think Bob will be interested in Council being expected to chase blocked posters down to offer them reprieve. Maybe, you could find a Civility Buddy who you could develop a relationship of trust with - and ahead of time you could work something out with them that if you find yourself blocked - you could as that CB and ask them to help you - to advocate on your behalf - to be *with* you - to guide you - something. In fact - Muffled - if we end up with a Council, and there is a mechanism that provides for a CB to do this - then I would be honored if you would allow me to be your Civility Buddy. We would work it out (getting your case before Council), together.
> > 2. Bob has suggested that there be special (harsher?) penalties for any poster who is uncivil to Council members in the performance of their duties. This would likely minimize any potential backlash against Council.
>
> *sounds good. I like that council is anonymous.I don't think the Council members themselves would be anonymous - we would know who the five are. But I think it would be important for ALL of their votes to reveal only yay or nay. I would strongly oppose the idea of it becoming public who voted (since at least two can abstain), and who voted how. I know that my notion about this does not fit with Bob's idea that if the community does not like how someone votes, then they can vote them out the following year - but I don't think that there is enough value to that process to merit the cost. The cost would be that we may not even get a Council seated if they have to campaign and go thru an election - and I don't think they will be able to as easily vote their conscience if they know their votes will be made public. I'd be fine with just an annual re-nomination process - where every January is the month for sending Bob nominations, and a new Council is seated every February 1. The top five names nominated (and willing to serve) will likely shift naturally. Some will not have time to do it again. There may be fresh faces the Community wants to put in there that collect a large number of nominations.. etc. It would be great if every year we end up with a mixture of new and old members. It'll provide continuity and stability.
> > There are of course a lot of ideas, questions, misconceptions, etc. floating around.. but I think what I've written above is, to the best of my understanding, where it stands at this point.
>
> *which...isn't a whole lot of info.
> Don't mistake me, I appreciate your work.
> But manoman, I need facts B4 I jump into stuff. If a person is going to do a job, they need to know WHAT the job REALLY is, so that they can determine IF in fact, it is a job they would like to do. AND they gonna have to agree w/the priciples of the group in order to be a part of the group...You don't have to jump into anything, Muff. Think of yourself as an observer. The only potential effect this will have on you is a good effect. The worst thing that could come of it for you - is if it never happens and nothing changes. Don't worry about any of it. In fact - you might want to just abstain from even reading Administration posts until this thing gets more settled. The chaos of it is stressful for you - and you don't need that. Remember - there are a lot of Babblers who care about you - Babblers you might even trust - who are speaking up and are involved in the process. Don't let yourself get tangled up in the process of it right now - because all the uncertainties are augmenting your sense of powerlessness, and that's not good for you at all. You could post to friends here - just enjoy participating wherever you like to participate - and maybe every other week you could ask for an update on this. That way you could avoid the chaotic part of the process, but still know where it stands.
> Maybe I overvigilant(makes me tired lots) but its also saved my bacon...I understand that hypervigilence - believe me! It can, as you say 'save your bacon,' but it can also make you very vulnerable to reacting as if you're in harm's way - when you're not. Unfortunately, when we react to a bunny as if it's a deadly snake, we can overreact and do something we later wish we'd known we could have avoided. So because of the hypervigilence, I am encouraging you to not get tangled up in this thing. It's not worth it for you.
> Also, another point, is just WHAT is the *point* of blocks? At what point is it punitive rather than just a time out?
> And I would like to see it as *rule* that a person is warned *in* the thread, or at least w/in say the last 24 hrs before blocks are thrown at them(except in extreme blowups, maybe an instant 24 hr.suspension or something...).
> I don't know that this is always the case, that thye are warned?
> And also, if the poster is no longer being inflammatory, what is the turnaround time for apology? If they are not posting, its possible they have self blocked.
> Also, if a person is just gone right off for some reason, then there would need to be an 'instant' block essentially in order to cut them off if they have clearly lost control.
> Its just not that simple....You are very right, it is not simple at all! You make some very good points here. But I think that in this situation, the most efficient thing is to do this one really big thing (seating a Council) first. Some things really do have to be done one step at a time. And remember.. baby steps ARE steps!
Solstice
poster:Solstice
thread:965628
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101201/msgs/973513.html