Posted by Solstice on December 14, 2010, at 2:00:42
In reply to ???, posted by muffled on December 13, 2010, at 23:56:06
> > I don't know if that's really fair, Muff. Bob has made changes... changes that were of benefit to the community. In particular I'm thinking of his agreeing to ask for rephrasing and apologies and then allowing time for a response before handing out blocks. That is a significant change.
>
> *but have you noticed, that the changes are always what HE wants. And then he tries to push them on us, and then blames us when we don't do what he wants....? :(He has indeed made changes that were what he wanted - and then shoved them down the throat of a very unwilling community... as in facebook/twitter. He did express some ambivilance about how all that went down. Then, when the idea came up about rating posts and/or posters - it hit an equally sized brick wall of resistence from the community. And know what? I haven't heard him continuing to push that idea (thank goodness). But you said *always* - and *always* is rarely ever true. He HAS done things in response to Community outcry. Again - I offer the example of his implementing his practice of asking for rephrasing/apology. My memory is that this was a direct result of community complaints about the unmerciful nature of swift blocks that left no room for cases where a poster may have not given enough thought to their post to realize that it could be construed as uncivil, etc. It also serves as an in-thread warning of being in danger of a block - which is something you've brought up in our dialogue here a number of times. Those changes didn't help him at all. In fact, it makes the whole thing more time consuming for him. But it really has worked pretty well at minimizing blocks - even if at times the merits of his rephrasing/apology requests are sometimes disputable.
> Bobs doing what he must to keep his site alive, but his concessions on the real big ticket item hasn't really moved much...and hence, the site flounders...
Muff - he has offered to seat a Council and give them power to reduce his blocks. That's huge! Details about how to seat the Council aren't yet worked out.. but I have faith that they will be. If you are going to carry the 'bad Bob moves' in one hand, it's important that you carry the 'good Bob moves' in the other. I know you know he's not *all* bad - you've said so yourself. But you will easily forget that if you don't make yourself carry the 'good Bob moves' in the other hand. And I'll tell you another thing, Muff.. you won't feel you're in as much danger and won't get as upset as you do sometimes if you will keep your grip on the 'good Bob moves.'
> I goto say, you are a WAY better person than I.No I'm not. I might be WAY less injured - or WAY more healed. But I am not a way better person than you.
> I would not put the huge effort forward that you are Solstice, to help Bob when he just sits there and lets you do the work.I don't see it that way. I'm not doing anything I don't want to do. I don't think I'm helping him - I hope it's the community I'm helping. And he's not letting me do his work. I'm doing work - but what I'm doing isn't something that he even really can do. Bob has made the offer of a Council - but it's up to the community to bring Council to life. I consider myself part of the Community - and I'm doing what I want to do.
> Or are you in communication w/him via email? Which doesn't bother me, but would make more sense to me as to how you seem to be so sure as to where the mysterious Bob is 'at' in his thinking????? I know I never ever understood him, tho beleive me, I tried...I emailed him when I first started posting. I can't even remember what it was about. He did respond. I emailed him not long after the first one, and don't remember what it was about - but I do remember that his response was that he meant no offense - but hoped I'd keep the issues under discussion separated. I guess I was talking about everything all together in my posts. I don't think I responded - other than to take care to do as he asked. I have not initiated any other communication with him. And I sure don't mean to make it sound like I have insight into his mind. I don't. But I do have a knack for understanding communication in general - so I may have an easier time having a sense of where he's 'at' by 'listening' to what he writes.. and sometimes I find out that I got it wrong! so I adjust my notions about where he's 'at' :-)
>> It's not about making everyone 'happy' - as much as it's about making this place as safe as it can be, while still giving it room to be as thriving as it can be.> *I don't even understand what 'safe' IS to Bob.... :(
> When I was a regular poster here at babble, it was not other posters I was afraid of...it was Bob :(I understand. I'm guessing your trauma background doesn't help, either. Bob does control the buttons here - for sure. But as far as 'safe' - when it comes to Bob, I think it really is simply about civility. His standards for it are indeed high. But since he controls the buttons - he's entitled to set the standard. The sad thing is that anyone who runs afoul of those high standards can easily end up blocked - and that makes them feel unsafe. I know you've had to endure painful blocks. So it makes a lot of sense to me that he looks powerful - and dangerous. My personal view is that the system he has been using is quite insensitive to the needs of the particular community he had in mind when he built this place. It's almost like he created a discipline system that is out of sync with his life work. I'm not sure he sees it. I think he's focused on one aspect of this community in that his high standards are designed to protect those here who are particularly sensitive to communication that breaks down into insults.. and that's a reasonable thing for him to focus on. BUT - I also think that he can hold that in one hand, and hold a more compassionate way of implementing his high civility standards that is more sensitive to a community of people with mental health issues that challenge their ability to color within his lines. I think his offer of transfering the power to release blocked posters to a Community Council is a very firm indication that he is holding this other important thing in his other hand. We've just got to work out a way to get Council seated. He has been listening - and he has been responding to the needs of the community. That tells me that he cares about this place. It might not feel safe to you to feel hope that this will get better. If you'll let me - I will hold the hope for you.. on your behalf. I do have hope that it will get better here for everyone. For you. Let me hold your hope, Muffled.
> I agree, that we can't make everyone happy, we are human, and presumably , given the nature of the site, have issues.
> So ya, there will be probs from time to time. I would expect that. But at this site, the biggest prob is the punitive blocks, the fear of blocks, the shame of them, the not understanding the why of them....I couldn't agree more. I absolutely Hate the punitive, shaming nature of the current blocking system. I hate it with a passion. I can't promise that having a Council will eliminate your fear, or prevent you from ever feeling shame - but I think that after we have a Council seated... and with time, you might end up feeling a whole lot less of both of those.
> > He said he will give Council the power to shorten blocks, and the power to release those blocked posters.
>
> *so then, Bob will still be doing the blocking? Or will blocks be looked at by council and council be given the power to decide if a block is even merited?Only Bob will be doing blocking. Council members will not be policing the boards or doing any blocking. My understanding is that they will look at blocks when asked to do so by a poster who has been blocked, and they will have the power to release that block after the unspecified minimum time has passed. At the current time, there is no plan for Council to rehash Bob's blocks and decide whether they are merited. However, they CAN decide that a block is unreasonably long - and/or that the poster has demonstrated that they want to repair their incivility, etc. So in that way, Council could decide that the length of block is not merited, in light of the blocked poster's frame of mind. The important thing to remember is that Council would not be chasing down blocked posters. Blocked posters would have to request review by Council.
> > Not 'only if' Muff. He can block someone for a year - and use any formula he wants. And if Council thinks its excessive, and that the blocked poster is working to stick with civility guidelines, then they can cut that block all the way down to the minimum if that's what the majority of them vote to do.
>
> *what is the minimum???clearly many want to know this...:-) That's one of those things that has not yet been determined. I think the minimum should be no longer than one week. I'd be happy with three days. The minimum block time probably isn't the most important thing just yet - because until we have a Council in place - the need for a minimum time doesn't yet exist.
> So....I think somehow I am having troubles digesting this.....so councils role would be to refute Bobs descions?
And Bob would be ok with this?No - it's not about refuting his decisions. It's about a blocked poster having a chance, after having been blocked, to demonstrate to council that they are willing to abide by civility guidelines. If a blocked poster contacts Council and says "I can't believe that jerk blocked me!" - - they might not even get a response! But if a blocked poster contacts council and says "Manoman.. I really lost it there. I got angry and just spouted off. I know I got off track - what can I do to fix this thing?" Now that poster is likely to enter a dialogue with Council. Council might consider past behavior.. or whether the blocked poster was provoked by someone else's bad behavior. It would be at their discretion. But if the blocked poster has satisfied council that they intend to stay within civility guidelines - then they can vote by majority to release the block. They could cut it down anyhow they see fit - all the way down to the minimum that must be served (which I hope is no longer than one week). But again, it's not about Council getting into arguments with Bob. That wouldn't be helpful to anyone. So 'refute' is not the best word to use in your head about it. Think of it as Council being there as a relief valve for the community. They would have the power to prevent unreasonably long blocks, for sure.. but only for posters who request a review and demonstrate a willingness to stay within civility guidelines. Of course a poster who gets their sentence pared down - and then jumps back in there to start trouble and become uncivil - that poster will probably be blocked again by Bob pretty quickly, and Council may not so readily release them from their block. Maybe that's when conditions would be imposed - as in "You gotta first serve four weeks of your 6 month block - and then you've got to find someone willing to review your first 10 posts." I'm just making that stuff up - but that's an example of possible conditions.
He would go along with majority council rule? Cuz in the past, he didn't always listen to the majority of poaters, or majority of deps either.
> > > All I am seeing is alot of reluctance on Bobs part..., alot of rather passive resistance to change....
> >
> > I don't think so, Muff. The only reluctance I'm seeing right now is his reluctance to change the method of seating Council. Other than that, I think he's been exceedingly generous.
>
> *ok, we'll have to agree to disagree on THAT! :)I'm okay with that :-)
> > > I feel badly always narcking away at Bob, but the fact of the matter is, this is HIS SITE and if he is not on board, nothing will truly change....
> >
> > I think you're afraid - because blocks have been traumatic for you. It is his site, but he has made a decent number of changes - which means he is willing to make changes. I think things will continue to evolve (or 'refine' :-)
>
> *we shall see.
You're right. We will not know for sure until we 'see' it come to life - but we've got to rally ourselves together and show him that we really can manage ourselves better with a Council in place that can be a relief valve. What we DON'T want to do is get in our own way by fighting against the process. It's easy for us to get in our own way because the current system has created a lot of mistrust of administration - but if we can help each other give it a chance - that's our best chance for real change. Directing our guns at Bob won't help speed this along - I'm sure of that :-)
> > > If he won't change some things before the board is implemnented, if he doesn't show some good faith....well, I for one sure wouldn't walk into it....
> >
> > He has made changes (asking for rephrasing & apologies before issuing blocks). I think he has shown good faith by making his proposal for turning power to release blocks over to a Council chosen by the community.
>
> * I have seen this repeated over and over.....I would need more...he hurt alot of people...I know. Bear with me for a minute as I say this - but I think he sees it as them hurting themselves - because it's not like the civility guidelines or blocking rules have been a secret. But despite the kernel of truth in the heart of this view - I think the hurt is much more complex and involves a lot of issues generated from him - his persona - his style - is way of handling things. I think he might have trouble seeing those things - but that doesn't matter. We don't need him to see himself as having been hurtful - if we can just get him to be flexible in the method of seating a Council. If we can get over that hump - I think his popularity rating will eventually improve :-)
> >And you don't have to walk into anything. It would warm my heart to see you allow yourself to coast along right now and let yourself trust those of us here that you have faith in to push this thing along to a better place than it has been. There are lots of really good folks here Muff.
>
> *I AM allowing you guys to carry the ball.Good. You deserve to be free of that ball.
> I am just asking questions so that everyone has some clarity here...And your questions deserve answers. I just sense a lot of hurt, grief, fear and mistrust leaking through. It's understandable to me. I just don't want the lack of clarity that is inherent in the process to be so triggering for you. There's no way to totally eliminate the fuzzy edges of this thing. It'll be fuzzy until it's operational, and that can be hard to tolerate. So it might work better for you to turn your back to it - except to look at periodic updates.
> There were always good folks here...Bob flipped them off...he didn't care about them or their concerns...just cares about 'The Masses' or something...I know it seems like that.. and I know it's hard to see it through all the experiences you've had here - but I really do believe that Bob is behaving in a way that says he does care about this place. And I'll tell you something, Muff.. I have seen him reach out to you specifically recently.. several times.. and the caring I can see in what he says to you has moved me. You might not be able to see it because the wounds you've suffered here are deep - but I'm asking you to consider just taking my word for it. I'm not naive - and I wouldn't tell you that I see something - if it wasn't there. But I do know that it is risky to have faith in something like that in light of all the wounds.
> >I know you know that. Please don't let yourself fret. Let some of the others of us carry the fretting for a while. We will fret on your behalf. What you can probably count on, is that it can't get worse here - it can only get better. It might not happen tomorrow - but I really do think that it will eventually happen. It is hard to wait.. but we are going to have to wait until we get it put together. Remember - baby steps ARE STILL STEPS!
>
> *It can't get worse.....oh yes it can. ALOT of people could get hurt again....:(ok... I think you might be talking about it becoming 'worse' if people here believe and have faith that it will get better - and then if it doesn't happened, then they will feel betrayed - and hurt. I understand that. And yes - that is an undeniable risk. I hadn't thought of that when I said it couldn't get worse. Thank you for pointing that out to me - because it's important for me to be aware of that. When I said it couldn't get worse - I was just referring to the blocking system couldn't get worse - that it could only get better. What you're talking about is important - and it's deeper.
> I hated it before and I will hate to see it again should it happen, which is why I ask questions.
>
> > > As someone said, it still sounds rather like a slightly more complex(more work) deputy position....and as people who have been here any length of time, well, we know how little influence they had on Bob.
> > It's nothing like deputies. Banish that thought!
>
> *well, it's people volunteering to work under Bob....Not really. First.. Bob will not be able to tell them how to vote. He may totally disagree with their vote - but he can't stop them from shortening a block and releasing that poster. Now - if that poster falls right back into incivility - then of course Bob can block them again - but that would be the poster's fault - not Council's. Secondly - Council will not be blocking posters. They will not be enforcing his rules like deputies. Remember - it has been of central importance to Bob that Council not in anyway be viewed as his 'minions.' This has been important to BOB! This thing plays a key role in the difficulty we're having with figuring out a way to seat a Council - because it's behind his desire that a campaign and election that doesn't involve him at all takes place.
> Its people expected to take Bob in good faith(its what you want them to do...)Council people can take Bob in good faith - but that doesn't mean they have to agree that an apologetic poster deserves a 6 month block. And I don't think Bob's feelings will be hurt if they don't agree with him.
> Its people 'thinking' they know wassup...but that may not be the reality, cuz as usual, Bob is being about as clear as mud...
> Its people who will find they may well be treated very differently than they were before....there may well be a loss there...
> Nope, can't banish the thot...
I think the dynamics of a Council made up of fellow posters will be very, very different than deputies made up of fellow posters. WAY different. But we won't know for sure unless we get a Council seated and see how it works. Remember - a crucial factor to it is that Council not in any way be seen as Bob's minions. They will not be 'doing' anything for Bob. Their work will be on behalf of the community, and blocked posters. They will not be answering to Bob - and they won't need his permissionm to release a block.I hope I've helped you some..
Take care Muff..
Solstice
poster:Solstice
thread:965628
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101201/msgs/973516.html