board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Only one screen name?

Post Reply   Page 10 of 10  [ 194 posts ]
Jump to page « 16 7 8 9 10
Author Message
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 10:16 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
:D

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Sassafras
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 10:19 pm
through the looking glass
Offline
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed 02 Feb , 2005 2:40 am
 
I see the future birth of hundreds, nay, thousands, of itty bitty donuts in that picture.

:Q

I'm sorry. I can't help it. I'm warped, I know

:D


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 10:34 pm
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
Quote:
I see the future birth of hundreds, nay, thousands, of itty bitty donuts in that picture.
Where do you think Munchkins, or "donut holes" come from?

[ img ]

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 21 May , 2005 11:40 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Edited because it is no longer relevant. :)

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 5:20 am
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
Time to quote my mom:

As you go through life, whatever be your goal,
Keep your eye upon the donut, and not upon the hole.

I'd like to thank everyone who gave thoughtful consideration to this topic. (And the rest of you. ;)) I may be, as Jnyusa said elsewhere, the only one out of 130 people who actually wants alternate IDs, but I appreciated having the opportunity to discuss it with you all. It almost felt like old times in the M00vie forum. :love: :rage: :scratch :bawl: :poke:

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 6:33 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
Here's what I posted last night, after reading the Jury Room thread and making several thoughtful edits. I suspect it slipped under the radar due to all of the donut talk:

C. Members are not limited to one screen name. Posting under the guise a secondary screen name does not relieve a member of his/her rights and responsibilities of Board77 membership. Members may not use a secondary screen name to vote or to serve as jury member, admin, mayor, mediator, or other in any other official capacity. If you choose this option, skip all of Part II.

Final ballot as written:

C. Members should be allowed to have multiple screen names without specific limitations beyond those required of all civil posters, other then [sic] that they are limited to one vote per member for each ballot in which they are entitled to participate. Posting under the guise a secondary screen name does not relieve a member of his/her rights and responsibilities of Board77 membership. [Note that under this choice no list of secondary screen names would be kept, secondary screen names would not be restricted from posting in any forum, including one in which a vote was ongoing, and secondary screen names would not be prohibited from serving as an admin, mediator, juror or in any elected office. The limitation on voting would be purely self-policed.]

-------

The note on Voronwe's ballot was modified to add the part in bold after I last looked at the ballot thread, so I didn't see the final ballot as it went into voting. Of course members should not be able to serve twice or vote twice just because they have two hats to wear! They still have only one head, and should act accordingly! The note makes Option C intolerable even to me, and completely subverts the intent of the option.

If I really am the only one who cares about this issue, I'll shut up now. If anyone else thinks the issue should be brought up after B77: The Public Board is up and running, let me know.

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 7:08 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Of course the issue should be brought up then, laureanna. You have every right to do so. The confusion over the ballot is unfortunate. The possibility off mix-ups like this is part of the reason I was in favor of waiting to consider this whole matter until after we open.

However, we are where we are.

I hope no one imagines that broad disagreement with a minority position means that the minority's views should be suppressed. But voicing that disagreement doesn't equal persecution of the minority, either. Everyone is free to express opinions and argue their points.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 7:28 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
My apologies, Laureanna. I did not see that you had edited that post.


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 8:43 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Actually, laureanna, maybe the mix-up isn't as unfortunate as it at first appears. Even if your edited version had gone onto the ballot, I think Voronwe's cautionary explanation would still have been essentially correct and necessary, because there would be no means of monitoring whether secondary screen names were serving as admins, jurors or in elected office, since there would be no record of those secondary screen names or who they belonged to.

In other words, your clause, 'members may not use a secondary screen name etc.' has no teeth, because there is no way to enforce it. So when Voronwe said that under C, secondary names would not be prohibited from, etc., that would have been essentially true even for your edited version of C, notwithstanding the admonition as to what members 'may' not use a secondary screen name for; if there is no way to check and ensure that one is not doing what one may not but can do, then it is true that one isn't prohibited from doing it.

You are definitely not the only one interested in multiple IDs! If the charter passes allowing only one ID, I hope the matter will be brought up again for consideration very soon after the board opens.


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 10:11 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
Primula_Baggins wrote:
I hope no one imagines that broad disagreement with a minority position means that the minority's views should be suppressed.
Of course not.

Cerin - we will have members using multiple screen names. This vote only forces them underground. It will supress the light, frivolous, and obvious screen names of generally law-abiding posters, like Louie the Raccoon, but it will not stop the person bent on being duplicitous and injurious. Those posters wouldn't have registered, anyway. I'm afraid we just put up a short fence to keep out hobbits, while in no way stopping the orcs.

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 10:32 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Laureanna, that sounds remarkably similar to the NRA standard argument against gun-control legislation.

:D


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 22 May , 2005 11:49 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
Do you mean the slogan

"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"

or "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."?

Both of those grate on my nerves because their sole intent is to obscure the direct relationship between weapon availability and crime. Sure there are some collectors out there who think guns are beautiful works of art that should be purchased and displayed under glass, but there are very few of them. The main function of a weapon, especially a hand gun, is to kill or threaten to kill.

Regulating screen names would not be like regulating a weapon that has a limited number of manufacturers (you can't generate it indescriminately like bathtub gin), requires each weapon to be identified by number, and requires each purchaser to be identified in person.

No, I don't think they are the same. But I must admit those slogans did pop up in my head even before you posted about it. ;)

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Dindraug
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 23 May , 2005 7:40 am
Tricksy Elf!
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:20 pm
Location: Tanelorn
 
Quote:
Regulating screen names would not be like regulating a weapon that has a limited number of manufacturers (you can't generate it indescriminately like bathtub gin), requires each weapon to be identified by number, and requires each purchaser to be identified in person.
Yes it would because for each id you need a new e-mail addy, and can be chased easily through investigating the usp. We did this in the early days a fair bit.

And forcing underground, well doesn't that limit numbers anyway, especially of the spammers which we want to avoid. The underground darkside of B77 :damnfunny not really that frightening ;)

_________________

'When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from delusion, it is called Religion'.

~Robert M. Pirsig


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 05 Jun , 2005 7:42 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
A bit of cleaning up of this forum has, rightly I think, been requested - it's getting hard to see where the discussion is taking place.

I'm therefore locking this thread to avoid confusion in the forum as to which are the active threads. :)

(laureanna, if you disagree to locking this, please let me know, we can just as well leave it open! :) )

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 10 of 10  [ 194 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 16 7 8 9 10
Jump to: