board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Access to ToE Member Discussion Thread

Locked   Page 15 of 20  [ 393 posts ]
Jump to page « 113 14 15 16 1720 »
Author Message
tolkienpurist
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 2:34 pm
Unlabeled
Offline
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 4:01 am
Location: San Francisco
 
Hi Cerin,

Here are my (excerpted) suggestions - you have access to read them in full if you would like - as posted in the Thinking of England forum. If you do read them and wish to quote anything from the ToE access threads that I have said in this forum, you have my permission to do so.

July 24th:
Truthfully, ToE is the one forum that still feels "safe" and less vulnerable, because it IS still closed - and unfortunately, that's only for a fleeting period of time. On the main board, there have been several topics I wanted to start, but no longer feel comfortable doing so. And as far as ToE goes, I just don't see it working if it's anything other than a group of people who have at least some semi-sense of who they are talking to, posting their experiences, because of the very personal nature of the conversations. I don't think I've posted too much here, but will remove all my posts as soon as ANY new members are allowed into this forum, forget Snowdog. I'm sorry that I was busy with starting a job and other RL things and couldn't advocate this POV vigorously while the ToE discussion was happening, but it's perverse at best to expect people to be able to talk about their sex lives, fantasies, and desires in a setting that is not fully anonymous and NOT have that be at least somewhat exclusive.

(Note: I've backed off of this position only insofar as my new willingness to wait to see who the new members are before deleting my posts.)

July 25:
If there was support from current ToE members to move the forum elsewhere (essentially start a new, private board, wouldn't that mean?), I'm not sure how that decision would be received "politically" by others. I would personally support that decision, but I think it would anger others.

July 25:
Personally, I think that if there is sufficient interest from the current, posting membership of ToE, the best solution is for the membership, quietly (in the sense of not making banner ads about it) to move to its own site. I don't think there needs to be "official" approval from b77 for members to decide to take discussion of personal topics to a non-public board.

July 25:

The only reason I didn't express this viewpoint more vehemently (I did express it tentatively at least twice) is that everyone was so insistent that there was a heinous exclusion going on that I assumed that there must be too many people who needed to be in here, but were not, to maintain a closed board system. It turns out that this is not the case. So, IMHO, I feel that we sacrificed a wonderful thing - the intimacy and comfort of posting within a community - for a less inviting, less welcoming thing. Within less than three months, there will be people on this forum that none of us have any idea whatsoever about, and how on earth that could be a good thing escapes me.

I didn't say anything today that I haven't been saying for months. Why was ToE not moved off b77? Because other people feel either that ToE will die away from b77, or that b77 should be given a chance first. I think they are wrong. b77 did not die away from TORC, and ToE will not die away from b77. However, as far as I know, I'm in the minority on this. Of course I will not copy other people's thoughts written in ToE into this forum, but you should take a look, since I don't think you were part of the initial discussion that occurred there in July. I have always agreed with you that a closed, private ToE is incompatible not with a democracy, but with the Mission Statement and Key Principles (which I oppose). However, if a majority of others feel that the two things are not incompatible, then I am not entirely opposed to having a closed ToE on b77 - although I'd feel vaguely uneasy with a perceived hypocrisy until and unless the Mission Statement and Key Principles were amended.

Voronwe - thanks. I understand why you disagree strongly and respect your POV very much.

Nin - I'm really not sure how many people would have been kept out. Now, granted, some people would never have been invited unless they took the initiative to ask to be invited - indeed, I fall into this camp myself. I'd disappeared from TORC and no one would have thought to invite me (in fact, I don't even know if anyone had my contact info to get in touch with me if someone had eventually thought about it). I was invited simply because I asked. I know that Cerin has posted that she also asked. I'm sure others did.

Aside from people like us, are there really a lot of people who would have been vetoed or voted down had they requested admittance? Certainly the person who has caused all of this nonsense would have been vetoed. I can think of one other quite controversial person who joined the board opening day whom I think might have been excluded for a while longer - and at most, a third who would not have been allowed in due to his statements about the board, but has since reconciled with a lot of people. Are there really more than three, tops, who would have been excluded?


Top
Profile
Tinsel_the_Elf
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 2:44 pm
* trolley dodger *
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon 27 Jun , 2005 3:27 am
Location: Fighting the Long Defeat
 
Voronwë_the_Faithful wrote:
Wilma wrote:
who would judge?
That is the upshot of my objection to the options requiring explanations. Who will judge whether someone's explanation is good enough? Cerin? Me? Lidless? The poor Rangers at the time, forced into making decisions that they should not have to make?
But for me, it's not really about judging per se (at least not right away), it's about establishing a record. This is why I really like and advocate the yearly review of whatever procedure is instituted. Say someone gets shut out because several ToE members write something like "Poster X is a committed Christian and we are afraid she might find our talk offensive." Or "Poster Y advocates threesomes and group sex and, as committed Christians, this makes us uncomfortable." Then we would know that there was something wrong and injust with the way the system was working, and we could do something to change it.

(I'm using the "Christian" example as an example only, I know that there Christians currently in ToE--although there has never been a mechanism to keep people out before (as far as I am aware), so we don't know who might have been denied entry had this system been put in place earlier).

Wilma, I have NOTHING against current ToE posters in the least. I just want to ensure that any system put in place is not abused in the future--keeping in mind both human nature and the fact that we have no idea who might join the board in the months to come. Please, relax, and see what happens before taking any drastic steps (ie. deleting posts). The ToE forum WILL survive in some form.

Cerin, One can leave any organization, but what chance do you have of making things better from the outside? ;)

tp, I wouldn't be in favor of "private clubs" on B77 for many reasons, but this practical one most of all: All these posts and forums require bandwidth. If a dozen little closed forums popped up they would be taking up that bandwidth, without allowing access to other B77 members and potentially harming the other members online experience. (Note: I have no idea how much bandwidth we currently use, but I imagine that it is not unlimited).

An open-to-all community can be vibrant and close-knit (I wish you'd been there for the heydays of the M00bies forum! :) ). The "death" or fading away of those communities can also have nothing to with whether or not a board is closed or not. :(


Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 2:53 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Quote:
What is a valid reason for me may not be a valid reason for you.
It isn't about what is valid for me or you. It is about there being something related to the conduct of the petitioner that has caused the member to object to their admittance. Whatever it is, they just have to say what it is. That is the only standard of validity -- that they say what it is that has prompted their objection.


Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 3:00 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
In other words, that they be willing to go on the record, at least privately and temporarily.

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 3:13 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
tp

Thanks so much for sharing those thoughts. :bawl:


Tinsel_the_Elf wrote:
But for me, it's not really about judging per se (at least not right away), it's about establishing a record.

Axordil wrote:
In other words, that they be willing to go on the record, at least privately and temporarily.
Thanks, you guys! That is what I have been spluttering around trying to express.


Top
Profile
Wilma
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 3:21 pm
Takoyaki is love
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Tue 22 Feb , 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
 
oooh I am pleased that people seem to cinsider my suggestion.
Also I would say here that really I wouldn't care too much if the guy came here.At least I don't think so. But I would care about him reading too much about very private sexual aspects of people's lives, since, like the dude had a business card. Also, he gets in people's personal space. I can always flip someone off when I am not confined. ;)

_________________

Itoshiki Sensei from Sayonara Zetsubou Sensei. Avatar by: sparklessence

"There is no such thing as coincidence in this world, only hitsuzen." - Yuko Ichihara and Kimihiro Watanuki - xxxHolic

"I'm modest, I'll keep my knickers on and die!" - My sister Grace commenting on Bear Gryllis on an episode of Oprah :rofl:

[ img ]


Top
Profile
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 7:54 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
Note, I just made this statement in the polling thread, then realized I was supposed to do my comments here.

Here's my comment. I've only had time to read the past three pages, as it is the end of my lunch break. I may be going over old ground.

---

Hmmm, I've been called divisive and engaging in provocation Elsewhere. Someone ever so sweetly (NOT!) encouraged me to leave this board, presumably because I was making her uncomfortable or she sincerely thought I was a danger to you all.

As far as I am concerned, neither "makes me uncomfortable" nor "makes me worried" is a reason enough to be exclusionary. Banning is a win/lose proposition that excludes the possibility of a win/win situation, even if the ban is later retracted.

I'm responding because you seem to want answers from the wider public, not just the people who actively post in TOE. So I don't have as strong a gut reaction to certain people as some of you may have. Actually, you could say the strong gut reaction happened before I even walked in the door - and explains why I am not a regular in TOE.

Last edited by laureanna on Thu 22 Sep , 2005 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile
Tinsel_the_Elf
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 8:01 pm
* trolley dodger *
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon 27 Jun , 2005 3:27 am
Location: Fighting the Long Defeat
 
laureanna wrote:
I'm responding because you seem to want answers from the wider public, not just the people who actively post in TOE. So I don't have as strong a gut reaction to certain people as some of you may have.
Hi, laureanna! :wave: There are several of us that don't have access to the ToE, or don't participate in the ToE, but have posted quite a bit on this issue (surprise, surprise, that includes me! :D ). If you have the time it is well-worth reading the previous pages of discussion (it makes clearer the reasons all sides have on this issue).


Top
Profile
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 9:34 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Wilma wrote:
Also I would say here that really I wouldn't care too much if the guy came here.At least I don't think so. But I would care about him reading too much about very private sexual aspects of people's lives
This is, I think, the most insightful and important statement that has been made in this whole discussion. The simple truth is that ToE requires different rules then the rest of board77 does. No amendment that we pass or don't pass is going to change that basic fact.


Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 9:41 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Tinsel, I just wanted to thank you for the taking the initiative to direct people here with their comments. That is greatly appreciated!! :)


Top
Profile
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 10:37 pm
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
I'm bringing my comments here, but I am short on time again so I shall just say what I wanted to say and if I've repeated anything everyone can tell me and I'll refrain from pushing the issue further.

The voting for membership into ToE (by the ToE) posters seems awfully reminiscent of another voting system in the days of b77-yore. While I understand the concern, I was under the impression that when that system was tossed aside because of all the negatives that ended up being associated with it, we would see the end of it. It strikes me as a similar situation with ToE and I don't doubt that a repeat of the negatives could happen. Yes, ToE has a lot of private information, but no one has to do anything but register to peek into the member's lounge and I've seen private information there.

I'm pretty sure this concern has been raised already. I'm not fully against the proposed "voting in" process or fully for it. It was just one of those things that struck me as inconsistent.

One other thing that I thought of today (alliterated T's... weeee), is "can ToE membership be revoked for same reasons it can be granted?" If, for example, I become a nuissance in the ToE and create a hostile forum, can the ToE posters vote me out?

That's it really.

*awaits being told his argument is redundant* :cheers:

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 11:10 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
TED:

Once someone is in ToE, they are bound by the rules ToE is bound by, that is, those of B77. The following strictures in the Charter apply:

(responsibilities of membership)
To post prudently in the Thinking of England forum and not expose yourself to unnecessary harm. That forum should be free of ridicule, provocation, or demeaning posts and you should report violations to the Rangers. You must also refrain from maliciously spreading information posted by others in that forum.

(emergency powers of rangers--temporary ban from a forum)
3. In the Thinking of England Forum, if more than one complaint has been
made about the way a poster has been posting there, posting rights can be suspended until a Hearing can be held to determine the right of continued access to that forum;

(setting disputes in Article 5)
Offenses for which the maximum penalty is permanent suspension of access to a particular forum

• In the Thinking of England Forum, posting in a manner that ridicules, demeans or threatens other posters

To make a long post short, yes, if you turn into a jerk once you're in ToE, you can be asked to leave, forcefully.

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 11:16 pm
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Thanks for the clarification.

Although, what if just one person has a problem with me? Let's say I don't turn into a jerk, but you don't like me for one reason or another. Would it just be up to you to deal with my presence? Kind of what Laureanna spoke of in her post above... If my conduct in ToE is not bannable, can you request a vote to boot me? Hmm, I'm thinking you can... since someone can request an hearing on a poster if need be...

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 11:23 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
TED--

The other thing I would say is that there are indeed some bits of ToE that can do nicely in TML...the Girls' night out thread for example. There WERE some bits that were ok in the Symposium....

But there are parts that can't work anywhere else, because basically they're group therapy, which only works when someone trusts everyone enough to open up about REALLY personal stuff. Not just cravings for chocolate.

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Sep , 2005 11:38 pm
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Fair enough.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 23 Sep , 2005 12:13 am
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
TheEllipticalDisillusion wrote:
The voting for membership into ToE (by the ToE) posters seems awfully reminiscent of another voting system in the days of b77-yore. While I understand the concern, I was under the impression that when that system was tossed aside because of all the negatives that ended up being associated with it, we would see the end of it.
The various methods being proposed are nothing like the old voting system. Every single member requesting access will not be voted on. This is not the old invites system. There's no "voting in".

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 23 Sep , 2005 12:18 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Well said, Madame Mayor. :)


Top
Profile
Anthriel
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 23 Sep , 2005 12:21 am
Seeking my nitid muliebrity
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun 20 Feb , 2005 4:15 pm
 
I reconsidered my post. I'm going to take this question to PM.

;)

Last edited by Anthriel on Fri 23 Sep , 2005 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 23 Sep , 2005 12:26 am
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
TED wrote:
The voting for membership into ToE (by the ToE) posters seems awfully reminiscent of another voting system in the days of b77-yore. While I understand the concern, I was under the impression that when that system was tossed aside because of all the negatives that ended up being associated with it, we would see the end of it.
This is another reason I so hate the idea of a 'vote' in ToE. It dredges up all that old ugliness. It represents ToE acting as a group instead of acting as individuals on the same footing as the rest of the board

If ToE members PM/email Admin. individually, it just seems to have less of that connotation of a group of people keeping other people out, and more of individuals expressing their concerns.

Last edited by Cerin on Fri 23 Sep , 2005 6:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 23 Sep , 2005 5:14 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Quote:
The various methods being proposed are nothing like the old voting system. Every single member requesting access will not be voted on. This is not the old invites system. There's no "voting in".
Sounds like a decent solution. Thanks.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Locked   Page 15 of 20  [ 393 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 113 14 15 16 1720 »
Jump to: