Re: Vote here for the "Aliens" solution

I applaud Turq for his creatively thinking about "how can we make this
thing work". And I like the direction of his suggestions. They offer
some good refinements, and practicalities, over what i suggested
yesterday.

In that spirit of creative problem solving, diologue and refinement, I
offer the following encouragement and refinements:

1) I agree that some fixed number of posts per time period is easier
to implment and more practical than my suggested "% of posts".

I think 7-10 posts a day is a good upper limit.

I do suggest a refinment in the time period. I think a month may be a
bit too long a monitoring period. If someone is on a compulsive,
venting or minutia jag, it may be better for them to send them more
immediate feedback. And keeps FFL from being choked during the 2-3
week lead up to their reaching their limits.

Thus I suggest:

* a limit of 70 posts for any 7 day period. Thats 10 posts per day.

* voluntary monitors. Thus it would not take any of the moderators
time -- other than to pull the plug on someone, and reinstate them (30
seconds).

Thus if someones posts seem excessive, anyone can pull the stats, post
them, and if non-disputed, moderators will pull the plug.

* "time-outs" would be one week for the first two time-outs. Two weeks
thereafter.

This is not as harsh as a full months suspension. And may be enough
feed-back for those seeking to become responsive and cordial FFL citizens.

-----

As far as immediate suspension of Judy, Sparaig and Shemp, while i
feel that may hve some merit, it is sort of an ex post facto
imposition of new rules. And without self-governing guidelines for FFL
-- an separate initiative i am working on -- its not practical IMO.

I do feel some action is appropriate given today, Sparaig's, (and
shemp's to a degree) childish response to a serious issue. Total
snubbing of noses, and no acknowledgement of their abuse of FFL, nor
any constructive diologue. And Judy's only response appears to be to
bash Barry. Again and Again. No acknowledgment, no constructive diologue.

Thus I suggest the following -- echoing and perhaps extending the
suggestions of others. It can be done immediately. No need for Ricks
approval.

For one month:

* Do not under any circumstances respond to any post of these three
(Sparaig, Judy and Shemp) -- directly or indirectly (referencing it in
a post to others).

* Do not under any circumstances respond to any poster who does
continue responding to these three.

My sense is that without "fuel" of posts to bounced off of, these
three will pretty much "dry up". Or at least reduce posts of
self-declarations and self-importance.

And if they hyper-react with 100's of silly "see me" posts -- it
simply builds a case for the need for explicit "time-out" rules.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to