Bronte:
> I don't think personal attacks ever should be permitted in a forum
that courts independent thought, vulnerability of expression and
sincere sharing of experiences -- the sort of things that would help
all of us heal the years we spent as victims.
Personal attacks are against the explicit guidelines of this forum.
That used to be the common ethos of the town. 4-5 years ago, strong
personal attacks were rare. People might strongly disagree with
other's ideas, and analyze and criticize the ideas, but not the person.
This whole ethos changed when a bunch of generally unwashed (a
metaphor for inconsiderate and rude) gunslingers came over here from
other forums, and continued their violent gunslinging ways here.
Unfortunately, the guidelines have been ignored, and are unenforced
(or unenforcable). Partly, they are unenforcable, because, being a
frontier town, we don't like a lot of rules, and are happy to live and
let live. At least that was the ethos of the original settlers. With
the gunslingers having moved in, the possible need for stronger
enforcement of "the law" (guidelines) has become an issue.
> I do think we should be permitted to use swear words -- why the
hell not, after all that we've been through? But even then, it's smart
to self-monitor and keep it fairly decent. A post that's 90 percent
full of barf and dogshit is going to turn off sensitive readers,
certainly women like me, who would otherwise participate in FFL.
And there is not requirement to continue continue reading such posts.
Their tone and flavor are apparent from the first line or so. Continue
reading only if you are the type that likes to slow and linger, to
watch bloody accident scenes on the highway.
And men do like a lot of gratuatious profanity? Perhaps reflect on the
implications of your comments.
>
> Someone wrote that the existing rules are already there, they just
need enforcing. Yeah, I think they do. Rick doesn't want to play the
policeman, but that's part of the role of a moderator, isn't it?
Sometimes policemen are needed in this world, as a necessary evil. If
people can't self-regulate in a moment of rage, a rule-enforcing
moderator provides a safety valve to stop a damaging post from going
through. If it saves the feeling level of the group, and helps promote
a higher level of discussion, isn't it worth the small pinch of
rule-enforcement? I don't think Rick should have to read and "judge
on" every post. He has no time for that. But if someone observed an
attacking email and complained to him, he could put the sender on
suspension for a couple of weeks. How hard is that?
Enforcement of guidelines has a long history of discussion here. Its
of value to understand that history and line of debate before making a
lot of recommendations, as a new poster, to a new forum, IMO. Its fine
to state an opinion, but above seems to be making explicit
recommendations. IMO, thats naive and even inconsiderate for someone
who has not taken the trouble to go through the archives and read the
history of all of this -- to get up to speed on the reasoning behind
each position.
>
> The question here is if the "townspeople" of FFL want to have a
policeman, for their own security and greater freedom. Freedom in the
long run: to talk deeper, more vulnerably, more sincerely than they
presently can when they have to write each post with their guard up,
or when they don't feel free to write at all. If the group does want
this, Rick or someone else needs to step up to the plate.
And/or you can set up a chat room and moderate as you see fit.
"I have been wounded and I need a place to heal" has been a motivation
for many of us to come here. As has been, more often I believe, "I
took the road less traveled, and now I know why it is less traveled,
it gets strange down there around the bend .. and now I am trying to
both understand those experiences and put them in perspective"
FFL can be of benefit to both types of needs.
Some people come here expecting it to be a five-star retreat facility
to cater to their needs. An expect the "staff" to be on call to
address their needs. And to change this retreat if their needs are not
being met as a concierge staff would do at a 5-star retreat.
Others come here recognizing its a volunteer group, and its not a
retreat, and when you walk in the door, you are as much a "host of the
party", a "manger of the spa" as anyone.
Some people see litter on the ground and immediately go to pick it up.
Others complain that "the friggin management of this friggin place are
no friggen good and this place sucks!"
Your guess as to which type thrives here.
