"Jim Schram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:56950@palm-dev-forum...
>
> At 5:50 PM -0700 2001/07/17, Richard M. Hartman wrote:
> >However, I can not support revoking his priveledges because of his tag
line.
> >That smacks of religious discrimination.
> >...
> >Moreover, banning somebody because of religious expression may open your
> >company to a lawsuit.
>
>
> At 10:16 PM -0500 2001/07/17, Richard Burmeister wrote:
> >According to the stated forum rules, one of the prohibited acts is
"actions
> >that undermine the purpose of the forums as outlined." Perhaps Mr.
Schram
> >believes that the repeated use of this tagline does undermine the purpose
of
> >the forum. (There may also be other rules that apply in this case.)
>
>
> Personally I do not consider DrumBSF's "God Bless" tagline to undermine
>the purpose of the forum. And I'm certain no offense was intended. However,
>the statement has nothing to do with Palm software and/or hardware
development,
Nor does my "186,000 mi/sec ..." tag line. Nor, I dare say, does _any_
tagline being used in this forum. But bear in mind that tag lines (or sigs)
are intended solely as the sign-off for a message and are not the message in
and of themselves. Condemning somebody for off-topic messages is one thing
... but an off-topic tag line? That is reaching.
>and like any comment based in religion, it offends many.
This is a hazard of free speech. Perhaps the europeans reading this forum
are offended by the america-centric use of miles-per-hour in my tag line ...
Darned near _anything_ will be offensive to _somebody_.
>Thus we arrive at what is perhaps the most important area of 'forum law' if
you
>could call it that: The uniform enforcement of the rules themselves.
Have you posted rules regarding inappropriate tag lines? Remember
"off-topic" applies to the body of the messages, not tag lines. What is
and isn't appropriate for tag lines? Netiquette prefers that sigs are
limited to 4 lines or less ... but aside from that, I can't think of any
rules or customs regarding tag lines.
Now a _deliberately_ offensive tag line might be another story. But I doubt
that you would go so far as to suggest that DrumBSF was _intending_ to
offend.
>
> When we issue a warning for inappropriate behavior to one forum member,
>we are required to issue the same warning to all others demonstrating
similar >behavior. Not doing so opens the company to discriminatory legal
action.
Absolutely. But what is "similar" in this instance. You mentioned above
that "God Bless" is off topic (having nothing to do with palm programming).
That would
seem to eliminate _any_ tag line, except perhaps "CW rules!".
>While we are very tolerant of off-topic posts and the occasional debasing
>comments, we cannot allow repeat offenders to go unpunished, especially
>after they have been told to cease and desist.
But the offense has to be legitimate. To my mind, DrumBSF _has_ offended
... but only in the persistant posting of trivial and basic programming
questions
after he has been referred to appropriate sources of information. Knock
him off for that if he continues ... but for his tag line? Bad precident.
>
> Revoking membership is truly a last resort after all other attempts to
>resolve a situation have failed.
So we truely have a "situation" here? Perhaps so ... but perhaps
not the one you think ...
>Such drastic action rarely if ever benefits anyone. Even our more caustic
>members deserve the freedom to participate. But remember, the American
>concept of free speech does not apply here. This is a privately owned
forum.
>Members are required to follow the rules, and Palm employees are required
>to enforce them.
Again, I do not believe that the rule (off-topic postings) that you have
cited
applies to tag lines. Perhaps if you had rules in place that stated that
references to religion (even in sigs) were off-limits ... but I don't
believe
that you do.
>
>
> >So, why can't we all just stick to the purpose of the forum, sharing
useful
> >information that permits more developers to create excellent programs for
> >the Palm OS platform?
>
> YES PLEASE! I personally really dislike playing list cop. I have much
better
>things to do with my time...
>
I have to agree that our time is better spent elsewhere ... but I also
believe that this is an important issue.
So mote it be!
--
-Richard M. Hartman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
