[Winona Online Democracy]
At 11:45 AM 7/15/04 -0500, Kathy wrote:
[Winona Online Democracy]
From my end it is hard for me to accept that an assessment that the rules are "arbitrarily enforced" has nothing to do with me personally, since I am the one who makes that call for our forum. I've been reading a lot of messages from folks who are unhappy about my judgement from those who believe that the discussion should be literally moderated (edited before being sent to the members) to those like Spencer or David who seem to conclude that my efforts to facilitate are analagous to the world of Orwell's 1984.
As a group, how can we decide how to address such issues? As the facilitator, I go back to re-read the rules and my archived responses to members in order to gain perspective and act consistently. I am happy to share the facilitator role with another individual in order to assist with these judgement calls, but I don't think it is constructive for me to change my standards each time a member disagrees with my judgement. That would, indeed, be arbitrary enforcement.
I am happy to take cues from the membership as to how to address the issue of rule enforcement, but I think it is wise that the membership define the process for establishing the procedures. Isn't that the democratic thing to do?
Members of the Forum,
I, for one, have been pleased with Kathy's actions and reactions in this regard. I think she has done her best to keep the discussion focussed on issues rather than personalities. Her comments merely reflect what we all agreed to when we voluntarily joined this online discussion forum. These "rules" are nothing more than common sense ways to keep the discussions open and fair.
There will, sadly, always be individuals who view a forum such as this as yet another venue to blow off steam, push personal agendas, score political points, etc. Also, again sadly, there will always be individuals who are unable to engage in what Aristotle and John Adams referred to as "civil discourse". Even worse, there will always be people to are simply unwilling to do so. I've certainly been quilty of this myself more than once (attacks on politicians can be downright fun sometimes! Especially after being on the receiving end myself for many years). At least one previous thread on this forum brought this up in the decline of local political rhetoric.
Kathy has no effective means of stopping this, other than appealing to our better judgement. Nor should she. The only effective response is in the hands of the rest of us as forum members: Silence. As soon as a writer gets negative or begins personal attacks, simply stop reading and hit the "delete" button. If the rest of us don't respond in any way, PARTICULARLY to remind them they are out of line, we will deprive these individuals of the controversy they seek. They will have two choices: shape up and act as polite members of society, or know that their ideas and opinions (regardless of how good they might otherwise be) are being sent unread to the garbage. They do indeed have a "right" to express their opinions. They do not have a right to expect me to read it.
Here is your first opportunity. DON'T respond to this message (thus further inflamming the controversy). Let it go and lets be done with this, or correspond with me privately if you wish.
Ed Thompson
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
