Posted by SLS on June 14, 2009, at 12:32:53
In reply to Simple ones..., posted by twinleaf on June 14, 2009, at 11:34:10
Hi.
If I am to understand your entire post as you have intended it to be understood, you are in favor of having no rules, is this correct?Except for when...
> blocks would probably be needed rarely, if ever.
This act requires at least one rule to be in enacted.
So, you *are* in favor of having at least one rule, with deputies mobilized to help avoid its enforcement.
I thought it might have been easier to answer my original question with an either/or answer without offering entire models of how this website might otherwise be operated. I really wasn't trying to flex my ego so much as set up a dialectical approach to understanding how things are now and how we might prefer them to be.
Now, if I am to understand your sentiments as they appear here in your writings taken in their entirety, you are indeed in favor of having rules, is this correct?
Your model does sound idyllic. I would prefer the term "moderator" to "deputy", though. I just don't think that we can develop a patronage of exclusively idyllic individuals for your model to work properly.
- Scott
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> I would prefer a simple general statement about what is expected of posters here: courtesy and respect towards others, kindness towards everyone, and especially towards persons who appear to be in crisis, respectful tolerance of views that are different from one's own.
>
> When these general guidelines are NOT followed, posters or deputies can take note of that fact. I think it would be ideal if the PROBLEM is stated and clarified, but with the SOLUTION being left up to the poster. Asking posters for specific actions, such as apologizing or changing their language, is a very poor outcome. It doesn't allow the poster in question to think about his actions and then decide what action he thinks will best correct the situation. If we do things this way, everyone should feel respected, even during times of conflict resolution.
>
> I think that if everyone does that, we won't need any blocks. Blocks, even short ones, depart from the model I've been describing in the direction of an authoritarian model, in which Bob and the deputies assume the role of knowing how to solve a given problem better than any of us do. I don't believe they do know how to do that; in fact, they invariably make errors which are hurtful and damaging. If we follow the model of trusting posters to resolve problems themselves, blocks would probably be needed rarely, if ever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
poster:SLS
thread:900936
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090529/msgs/900958.html