Posted by Solstice on November 20, 2010, at 17:32:27
In reply to a note to Dr. Bob, posted by floatingbridge on November 20, 2010, at 17:02:48
> Dr. Bob,
>
> One aspect on the handling of blocks and pbc's is bothering me, and I want to bring it to your attention. Perhaps it's been discussed.
>
> Timing. If there are rules, they need to be enforced within a consistent, therefore expected, timeframe.
>
> To let some threads go on and on, rife with incivilities, erodes morale and hurts
> individuals expecting a modicum of safety because PB is a moderated board.
>
> To let individual requests sit without reply is irresponsible to forum members. Administration should set and adhere to a specific turn around time. If one
> person is too busy, or two people, then
> there needs to be more.
>
> To lack consistency seems irresponsible. If forum members are expected to abide by site guidelines, administration needs to as well--that is, given that there is equal interest on both sides to have a beneficial site.
>Floating Bridge...
I hear you. You are very legitimately citing one of the things that seems to play a large role in outcrys of injustice (some uncivil posts not be held accountable, and others held overly-accountable). If civilty starts slipping when Bob is absent, they can genuinely get pretty far off track. I think what you are calling attention to is an inherent problem with there being a single administrator, particularly if that administrator's career necessitates long absences at times. I don't think there is a way to solve that problem, though, without constructing another way to deal with incivilities. A less harsh blocking system would probably help a lot. Extended blocks for repeated (but minor) infractions emphasize the disparity when posters whose equal (or worse) infractions are overlooked because Bob isn't here. If the worst thing that happened was someone got a 4 week block when he was here, and someone with an equal incivility that got overlooked because he wasn't - then it wouldn't be such a big deal. But when someone gets a block that lasts months (or a year), and then someone else who does the same thing doesn't.. the disparity is enormous
I don't think it's realistic for us to expect Bob (or any administrator) to be able to have a completely (or even near-completely) even-handed system for dealing with incivilities.. I just don't think it's humanly possible. There will always be things that escape notice. BUT - - I can't help but wonder if there was just a standard block - i.e. 2 weeks for each and every incivility - regardless.. maybe the incivilities that are 'let go' because he's not here wouldn't be so offensive? If no one was blocked longer than 2 weeks.. and the only thing that would cause them to be 'gone' for a long time is if every time they come back they are uncivil again and get repeated 2 week blocks.. maybe that would make the inevitable unequal application of blocks less potent? Maybe that's an idea worth re-exploring with Bob?
Solstice
poster:Solstice
thread:970854
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/970855.html