Subject:
|
Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:57:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
558 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
> I'm writing this as a user of Lugnet, not particularly as an Admin. I'm writing
> this way to get the reactions of other users in this concept.
> ==
>
> If Lugnet has added 'no cursing' to the ToU for the expressed purpose of making
> this site friendly to children, then the current method of limiting cursing is
> seriously defunct. People have, in the past, cursed and cursed a lot, and then
> refused to request a cancel. These posts are still viewable today - by children
> or anyone who comes accross them.
>
> Leaving the policing of users to the users themselves has not worked, and can
> not work within a large community such as Lugnet - especially when the only
> penalty is the admonishment of your peers.
>
> Lugnet should not try to define what 'cursing' is, as the concept is changing
> over time and in responce to circumstances. Aggression without use of certain
> key words should be limited just as much as cursing proper.
>
> Lugnet Admins should be given the power of:
> 1. Directly editting the posts of users without their consent.
> 2. Directly canceling the posts of users without their consent.
> 3. Suspending and/or banning users who repeatedly break the ToU.
>
> If Lugnet wishes to maintain the spirit of no censoring, then it could follow
> Ray Sander's advise - http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=50243 - and provide a
> link to an unedited copy of the message. A link that children would be advised
> to avoid.
>
> Thus no more need for Larry to track down users and try to politely urge them to
> follow the ToU, and then have those members then come back and accuse Larry of
> being draconian. The actions of the Admins would be invisible to the general
> public, except as the generic 'Lugnet Administration has editted this post' and
> their actions would be above scrutiny.
>
> This would allow the Admins to be more immeadiate and complete in their attempt
> to police Lugnet. It would also be easier for users to obey the ToU, especially
> when they remain ignorant of policy updates in .admin.general. The whole
> she-bang would flow a lot smoother.
>
> -Lenny
Hear, hear. And perhaps that would cut down on the 'censorship whiners.' LUGNET
is privately owned, it is NOT the public square. I really wish people would get
over themselves.
Anyways, it's not like I read in-depth enough for this to effect my daily life
anymore. The negative environment here has slowly pushed me away, and is
continuing to do so. Not the policies--the people whining about them and making
demands they have no basis making, and the people bickering over petty things
like colors or 'TLC can do no right.'
Let's remember that these are LITTLE PLASTIC BRICKS we're talking about. Yeah
they're cool, but geeeez.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) It is a sad fact that people in the Western world are getting more and more stressed out, and the result is often bickering and whining in all kinds of situations which used to be a source for relaxation, all smiles and warm, fuzzy feelings. (...) (19 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| I'm writing this as a user of Lugnet, not particularly as an Admin. I'm writing this way to get the reactions of other users in this concept. == If Lugnet has added 'no cursing' to the ToU for the expressed purpose of making this site friendly to (...) (19 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general)
|
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
