Subject:
|
Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM) (Was: Re: Do you think there is a market)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 22 Jan 2002 20:32:41 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
1002 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Scott Arthur writes:
> You are completely missing the point. You are one of the "twits who actively
> undermine it with non constructive sniping". Read Brian's words addressed to
> you again (the ones you have deleted):
I wasn't going to get into this, but your post really makes me sick.
I just read the thread history of this..... setting the Bricksmiths issue
aside [1], I'd like to discuss the issue of community policing, and how it
is a Good Thing(TM).
Scott, I beg to differ with your statement above. You do nothing but snipe
at Larry's comments, seemingly for the sake of sniping at his comments. I
have little to no regard for any of your words here, in my view (and in the
view of MANY others I have talked to), you are a distructive force here in
the community.
> ==+==
> My whole point was simply to point out that many of us out here on
> Lugnet(tm) ;-) are tired of Larry and his 'know it all attitude' and
> personal way of always trying to control EVERY SINGLE thread that goes
> beyond 4. This is not the first, and I'm sure, not the last that people are
> going to get irritated with Larry. I can recall over a dozen instances
> where people, on this site, have complained about Larry and his 'policing of
> Lugnet.
> ==+==
>
> But I, and others, have made our views clear on "policing" before - there is
> no real point in doing so again:
> http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=9989
Funny you cite Frank, who doesn't exacly agree with you. My perception of
your points is 'leave the policing to the admins, the community members have
no place in it.'
I disagree wholeheartedly.
I think that each and every person has a responsibility and a right to
attempt to make LUGNET a better place.
Let me explain this further: Obviously we've seen instances where people
abuse a position of community policing, or they take the stance too far,
etc. That's unfortunate. But, there are other instances where people are
making a genuine attempt to be polite to the 'offender' and at the same time
guide them to take actions that are more appropriate or acceptable to the
LUGNET community.
The burden of correcting posters for TOS violations and off-charter postings
should NOT be put on the shoulders of the admins alone, unless that is what
they want. At least one admin has spoken up about this:
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=9984
Since correcting people publicly has been blessed, I think the people who
are interested in making LUGNET a better place should discuss what methods
are more effective than others, and address the issues of negative response
to corrective posts.
For example, from my last bout, the incident with Iain Hendry positng
lewdities, I made a polite post requesting he keep the comments off of
LUGNET, and copied admin.general. There was severe backlash from the
offender and a cohort of his, and the rtlToronto group in general took offense.
It was suggested to me privately that the first time admin.general should
not be copied. Attempt to correct the problem without bringing it under the
direct attention of the admins. I agree with this sentiment. I think its a
good idea to post a polite correction in the original group and wait for a
reply. If the reply is positive, job well done. If it is negative, copy
admin and solicit the backup of an authority (by crossposting, not
necessarily by directly prompting an admin).
Another thing I note is it is not socially acceptable to the general LUGNET
populus to accept correction from another LUGNET member. A far cry from the
beginnings of LUGNET, where most everyone knew each other and took
correction graciously if it was made politely. Now, no matter who issues a
polite correction, they almost certainly backlash 'I don't care who you are,
you can't tell me what to do, I'll only listen to an admin.' This is a very
destructive attitude, and it harms the sentiment of a community here. How
to deal with this problem?
These are my thoughts for now. They're targeted at others who are concerned
and agree that community policing is a Good Thing(TM). It isn't targeted at
those who destructively want to see community policing eliminated on LUGNET.
I'm not up to debate community policing as an institution, unless an admin
speaks up against it. It appears to me that the activity has been blessed.
Feel free to correct me (admins) if I'm wrong. :-)
-Tim
[1] At first glance, the Bricksmiths assertion is being a bit A-R. But I
respect Larry's explanation of it and stand behind him because I know how
important the Guild is to him. There is nothing wrong with Larry making the
very polite assertion he made.
|
|
Message has 9 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
83 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
|
|
|
|
