Subject:
|
Re: Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM) (Was: Re: Do you think there is a market)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:31:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1530 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Tim Courtney writes:
> I was going to reply to Kyle directly, but Frank, you gave me a better
> springboard. :-)
>
> "Frank Filz" <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:3C4E370A.6D598D4F@mindspring.com...
> > Kyle Beatty wrote:
> > >
> > > In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > > In lugnet.admin.general, Tim Courtney writes:
> > >
> > > > Yes indeed. We all have a right and a responsibility to work to make • LUGNET
> > > > a better place. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
> > >
> > > This sentiment is not friendly. It is arrogant and has a stink of
> > > martiality. It really bugs me, I'm sorry to say. I am unlikely to do any • of
> > > the above.
> >
> > It may be bluntly stated, but frankly, if you are not here to work with
> > all the members and users of Lugnet to make Lugnet a better place, I
> > think you are in the wrong place.
>
> Exactly, I agree.
>
> The sentiment 'lets make LUGNET a better place' however, is a very bright,
> friendly, polite sentiment. We want a community which is inviting. The
> chaos that stems from people getting in the way of making LUGNET better, or
> disregarding social norms (and refusing to learn them when they are politely
> outlined) makes LUGNET an unfriendly place.
>
> 'Lead, follow, or get out of the way' expresses the attitude that if you
> aren't here to build up, maybe this isn't your place.
>
> > Take a look at the Lugnet plan for some of Todd's and Suzanne's original
> > ideas:
> >
> > http://www.lugnet.com/admin/plan/
>
> The second page of the plan says, "LUGNET is designed to unite, enrich, and
> help people share." How united will we be if there are no enforced social
> norms? If all is disregarded and an 'anything goes' environment takes over
> on LUGNET. This is the attitude of those who are trying to restrict
> community policing. Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM).
>
> (we just need to figure out how to do it more effectively)
>
> > > There has been insufficient restraint so far in the cause of • 'correction'.
> > > The initial 'correction' (re T) that caused the current brouhaha comes • off
> > > frankly oafish. I don't mean to be rude, but that was my reaction. (A • crash
> > > course on when assertion is really necessary might be in order.)
> >
> > Are you implying Larry is wrong to do as the law requires and protect
> > his (and his associates) property? Do you feel a trademark is not
> > something to be protected? Trademarks have been lost because they were
> > allowed to become common terms. Perhaps Larry is sometimes too blunt,
> > but sometimes bluntness is necessary (and Todd can be more blunt than
> > Larry when he needs to).
>
> I *think* he was referring to me and the Iain Hendry one. My interpretation
> at least when he said '(re T).' Anyways, I agree with what you said above.
>
> The only error I admit to committing during that instance was crossposting
> to admin.general on the first reply. I stand by the rest of my words and
> actions in the situation with Iain and Richard and the members of
> rtlToronto.
>
> > > > But I have zero interest in hearing from those that think that any • community
> > > > guidance is too much. Zero.
> > >
> > > This is not a constructive, useful attitude.
>
> The issues have already been discussed, its (to borrow from someone)
> 'ploughed ground.' Its been established by many here that community
> policing is good and not bad. In every private conversation I've had with
> someone from LUGNET on the topic, they've agreed. We have a case of a few
> people who want to establish an anything goes environment, or be a thorn in
> everyone's side (Scott).
An interesting description. I challenge you to look at all my posts over the
last couple of months outside this group and look at the amount of
“thorning” I have generated. Compare that to your own, and that of your
vigilante mate’s. I know I won't be top of the list. How long before Brian's
words are echoed again?
Scott A
>
> No need to discuss the merits of community policing. They've already been
> established. We do need to discuss how to effectively do it, and how to
> excercise the social control to bring new users on to the same wavelength of
> making LUGNET a better place.
>
> (kinda an off the subject comment, but posting auciton spam in a theme group
> is like tossing a cigarette out the window of a car. There's a proper place
> for it, and its damaging when not put in its proper place)
>
> > Lugnet is attempting to be the kind of place where people can come and
> > relax and share their passions. This is best done in an environment
> > where the prodding is gentle and not overly authoritarian.
>
> Yep. Usually prods from an admin come off as authoritarian, simply because
> they wear the badge. I dunno why prods from non-admins are still taken as
> authoritarian here on LUGNET. Part of it is the method the prodder uses,
> part of it is the 'don't tell me what to do' attitude of the prodee.
>
> I think we should all work to develop a system of prodding that can be used
> by the average community member who wants to positively influence LUGNET.
> And we should also work to curb the negative response to proper, polite
> prodding.
>
> We need to enforce our social norms if the climate of LUGNET is going to be
> restored back to the way it was in the beginning. If everyone works towards
> those norms, the burden of their enforcement is not put on a small handful
> of people who already have their hands full.
>
> I keep seeing 'Neighborhood Watch' signs in my head. ;-)
>
> > This is best
> > accomplished by everyone taking a role in guiding the community down
> > constructive paths. If everyone was doing this, there would be no need
> > for such blunt words and "attitudes" because folks would see someone
> > asking nicely that some unacceptable action not be repeated, and would
> > say to themselves "yes, I agree, the original action was uncalled for
> > and the gentle prodding was appropriate" and the issue quietly dies, or
> > the transgressor doesn't understand and either continues the same action
> > (and gets asked again, perhaps by a different person, perhaps eventually
> > by an administrator with authority) or enters a dialogue to understand
> > why their action was considered inappropriate (I would see nothing wrong
> > with a sequence something like:
>
> [snip] Agreed.
>
> > Of course if this is the third theme group such a conversation has
> > occurred after one of Fred's posts well, then it may be time for less
> > gentle discussion with Fred.
>
> Yep. Start off with gentle prodding in almost all circumstances, unless its
> totally clear the person has been told before and really does know better.
> Be sensitive to potential issues like language barriers (I can think of a
> particular poster in the .cad groups who isn't an effective communicator for
> that reason) but be clear in what behavioral change is expected.
>
> > Unfortunately, this is not how Lugnet has been running. Some of us have
> > felt that no one has been at the helm recently, though we think we
> > understand some of the reasons for that.
>
> For me, after some off-LUGNET discussion, this sentiment has diminished for
> me. I feel more confident in the administration and also believe we need to
> excercise a bit more patience when it comes to expressing this perception in
> public.
>
> (not at all implying you were wrong to make the above statement though!)
>
> This is more suited for an off-LUGNET discussion though, IMO, perhaps at
> BricksWest? :-)
>
> > In any case, since we have
> > perceived a degeneration of Lugnet we are concerned, and concerned
> > people sometimes use stronger and more blunt language than might be
> > optimal. Many of us have invested a lot of time and some to a lot of
> > money because we hope to create a place which is easy and fun to
> > participate in.
>
> Exactly. For me, I've put 5.5 years of myself into this community. I know
> a small handful of people who that number seems like piddlesticks to ;-),
> but its still a long time and a lot of energy. I've volunteered a lot of
> myself to make this community better in places off of (but tied into) LUGNET
> (through the community). I have a vested interest in seeing LUGNET continue
> to be a positive place to be, and in seeing the community grow. This is why
> I'm so passionate about what I believe here.
>
> > I have a hard time trying to explain what community means to me, and
> > what community building is, but I do know that Lugnet is central to the
> > LEGO toy fan community and that mostly online community is every bit as
> > real as the mostly face-to-face community I experience at my church and
> > related gatherings. Lugnet is not the only online community I have
> > participated in, I have been participating in online community for about
> > 15 years (and I'm sure some here have participated longer).
>
> When LUGNET prospers, the AFOL hobby prospers. LUGNET is the center of the
> AFOL hobby universe, its the largest medium through which we communicate.
> Naturally, those who have invested a lot into LUGNET want to see it continue
> to be a pleasant place to be, and see it continue to grow. We want to see
> the social norms extended to the new users so we can continue to have a
> pleasant place to be.
>
> The social norms which exist on LUGNET, some of them established by Todd and
> Suz, others which developed from the early community, are here for a good
> reason. They were developed because of previous experience with a less than
> ideal medium, RTL. That's why auction and market posts have their own
> group, that's why we run around acting like Compartmentalized Dorks(TM), but
> through and through, we're a great bunch of people who want to keep our
> living space clean and inviting to others.
>
> > I think the problem is not the initial "policing" post, but the
> > follow-up brawl.
>
> Yup. Its what happens when people are too big in their own minds to admit
> they're wrong. They gotta make a big excuse for it, and a big stink to
> announce the excuse, etc etc...
>
> > When a negative reaction to a polite request occurs, you are right, one
> > does need to step back and examine the situation. However, if the
> > request is made in the right spirit, a negative reaction suggests
> > someone either doesn't understand why they have done wrong or someone
> > who just doesn't care. Someone who doesn't understand needs and deserves
> > education. Someone who doesn't care should be shown the door. Would you
> > put up with a drunk at one of your parties who cusses people for asking
> > him cool it?
>
> Exactly.
>
> > > > This really is the crux, I think. No matter how polite you are in your
> > > > request, if the twits come swarming out and interfere, it is difficult • to
> > > > make forward progress.
> > >
> > > Then progress in a different direction and Let. It. Go.
> >
> > So we should just Let It Go and let Lugnet become like RTL? We should
> > let folks fill lugnet.trains with announcements of their eBay auctions?
> > That's what you're asking for.
>
> Yep. And that's a destructive attitude.
>
> > > Our visions of Lugnet are not absolutely aligned, but they are mostly • the
> > > same. The key is to be able to disagree without getting wrapped up in a • knot.
> >
> > You are right, it is important to be able to disagree without getting
> > tangled, but it is also important that everyone realize they need to
> > play a part. And part of that part they need to play is to ask
> > themselves if a complaint is valid. If they are not willing to do so,
> > and especially if they repeatedly do so, it is right for the rest of the
> > community to ask they be removed, or at least be given a stern warning.
>
> The LUGNET Community is what everyone makes it.
>
> -Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
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
|
|
|
|
