Subject:
|
Re: Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM) (Was: Re: Do you think there is a market)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:30:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1944 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Tim Courtney writes:
> "David Koudys" <dkoudys@redeemer.on.ca> wrote in message
> > It's small 'c' community 'p' policing that is a good thing for LUGNET.
> >
> > 'Psst, hey bud, we really don't appreciate that sorta talk here in our own
> > little corner of the world--could you tone it down just a bit? plsthx :)
> .'
>
> Can you point out specifically where that happened in the incident above?
> Again, I can't see where that ever happened, it is not clear for me.
Me either. As I said in my first email to David (perhaps using a not very
good analogy didn't make that point very clear, admittedly).
> I even
> searched back in the rtlToronto newsgroup to see if it happened in another
> thread, I could not find anything.
Me too, me either.
> BTW - I never got a reply to the email I sent you asking the same question.
I did but it didn't address that point. I may have been unclear but as I
said to David privately I just didn't see what happened in that instance as
that scenario at all.
There are people in this thread that have said all of LUGNET has to hew to
the same standards. I'm not sure I agree. I think I'm a bit more flexible
than that. I think certain groups can ((and should) "get away" with quite a
lot... (the loc groups, club groups, etc) that would raise eyebrows if
posted to .general or somewhere high traffic. ...c.f. past discussions about
what words are swear words in Proper English (loc.uk) and 'Strine (loc.au)
David, if you think small c community policing is the way to go (and I do
too, I'm not sure why outsiders are going to be better than the thought
leaders of a particular group at helping guide) why hasen't your community
dealt with the person who cross posted something to .general quite
needlessly? Or have you, privately?
> It just seems that you're associating the Iain/Richard incident and small
> 'c' policing. I don't see any connection whatsoever. No member of
> rtlToronto corrected Iain (publicly) before I did.
Or Richard, who I would say was the person that took a community problem and
made it a Community Problem.
> Remember, this isn't a question of *if* Community Policing is going to
> happen, its a question of *how* community policing is going to happen.
At the risk of being characterised yet again as arrogant, blunt or whatever
pejorative, I mus say this is exactly right. Lead, follow or get out of the
way. I won't stand idly by and let a few rotten apples spoil it for the rest.
But I think this point needs to be filed away for future reference, rather
than repeated. We've said it enough times now that it ought to have sunk in.
It has blessing from the admins, it's what the majority of the community
wants and there is no need to belabor it further.
I'd even really like to see the term dropped. I prefer guidance to policing
as that's the intent.
> > If some people want to defend their own stuff,
> > I support that. So you go on about your (TM). I don't know why that even
> > got folded into this debate--It's yours and you have every right to say
> > what you want about it.
Me either. It has nothing to do with this debate.
Except that, as Tim says, it's a vehicle to generate obscuring smoke or
attacks on me personally. Do those people attacking me and my beliefs and
desires about LUGNET think that by doing so they are going to stop thought
leaders from giving guidance? If so they are confused. The vast majority of
LUGNET citizenry are far smarter than that.
> It got morphed into this because Scott decided the TM discussion would be a
> good place to start sniping at Larry again, this time for his Community
> Policing efforts.
Small c and p please! But yes.
> > Flogging dead horses doesn't work, either. I can state emphatically that
> > the not-mentioned group I belong to hasn't cleaned up it's act just
> > because "C"ommunity "P"olicing reared it's ugly head and was offended.
The problem I have with this "it's the police's fault for being annoyed
about it" argument is that no less a personage than Suz herself (who really
Ought Not Need To Be Bothered with this sort of thing, if small c community
policing was working) had to tell you all to stop, after much jibing at
those trying to give guidance by some in your group, and you STILL carried
on complaining even after she finished. Were I her I'd have less hair than I
did a month ago. She has far weightier issues to worry about.
(were I ME I'd have less hair as well, but it's due to male pattern
baldness... but I digress :-) )
> > Our little
> > corner of LUGNET is, and always has been, a pretty great group. Yes we
> > stray once in a while (who doesn't) and we (community policing) took care
> > of whatever situation occured long before it got upgraded into
> > hurricane CP,
> > and if CP didn't show up, no one would have even *known* about it and we
> > all would have gone along our little merry ways, all the happier because
> > of it.
Well, no. I think this has been debunked. While there's merit in the
argument in the abstract, in this concrete case it was your community member
that brought the incident out where it would attract .general (sorry!)
notice. If you want special norms, don't do that.
And, another idea. Actually police yourselves as appropriate rather than
merely claiming that you do.
++Lar
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
