| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Someone explain to me why a no censorship policy is better than that alernative,
> given that there is a minority of immature users here that seems bound and
> determined to flout the ToS and to cause uproars like this one every so often.
IMHO, I think the policy is fine. IMHO again, I think the problem that keeps
popping up has to do with the (enforcement) mechanism. Seperate the policy from
the mechanism. Examine each seperately. Look for alternative ways of enforcing
the policy which are less confrontational, but are explicit and
non-argumentative. A better mechanism is one where folks know (as they write a
post) exactly what to expect and why. They *know* that the post will be (choose
one: edited, quarantined, deleted, sent to a 'worst of lugnet gallery'). The
existing model seems to be oriented towards behaviour modification (i.e. if we
harangue the poster often enough with sufficient veiled threats, they will see
the light and change their behaviour). I, for one, do not believe that will
happen. Some folks here have been posting at one another for 5, 6, maybe 7 years
(or more). They *think* they understand each others view points, tolerance level
and maturity. They forget that new people (some minors) are filtering in
constantly. Toss in cultural differences for good measure. In addition, we are
all aging. Our way of expressing ourselves changes over time. As we mature, we
(sometimes) think that that instills a certain 'license' be speak down to our
younger peers (whether it does or not is another whole topic). Some of what is
happening here is folks perceptions and outward contact changing as they age. No
one stays the same forever.
Ray
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
17 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
