When David Borenstein and Adam Lewis signed off on the Quoteland Constitution, they closed with this section
quote:Compliance Quoteland.com is a service. As with any other service, you use it on the terms of the service's providers. When you enter someone else's home, you are expected to abide by their rules or leave. We ask that you do the same for us. If you do not like our rules, you may suggest that they be revised. Until we choose to change them, though, we ask that you comply by them.
If you feel that our rules are unacceptable, we invite you to move your discussion to a community that is more to your liking. We acknoweldge that we have no way to stop those who are totally determined to undermine our rules. We ask, out of respect for our work, that you accept these rules or go elsewhere. Most sincerely, David B. Borenstein, Adam L. Lewis
The constitution is hereby ammended to now have a statement at the end that refers to text in the section titled "Authority" that states
quote:Amendment 11-07-04: There are members who display a pattern of participation that indicates a rejection of the friendly and respectful intellectual environment that Quoteland attempts to exemplify. Much is written here in this Constitution, and also in the rules that are agreed to when new members register, that define this environment and Quoteland’s exemplification so no further definition is required in this amendment. These members will be declared by the Administration to be undesirable members of Quoteland and will receive an “invitation to leave Quoteland” email and the member’s access rights to Quoteland will be terminated. If the member wants to discuss a “second chance” they will have to email the Quoteland administration. End of amendment 11-07-04
Since the statement "If you feel that our rules are unacceptable, we invite you to move your discussion to a community that is more to your liking" was made, I am simply adding the mechanism that will provide a method of implementation of David and Adam's intentions in those closing remarks to the constitution. Since discussion already has begun on this, it's probably best to just continue on at http://forum.quoteland.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=586192041&f=260191641&m=241107124
[This message was edited by thenostromo on 11-07-04 at 09:05 PM.]
Anyone that has seen "Finding Nemo" (a reference to a scene from Monty Python) knows what that means. Yesterday I removed the access rights for any member that was announcing that they were leaving. Well, that was wrong and I apologize to members Amy Beth, mesaboogie246, and Flaming Mo. Also, certain members had access rights to Quoteland removed simply because they were making the most pressing noise about demanding answers to questions. I am not happy that everyone seems to ignore the rules about
quote:Users may request an explanation of a moderator's actions, and they may appeal those decisions. Such requests should never be posted publicly. The appeals process applies only to decisions made after the introduction of this constitution. Both forms of requests should be conducted through e-mail. The e-mail should be respectful and reasonable, as should the moderator's response. Should the moderator uphold his original decision, the decision may be appealed to the community's administrators. Should both the moderator and the administrator uphold the decision, the user must abide by that decision. Should a moderator or administrator overstep the boundaries of respect and reasonable authority, junior members and members may request an enquiry. All enquiries should be privately requested through e-mail. To request an enquiry, send a letter to one of the administrators; the moderator in question need not be contacted. If the enquiry concerns an administrator, contact the other administrator.
Now before anyone thinks I'm just quoting rules and will leave it there, read on! I certainly understand why everyone thinks this is all worthy of a public laundry process, so I am not freaking out about this. I have already stated that Quoteland does not profess itself to be a free society. I think David's constitution was a bit of an idealistic attempt to cover all the bases of control and discontent, but there is no perfect document that deals with these concepts. It is obvious that I am having trouble with these concepts because I am not an “administrator” by trade. In my career I do have to take stands and make demands, but the bottom-line description for my trade is that I help people and fix things. Regardless of all that, I will say again that if I make a decision and my boss is supporting me, then that’s it. End of that story; let’s move on to another one. Just because a question is asked of me does not mean that I have to answer it. If I say I am not going to expand on a certain issue and that my decision stands, then that is it. If someone is unwilling to accept that and still wants to go over my head or just make more noise, then that member will be removed from active participation on Quoteland. Having said that, I apologize to members Apokryphos and Katelyn. Their access rights are restored. Other members have indicated that they are comfortable with their access rights removed, so unless I hear from someone via email, that’s it for correcting my current mistakes (if I’ve forgotten someone, or if someone still wants to appeal their access removal, please email me). I’ve been accused of being on a “power trip.” Call it what you will, I really don’t care. If anyone wants to fall into the labeling business that is so clever at making points, then go ahead and say I’m on a “power trip.” I will not care. What I am on is a path to protect Quoteland and to make sure it continues to have every opportunity to continue to exist and grow. The growth aspect of Quoteland so far as number and variety of discussion forums is concerned is probably at an end, and it is still possible that some more changes may occur. The primary focus now is growth and enhancement of Quoteland’s quotation database. Back for edit. Acrewts access rights are also restored and email sent. Aeras access rights also restored. 11-17-04 [This message was edited by thenostromo on 11-16-04 at 04:45 PM.]
[This message was edited by thenostromo on 11-17-04 at 09:44 AM.]
Well, thanks for THIS much, genuinely. It (administration etc.) wouldn't be easy for you, but you can make it easier if you 'look where you tread' (and look beforeyou tread), and I'd try to do the same.
---- "If all they say of good and evil were true, then my life is but one long crime." ~Kahlil Gibran in Sand and Foam
[This message was edited by LetswriteNshare on 11-16-04 at 02:40 PM.]
Posts: 4374 | Location: Back At Quoteland :) | Registered: 08-18-02
I was going to say this even before TN's recent post above -- I suggest that the banned members be provided with the title of "banned". C'z it should be clear even in the future that exactly who all are banned. Some people seem to agree with me here; and I know I would have wanted the title had I been banned.
---- "If all they say of good and evil were true, then my life is but one long crime." ~Kahlil Gibran in Sand and Foam
Posts: 4374 | Location: Back At Quoteland :) | Registered: 08-18-02
quote:Now before anyone thinks I'm just quoting rules and will leave it there, read on!
All well and good. But, I'm a little tired of this Constitution; primarily because people see it as a way out of things. When someone cannot provide justification, hey -- it's in the Constitution, so it must be right! Like that stuff quoted above. Not only is it arbitrary, it's also quite silly. Maybe I should go and attack the Constitution in the Constitution thread. My post might be just a little too long though.
quote:If someone is unwilling to accept that and still wants to go over my head or just make more noise, then that member will be removed from active participation on Quoteland.
I don't want to simply make "more noise", and there isn't a single member that would vouch to wanting to do only that. However, I can tell you that I'll never stop questioning the administration until the day that I am banned, or the day that the previously banned members are restored, and the appropriate administration is "in power". You, having noted that, should either ban me now or await the process.
quote:The primary focus now is growth and enhancement of Quoteland’s quotation database.
I think that that's what dear Chris would want; but, for you to not claim that major changes are taking place now it would be more than absurd. Quoteland was all about the community, and indeed -- that is what David stressed. If it was "primarily" for what you just said there, then there wouldn't be any extra forums further down.
quote:Not going to happen. Smile
Answers like this are simply never going to do. David wrote a decent summary in the Constitution thread on unsubstantiated claims. Statements of the form "x" are never going to be strong, nor convincing. Statements of the form, "x because of y" are going to get at least a challenging response, if one at all. Actions are all well and good; reasons are a different matter; and really -- what we're concerned with.
Posts: 3321 | Location: London | Registered: 02-20-03
I am tired of quoting the Constitution, too. My reply of "not going to happen - smile" was sufficient for the request. Will never do? You can question all you like, just don't always expect an answer to your satisfaction. Ain't going to happen.
Alrighty. Now, why? Are you trying to intentionally be unreasonable? It's a simple fact: reasonable people provide reasons. People who don't provide reasons either do so because (i) the one provided is bound to not substantiate the original proposition, or (ii) there is, plainly, no other reason than that the person making the proposition likes it "better that way" (note the commonality between (i) and (ii)). Needless to say, that is a dead relationship -- a non-relationship, not an active healthy one, and I surely hope you don't do so in "real" life. It's selfish, and more importantly -- it's unreasonable.
Posts: 3321 | Location: London | Registered: 02-20-03
FM, I just did and I apologize for not reading it sooner. Been a bit busy. Your email could serve as a model for respect, civility, and it was a pleasure to read. Thank you.
As easy as it is to do otherwise, tn, could you please take a whack at answering the questions? It is only the careless tyrant who wants to say things to be so, and for that to be the end of the matter; and, I'm sure you wouldn't like to be one.
Can you not see how Retardo's analogy of Animal Farm is becoming truer and truer by your actions? You might say that others in real life always say quite the contrary, but if you think that the rational person, judging from your actions on here, would reach the same conclusion, then I'd say we've lost all touch of reason.
Posts: 3321 | Location: London | Registered: 02-20-03
TN— This "talk" with you might not be any use, but I'll optimistically hazard it since I wish to be clear how things are going to be in the long run.
"I have already stated that Quoteland does not profess itself to be a free society." Yes. That's correct and that's ok.
"If someone is unwilling to accept that and still wants to go over my head or just make more noise, then that member will be removed from active participation on Quoteland." -THAT doesn't seem correct nor ok. The total my-way-or-no-way attitude. And here the measure of banning is TOO drastic (no warnings; inventing the rule after enforcing it; not a temporary ban rather a permanent one the only way to lift which seems begging). & too painful when I think back to D_W and Fuzzies who stuck loyally with QL when they didn't have to.
---- "If all they say of good and evil were true, then my life is but one long crime." ~Kahlil Gibran in Sand and Foam
[This message was edited by LetswriteNshare on 11-18-04 at 06:14 AM.]
Posts: 4374 | Location: Back At Quoteland :) | Registered: 08-18-02
TN, please abandon the supercilious attitude of "not having to respond to us". It's both condenscending, degrading, and only seems to strengthen any arguments that people have against you.
If you're doing this for reasonable reasons, you think that we won't see that clearly? Are we all that unreasonable? What a thought.
Posts: 3321 | Location: London | Registered: 02-20-03
You know HOW happy I am Hershey? I could just somersault all the way to Australia, or dance around naked on the street, or, um, stop calling you by my invented NICKNAMES ! Joking -- about the nickname part I mean.
Glad, TN.
..what about the others……..??
---- "If all they say of good and evil were true, then my life is but one long crime." ~Kahlil Gibran in Sand and Foam
Posts: 4374 | Location: Back At Quoteland :) | Registered: 08-18-02
I sent an email to TN before requesting him to share similar information. He had agreed to make an announcement regarding the same. I think he might have been busy after that and I also await an announcement.
~Dee
I miss Quoteland of before the power shower.
Posts: 3196 | Location: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: 06-26-03
I hate Fora as a form of one way communication. I'd be really happy to have an online chat with TN and other moderators if they want, regarding everything that has happened in the past few weeks. It would be really helpful and maybe we could include many other members as well. This just might be wishful thinking but after all that has happened, maybe we need it?
If something like this were to ever happen, I promise civility on my behalf.
And even if this suggestion is disregarded, I do await an announcement from TN. Truthfully, I aren't pressuring him into doing this as soon as possible, he can take his time and I will wait.
~Dee
I miss Quoteland of before the power shower.
Posts: 3196 | Location: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: 06-26-03
I like that idea...perhaps we could post a time to meet on that MSN Group site? For what it's worth, I promise to behave, as well, if such a discussion occurs.
-------------------------- I miss Ladon, Fuzzies, Twister, Retardo, and Afenton, on QL.
Posts: 3489 | Location: United States | Registered: 03-17-02
!
