Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: objection rules

Posted by Dr. Bob on August 7, 2006, at 15:41:53

In reply to Re: 3-complaint rule, posted by Dr. Bob on June 17, 2005, at 10:13:22

Hi, everyone,

The deputies and I thought this was worth revisiting...

> So here's an idea, what if we adopt another 3-post rule? In this case, a limit of 3 objections per poster -- to posts I consider OK -- per other poster.
>
> Say A objects 3 times to posts by B. If I see a problem with those posts, then I'll enforce the rules, and A has helped me administrate. B may feel angry, but that would be considered an acceptable tradeoff.
>
> If I consider those posts OK, however, it would then be up to A [to] deal in some other way with posts by B, for example, by not even reading them.
>
> A could still object to posts by C, and the 3-post "clock" would start over.

Others could still object to posts by B.

> And it would go both ways, B could object to posts by A, but subject again to this 3-post rule.

> > I thought the perfect solution would be for people with concerns (including "requests for determination") to email Dr. Bob privately, rather than making a public comment on the Admin board. However, Dr. Bob recently wrote: "Thanks for the suggestion. I know it has its downsides, but overall, I think it's better for this to be out in the open."
>
> I think it's like having PBCs out in the open

Well, I'm sorry it's taken me so long to appreciate this, but I think the above was a faulty analogy. A determination is like a PBC, but a request for a determination isn't.

I do think a better solution would be for requests to be emailed (or babblemailed) to me and the deputies. The time we have to deal with them is limited, however, so I'd still like to limit them.

If we do determine that there are issues, we'll continue to deal with them out in the open. And it'll continue to be fine to discuss both the particular actions we take and our general policies here.

So, to recap, we'll now consider it uncivil (1) to object here to specific posts and also (2) to object directly to us more than three times per poster per other poster.

> > If you are saying that I can email to you ... what could I do to deal with it if you do not reply to me within some time period that we have not established yet ... ?
>
> The time period we discussed before was 2 days.

If you email all of us and don't hear back from any of us within 2 days, then please email all of us again. If you don't hear back from any of us within another 2 days, then go ahead and post here, but just to ask us to check our email, not to object.

> I'd like to leave it up to posters whose posts are objected to to invoke this. If there's a third "false alarm", they can do so by letting me know the URLs of the objections.

Since those posters may no longer be aware of any objections, the deputies and I will take responsibility for keeping count.

OK, how does that sound?

Bob


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Dr. Bob thread:407882
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060802/msgs/674584.html