Posted by Larry Hoover on April 23, 2007, at 18:22:06
In reply to Just a couple of those answers.... » Larry Hoover, posted by Racer on April 23, 2007, at 13:11:01
> I'm the newest of the active deputies, so I can't answer all of the questions. I will answer the few that I know, however.
I appreciate the effort expended.
> > 1. What is the status of old DNPs?
> >
> > Happyflower asserts that she was told that her old DNP was no longer valid under the new guidelines. Why? Could it be made enforceable?
>
> All she'd have to do is to post the DNP request again, and inform Dr Bob and the deputies. It would be helpful to have a link to the offending post in the private message to Dr Bob and the deputies, but it needn't be posted on the board. In fact, it really shouldn't be posted on the board.I still am not clear on the status of old DNPs. I take it that all are unenforceable, unless renewed under the current guidelines?
> > 2. How is the recipient of the DNP to know the status of such a request?
> >
> >Or for an adminstrator to send an email to the person who is supposed to honour the request?
>
> Only Dr Bob has access to registration information for people who post here. The deputies cannot email anyone, we can only use Babblemail if it's turned on. Therefore, while it would be nice to have notifications sent, we do not have the ability to do so.I was just trying to make suggestions. I understand that this one may not be feasible, but that does not mean that a more formal process is unreasonable. Clarity is an important issue, for some.
> >
> > 4. What happens during the time a DNP is posted, and it is pending administrative validation?
>
> I think it's probably worth erring on the side of caution here, and just not posting to someone who has asked you not to. (That's the general "you," not you-meaning-Larry) If the DNP is validated, and you've continued to post to the person who requested it, that does tend to show a bit of support for the need for a DNP request, n'est pas?Circular argument. If the former is false, the latter is moot.
I was considering the case where a DNP lands out of the blue. It could be perceived as, "You shut up, or else!" "Forever, if I so choose." There could have been a misunderstanding. There could yet be no evidence that someone is even becoming upset, to that point in time. If a DNP is to be a last resort, and open communications is to be encouraged, how does jumping to a full blockade serve these ideas?
It precludes any opportunity to explain oneself, to apologize, to rephrase, to ask questions.....It is the antithesis of open communication. Moreover, the interpretation of what constitutes posting to somebody has been so broadly interpreted, censorship is indeed the result.
First one to push that DNP button gets all the power. And, as I've raised repeatedly, without verification of harassment and alternate efforts to settle things.
Used in the way I'm describing it, I consider the application contrary to civility. You couldn't tell someone to shut up, right? But, you can DNP them. Permanently, if you feel like it.
> >
> > 5. Why isn't improperly issuing a DNP any kind of offense?
>
> I think this has been addressed, although I don't recall what the official penalties might be.It should be the same as everything else. One warning, then you're blocked.
> Generally, there are limits here regarding complaints of any sort against other Babblers. There are rules regarding how many times you can report another Babbler's posts, if those posts are found acceptable. I'm not sure what Dr Bob has decided on regarding DNPs, but I'm sure he has limits on them, as well.
It would be nice to know. And, as the DNPs themselves are public, so should disciplinary acts related thereto.
> It is his hope that a DNP is the last resort, and is only used if nothing else has resolved the conflicts between two Babblers.
Last resort. Exactly. The first notice of a problem should not be a DNP. That should be punishable, as uncivil.....there *is* an implication that the recipient of a DNP has conducted themselves inappropriately. The allegation should not be a "free shot".
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:752323
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070423/msgs/752819.html