Posted by madwand on January 3, 2004, at 15:31:54
In reply to Re: blocked for 48 weeks » galkeepinon, posted by Dr. Bob on December 30, 2003, at 11:16:10
> > I simply don't trust you.
> >
> > the same few folks who have caused me slander, defamation, libel, and hurt didn't change.
> >
> > Social ... is too histrionic for my taste.
>
> I held off before, since people were hoping to hear from you, but I think I should go ahead now...
>
> Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down. Sorry, but the last time you were blocked it was for 16 weeks, so this time it's for 48. Best wishes,
>
> BobDr. Bob:
Uh, I know this was a somewhat unusual situation (and that there was pressure on you from before to block Kristen anyway), but isn't that quite a long gap between the blockable event and the actually block (over a month and a half)?
Isn't there (or if not, shouldn't there be), some kind of "statute of limitations"? I know sometimes you run behind on reviewing posts and can't address problem ones immediately, but it would seem fairer to have a cap on that (e.g. any post that "stands" unrebuked for two weeks (or whatever time period) is no longer subject to sanctions).Others (you know who you are <g>):
I know this is a highly charged specific case which may sway your opinion in favor of the block, but (as you yourselves argued when Kristen came back under the circumstances in which she did) consider the precedent. The notion of a block for a post from over a month ago is a bit scary.Michael
poster:madwand
thread:296076
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20031120/msgs/296076.html