Posted by Dr. Bob on April 5, 2005, at 9:32:00
In reply to Re: That's it! » used2b, posted by gardenergirl on April 3, 2005, at 18:53:15
> I am concerned that some ... may feel hurt or offended if a board they post on is mentioned by name and is criticized. Would such a post be considered civil?
IMO, that would be like the disagreements we've seen regarding benzo.org.uk. And politics.
> It is my belief, and one which I hope Dr. Bob will comment on, that concerns about a site's administration belong on that individual site in order to prevent cross-site bashing.
I agree, it's important to be sensitive to the feelings of others, and bashing is unlikely to be supportive. But I don't think I want to make a blanket rule against discussing other sites...
> I personally would prefer to see [a discussion] with a focus on the strengths and weaknesses of different styles or policies without naming specific administrators.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20050330/msgs/479340.html
I liked that suggestion, too...
Bob
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:479358
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050323/msgs/480116.html