Posted by ClearSkies on February 19, 2008, at 12:22:30
In reply to old issue, butttt!!!!, posted by karen_kay on February 19, 2008, at 11:48:51
> lengthy blocks need to be reexamined.
>
> blocked for 1 year? i'm sorry, but that's just plain ridiculous. i understand sometimes hurtful thigns are written here. but, i feel that's no excuse for such a 'punishment'.
>
> rules are rules. i get it. maybe it's time some of these rules are looked at and possibly changed?
>
> too bad i'm not better at expressing myself, or perhaps some changes would be made?
>
> hoping i wrote this right, so i won't get blocked,
> kkI think that this is the correct forum in which to raise these issues, KK. My question is - what would you propose instead of these extensive block periods - what is the solution here, and what would be the benefit of it?
I think it's worth looking at that block calculator, too - the length of time since the previous block carries some weight. It's to a person's advantage, block-wise, to have extended periods of time between blocks. If someone has a block expire, then comes backs and posts something uncivil soon after they're allowed back, that's when the block period grows longer, quickly.
Maybe we should be looking at how to dissuade people returning from blocks from breaking the rules again. I know that "civility buddies" have been suggested at one time, though I don't know how those would work in real time, or if someone is posting during late hours. Some kind of system where your post would be babblemailed to another, volunteer babbler for their input as to whether it meets the civility guidelines. (Looks OK on paper but again, doesn't seem very practical.)
What do you think?
CS
poster:ClearSkies
thread:813587
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20080204/msgs/813595.html