Quote:
there are people who take great pleasure in that and I refuse to grant them that pleasure.

Quote:
Hopefully the fact that it was moderated means the moderators are paying close attention to this thread and maybe even listening to some of the ideas. 

Quote:
BTW did you remove your avatar?

Quote:

Quote:
Moderated post = 1st warning = verbal warning and 30 day probationary period
2nd moderated post in probationary period = 24 hour ban and 60 day probationary period
3rd moderated post in probationary period = 72 hour ban and 90 probationary period
4th moderated post in probationary period = 7 day ban and 6 month probationary period
5th moderated post in probationary period = 30 day ban and 1 year probationary period
6th moderated post in probationary period  = 60 day ban and probationary period of 1 year
7th moderated post in probationary period  = 90 day ban and probationary period of 1 year
8th moderated post in probationary period  = 120 day ban and probationary period of 1 year
9th moderated post in probationary period  = 180 day ban and probationary period of 1 year
10th moderated post in probationary period  = 1 year ban and probationary period of 2 year

If you have one of your posts moderated because you quoted a post that was moderated, it would not fall under these quidelines.

For those who weren't happy with the thought of a permanent ban, does this alteration make you more inclined to accept it as a final proposal? If someone actually gets to the 10th level, then that person has definitely proven to be a detriment to the forum community and a 1 year ban is justified.

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Sorry Kathy, I object to the red or green arrows. Here is the reason, I hope I can explain it properly....

You make a valid point and invelos will need to monitor the situation. The arrows are only a tool in which to gauge how the community as a whole views the comments posted in the forums.

They will know if the same person(s) are consistently giving red arrows to a specific individual. But, if many others are also red flagging a post, the probability is that there is some validity that the posting is problematic.

I do not believe that anyone can give themselves red or green arrows - please correct me if I am wrong.


Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Kathy the problem with the arguing from my viewpoint is that 98% of the time we aren't debating or discussing, we are talking AT each other. IN fact there are few times when I feel like a given point I am making is being understood, I blame that on myself and restate. I have said this many,many times and it remains true, I see very few instances where I have the feeling that what I am saying is understood. In order to find areas of agreement, then the sides of a discussion must be understood, otherwise there is no foundation for discussion and agreement and instead of debating, people talk at each other. While I blame myself in these cases and will state and restate and reformulate an argument simply looking for some inkling of comprehension, I find it hard to believe that what i say is not understood, and that is ultimately hurtful as well. . All too sadly I am also aware that there are people who will take a different position from my own, just because I have stated an opinion, unfortunately this has several times taken the database is VERY VERY bad directions. I have proven this to be true myself on a number of occasions, just to see what happens, this also tends to follow a very predictable pattern and it is a select group of users, the sameones everytime and very predictable.

I wanted to quote this entire comment because I find so much of it insightful. And worthy of a green arrow too!

I agree that communication is a problem. So much of what we are and express can only be done in person. Because this community can only communicate with the written word, the chances increase that there will be misunderstanding.

I had hopes that the arrow system might have made a difference in how we talk to one other, but it has not. Maybe the disciplinary proposal will aid in this process, only time will tell.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
I have also told you publicly that i viewed, and still do some of your comments to be unbalanced, you will make comments directed at me, while ignoring the crass behavior of others and the riles me, no matter who it is.

I do not ignore the behavior of anyone. If there are comments or negative things posted in the forums, I first react to them the way invelos has requested - I give them a red arrow.

If it goes too far, I have done things such as asking for thread to be locked or I will make an all encompassing statement about behavior that I have unacceptable.

The only time that I will specifically address someone is when my name is brought up. Then, I feel the responsibility to address the points that are directed at me.

But, I do not attack or say mean things to that individual. I address each point and, even when I am mad or hurt, I stay respectful. I say what I am feeling and what I expect and hope for the forums and the database.

There are times that I might have crossed a line, I then make it my responsibility to say I am sorry and try not to do it again.

There is a long history of negative behavior on many sides. Because of this it will take time for each side to change and for others to see that change. But, change is what is needed.

Quote:
But see... no matter when it is you have consequences... I just personally see yours as to harsh. Sorry... it is just how I see things. But it don't matter anyway... as I basically don't believe it matters as Ken didn't ask for our opinions on it... and I personally believe he is going to do it the way he feels is right for him... no matter of this thread.