I have a rant ....

[abcrystcats]

I am very disappointed and disgusted with another website which shall remain nameless.

Two internet acquaintances have had their memberships suspended while awaiting final "judgment" from said website's Star Chamber. I've seen most of the dialog and only one of the two members deserve punishment of any kind. That member has offended time and time again and ought to be cut off for good.

I don't see what the big hang up is. Where's the moral dilemma? Why are they hesitating to do the right thing? Isn't it clear to them? If it's not clear, it bloody well ought to be.

I can be objective. I think we can all go there and read the posts that remain available. Enough snarling is apparent in the posts that (strangely enough) continue to stay up. We can easily read who has violated the rules of the website, and who has merely stated facts. If the rules of the website are going to be interpreted THAT strictly, then there is a third member, who asked a question about dumpsters. He's not included in the suspension action. I am glad he's not, but it brings up some fine points, doesn't it?

I think the whole thing is arbitrary and ridiculous. I've already had my share of nonsensical debates about the rules over there, and I give up.

There is something very Roman and very unjust about a place where some people have votes and some do not. Maybe I am just rebelling against the whole website phenomenon when I say that, but there's a large body of people there that get to make decisions and another larger body of people who don't have a say. If a website is going to be an autocracy, it ought to be openly run that way, without the false attempts at rules and fairness.

I'm seriously trying to break that particular website habit. It's bad for my mental health.

One valuable contributor here was kicked off THERE a couple years ago. There were reasons, but it was a big waste of talent in favor of someone who (in my opinion) was a minor player, not very inspired.

It might happen again to someone else who has lot to say and says it well.
This makes me angry. There is enough injustice in the real world already. When I see it again and again in a virtual world, it's time to change the addresses I visit ....

[Doreen Peri]

I sure can't figure it out. But I'll let you know what happens.

One thing that's happened to me since I've created studio eight is I make DAMN sure I don't break anybody else's rules when i go to other forums.

I think before I type and make sure I word things in a way that wouldn't cause any problems because, hell, I wouldn't want to do that to anybody.

But then again, I've pretty much always tried to be sorta polite anyway. lol

These sites have their own governments. There really is no democracy on the internet.

I'm sure somebody out there will one day call me a dictator. Oh well.

I really would like it to be a democracy.

But if I had a crew of moderators weighing everybody's words, it wouldn't be very much fun i don't think.

Good to see you here. Got your email! Will write soon.

[abcrystcats]

Doreen, I will give it up: you ARE a dictator, but a benevolent one. That works for me, and it's honest as well.

Yes, I've noticed that you think your replies through very carefully at AC. You've really bent over backwards to comply with their written rules, to the T. That's why I will take it very badly if something happens to you as a result of all this. You don't deserve it.

I'm OK with no democracy if there's an autocrat in charge. But if Caesar doesn't rule and the Citizens do .. well then I see inequality. What defines a citizen? We are all citizens here, even though you rule with the Iron Fist (LOL).

Democracy doesn't work ...but if it is going to be a democracy then at least it ought to be a true one.

My point is that lots of people know exactly what's going on, but they are not going to be able to decide on this issue. Instead, it is going to be decided by a few handpicked insiders.

There is really only one set of decisions that I will be able to accept.

Again, I don't see why they are hesitating, Another 24 hours have passed and still they are figiting (sp). Why?

The answers are SO obvious!!!

The delay alone proves the website is morally defunct ....

I look at the Rules, as posted. You haven't violated them, but someone else did ... again and again. Many of the especially obnoxious posts are still sitting there. This is a no-brainer ....

[the flaming ace]

I may be a minor player, but I am damn well inspired,
and shucks, I like general politeness, too,
except when we are flagellating at the status quo,
or vehemizing for tranquility,
not directing slings of uncouth vulgarity at anyone present,
no spiritual humanist would do otherwise,
so a certain quality is expected here,
ya can call Ms Peri a benevolant dictater for sure,
you be talking some trash, honey
woman ascending,
the Ace crashing,
adieux!

[Doreen Peri]

Flaming Ace.... YOU? a minor player? No sir! You rank up there with all the local locos *wink*

....

Ms Cat -

Thing is here, really, what I'm trying to do is to give the site to those who want to use it. You know... let everybody decide what they want to do next. (the online events like jams, the studios, the artlogs, etc.) And we have made a committee (of volunteers... anybody was welcome to volunteer) to review the material for the book we're putting together but for moderators, well, they're really those who have opted to have their own forums so they're moderators of their own domain (also dictators, if you will, but only of their own spots).

So, it could be considered a democracy here because everybody can be part of having a say in what we might want to do as a community but it's not a place that has all those "rules" that some other places has which may be a bad thing but then again may be a good thing. I donno. Basically once you create a set of rules, those are like the "laws of the land" and then you need to hire a police force to make sure the laws are upheld and damn, though I understand the reasoning behind why other communities have done this, it sure seems like a lot of trouble to go to plus various rules can be subjective, meaning the decisions of the "police" won't always be popular or even agreed with.

I guess that's why our ONE rule is "respect each other" and it's pretty easy to tell when it's not happening. So, yeah for now, I guess I"m the designated dictator and thanks for saying I'm benevolent.. I try to be. Honestly, though, this is not a job I really wanted. I wasn't elected to it so obviously it didn't come about via a democratic process. And I only ended up being in this position because I pushed the install button on some internet software, bought a domain name and got it hosted.

There always seems to be a "situation" on one site or another on the internet. These are repeated occurrences. Why? I donno. These types of things don't seem to happen in real life communities (from my experience anyway). I mean, in my neighborhood, things people happen to say to each other on the street aren't continually being analyzed and the homeowners association (for lack of a better example) isn't sitting in judgement of how people talk or how they walk or their tone of voice or anything like that. (But I'm pretty sure if someone came up to his or her neighbor and threatened to physically kick them in the seat of their pants that the person doing the threatening might have a legal problem, no?)

But yeah, back to my participation on internet discussion boards, I really DO try my best to follow the rules set forth by those who are in control of the community software because it IS their home and I want to respect that! Why my words are under scrutiny is beyond me. *shrug*

[the flaming ace]

scrutiny on the bounty
mercy
you be talking some trash, honey