|
In Reply to: Re: The matter is settled then posted by Another coordinator on December 11, 2005 at 04:32:17:
I had written a post in response, a few minutes after you wrote your ban request, but it got deleted by accident and I didn't have time to write it all over again. But here I am, and here it is:
Nobody is going to be banned, but we would strongly recommend a time out for you.
Believe it or not, it’s nothing new under the sun, and not the first time someone has tried to manipulate the boards. You're not the first one with the energy to open up a blossom of threads, dealing with each and every poster and challenging them all. You're not the first "Bulletin Board Bruce Lee" we've encountered, and we'd respectfully request that you reconsider your approach.
This latest furore was not just started by a mere request that you publish your communications with Peter Amsterdam. It would be ignorant to miss the fact that it wasn't the request itself, nor the replies, but the tone of the requests and the tone of the replies, and one thing led to another.
What has been happening here was obviously due to unresolved tensions and previous communications on and outside of this board. If any of these discussions originated on this board, it would only be fair to allow them to be discussed on this board. We would normally have tried to nip it in the bud when references were made to events outside this board, and people were starting to air their personal grievances. However, we felt it was necessary to let the discussions play themselves out, since many of these references to off-board events were largely in response to your challenges to "show me specifically what you mean" and "prove to me anyone has a problem with me about [fill in the blank]" (to paraphrase you).
We would normally have recommended early on that posters email you personally, but this was pre-empted by the fact that many voiced reluctance to have anything to do with emailing you. It is their prerogative to ignore your emails.
All in all, there is something not quite working for you, with quite a few people in the online ex-member community. Rather than rise to the challenge to be quick to respond again and again to every detracting post, it may be worth taking time out to examine why that is. I'm sure many believe you are sincere about your goals, and it would be unfair not to factor in that the ex-member crowd is not an easy one to tackle, but it is also obvious enough that somehow you are not winning the support you want.
It would certainly be worth your figuring out how to better interact with the ex-member community. I'd venture to say it probably has a lot less to do with addressing every single detracting post you find here. I'd also venture to say that in this case, the boards have proven not to be the best avenue for resolving the problems that have been manifested here.
It's fair enough that you and Acheick have agreed to stop talking about each other. However, your request that she does not discuss your ideas and goals does not hold. If you bring any ideas to this board, you can expect anyone and everyone to discuss them. You'd also have to expect people to be able to discuss your approach towards those ideas and goals, and to bring your motives to scrutiny. And, you'd have to let them hold you to your word, or deal with what they perceive as you giving your word. Just the same, if Acheick brings ideas and goals to this board, you are free to discuss them. (No, her hosting her story on this site doesn't count as bringing an idea or goal for discussion).
So along with my request that you take time out, I am also requesting that all other posters refrain from posting to Jim or about Jim.
WC
