Preliminarily, let me make clear what this post is not. It is not an appeal of the ban imposed on me. It is not a request for an amendment of rules. Having practiced law, trying cases and arbitrating other peoples cases for many years, I am well aware that not every matter can be distilled into a rule that can be uniformly applied.
It is not an underestimation of the challenge of moderating the population here, which in some ways is atypically diverse.
I do suggest that you rob banning of any pedagogic value if you refuse to tell the target why he has been banned. Unless the target understands why he has been banned, the ban will necessarily appear to be arbitrary, capricious or misdirected. That itself isn’t a problem, unless one of the board’s goals is to retain the sort of population with the analytical ability that would find that sort of treatment objectionable. Since this board does have a fair population of people with that ability, retention seems a worthy goal.
Several days ago, I wrote a post the entirety of which read,
In other words, events that occur prior to a group’s existence are not evidence of that group’s behaviour.
With the assistance of others, I have concluded that TheBluesMan either construed this as a discussion of religion or the cause of a discussion of religion. This conclusion required the assistance of others because TheBluesMan’s admonition to “re-read the forum rules” before I return didn’t indicate any specific problem. He has not seen fit to respond in any way to my request,
Dave, I would only be guessing to think that your sense of civility had been impaired by anger at my statement, but I’ve found that even small tokens of courtesy are all the more important when you are dealing with matters that upset you personally.
Best of luck with the forum.
It is not an underestimation of the challenge of moderating the population here, which in some ways is atypically diverse.
I do suggest that you rob banning of any pedagogic value if you refuse to tell the target why he has been banned. Unless the target understands why he has been banned, the ban will necessarily appear to be arbitrary, capricious or misdirected. That itself isn’t a problem, unless one of the board’s goals is to retain the sort of population with the analytical ability that would find that sort of treatment objectionable. Since this board does have a fair population of people with that ability, retention seems a worthy goal.
Several days ago, I wrote a post the entirety of which read,
In other words, events that occur prior to a group’s existence are not evidence of that group’s behaviour.
With the assistance of others, I have concluded that TheBluesMan either construed this as a discussion of religion or the cause of a discussion of religion. This conclusion required the assistance of others because TheBluesMan’s admonition to “re-read the forum rules” before I return didn’t indicate any specific problem. He has not seen fit to respond in any way to my request,
Dave, I would only be guessing to think that your sense of civility had been impaired by anger at my statement, but I’ve found that even small tokens of courtesy are all the more important when you are dealing with matters that upset you personally.
Best of luck with the forum.