Bud and turk, you are not listening to Armando and are giving responses that are not relevant to the issue Armando raises, which is a valid issue.
I can not speak for Armando, but this is my take of this thread in my unawake state.
There are several ways that an unwritten “rule” becomes a “law.”
One method is intentional and is similar to how statutes are enacted by congress (or unilaterally by Bush). Someone drafts a policy that becomes a rule either by the unilateral decision of the community leader or group consensus. It is usually transparent. Bud and turk are focused on this type of rule, Armando is not.
A second method is more stealth and is similar to natural law or common law. Someone says yada, as in this comment, which is a definitive statement of what is and is not civil and therefore constitutes a “rule” whether the leaders or community call it that or not. The community approves, in this case by a good chunk here reccing the comment. Then, at some point in future, one of the members of the group who approved the comment applies the civility rules to a comment or diary, maybe not expressly, it could be implicitly. You now have precedent in the facts of this rule being applied to the comment or diary, whether it is called a civility rule or not. In the future, this precedent can be cited by others, again and again, and eventually the rule is recognized as a rule.
Turk and bud, when you tell Armando that this will not happen, what you don’t see is that it has already started. The stealth manner of adopting rules has already started when the declarative statement was posted and then approved by a good chunk of community. So, Armando is saying, wake up because down the road you may find that a rule you did not intend to “enact” has already taken hold at this site.
btw, if this posts as an essay, i will be surprised because i tried to post as a comment in armando’s thread, but it was rejected several times. hmmm…
29 comments
Skip to comment form
Author
just testing to see if i can post comment here. very strange that i could not post comment in armando’s thread. i posted a couple comments last night, but today there appears to be some site malfunction, telling me i need a subject, when there is a subject. very odd.
odd indeed, because looks like i can post a comment here, just not in armando’s thread.
Author
just testing to see if i can post comment here. very strange that i could not post comment in armando’s thread. i posted a couple comments last night, but today there appears to be some site malfunction, telling me i need a subject, when there is a subject. very odd.
odd indeed, because looks like i can post a comment here, just not in armando’s thread.
And the way to stop it is a definitive statement from Management saying that we will not play the “civility concern” game.
Now, both Patriot and I post at a site, Talk Left, that very strictly enforces civility norms.
No profanity. No personal attacks.
We can live by those rules. But the point is do we want those to be our rules and do we want endless debate about what our rules on this will be.
I thought not and think not based on what EK said last night.
I think it is good to be clear on this now.
I know it will have and effect on how and how much I participate here. I think it is only fair to EVERYBODY that this be clear.
since I also could not post in Armando’s.
Since I wrote the comment that inspired his diary, I felt it necessary to respond, since he mischaracterized what I wrote.
Unless I am wrong about that!
I am writing a piece about the whole thing (our first kerfuffle, yay!) so all I will say for now is that I took and understand Mando’s point very well.
And agree with him….In Principle.
Ok now you will all be waiting for my piece in suspense! Goody!
that presumes that the community has some say in the matter! bwa ha ha ha ha!