but I'll be happy to lay out my thoughts.

My goal as a moderator is to enforce less and persuade more. I believe in giving wide leeway to the moderators and not having an overly legalistic approach to site rules. I believe that warnings should always precede disciplinary action, except in the most extreme cases (like an obscenity and racial slur laced rant). I believe in reaching common understanding and agreement as much as possible with the other moderators.

In short, I am an idealist. I believe in the marketplace of ideas, and that a rational and fact based approach to discussion will provide the most enlightening and enjoyable experience for all involved. I am the first to admit that I don't always live up to these ideals, but I am also not afraid to apologize or admit I was wrong. I also believe humor can help to defuse emotional situations if used judiciously.

I've been posting here and at the last site since around March. Most people have had a chance to interact with me and gauge my character (at least, as much as comes across in a blog). I'll try to do my best, and I welcome constructive criticism from those who disagree with my methods or means.

Since I am currently serving as an appointed moderator, I will not speak of the current situation, as it is being discussed by the moderators. As far as past actions, I did not agree to the suspension of Ken White or Timmy. I thought a warning would have been sufficient in either case. I should point out that there have been several posts in the last few weeks that I would have voted to issue warnings over. I have no problem with passion in an argument, but I do object to personal attacks or denigration. Once again, think a gentle reminder will usually suffice since we are all reasonable adults here.

So there you have it. As I pointed out in the polling thread, votes can be canceled and re-cast any time up to Monday at 8:06 PM PST. If you disagree with my approach or philosophy, then by all means vote for someone who more closely mirrors your beliefs. If you do decide to vote for me, I can only say that I'll do the best I can.

I blame it all on the Internet

After all, everyone tends to be sated and lethargic after a little bloodletting like today. Heck...it's all one can do to keep moving forward and water moving through the gills.

BTW; these folks being voted for aren't candidates. They're draftees (or victims of an impress gang, more accurately). Nobody expects them to have a platform or a position, fergoshsakes!

Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham

...this banning nonsense needs to be on the ballot. What I think is not understood is that 24, 48 and 72 hours is an eternity in Internet time. This thirty day business is just ridiculous except in the most egregious of circumstances.

Also, the slings and arrows from friends at a place like this seem to actually hurt worse than even in real life. I'm not calling for a time out as mentioned in the other Thread, I sincerely thing that a banning for 24 to 72 hours is sufficient to get someone's attention.

It's embarrassing and it would be effective to curb excessive zeal when it pops up its ugly head. Also, by being less draconian than this seemingly automatic, only choice, 30 day Death Sentence means that it would be much easier to just let bygones be bygones and hence much easier putting something unfortunate behind us as a group and for the parties involved.

With all due respect to Mac, I humbly request that Harley and MA overrule the banning of K, reducing his sentence to what I see as a still severe 48 hours.

I personally would invite K back after this passage of time and if he refused, as he might, then at least our consciences would be clear in that, at a minimum, we made a good faith attempt to be "Just," towards him.

I suspect that the sting of even this rebuke (remember my second point...any Internet scolding is tough to swallow), may be too great for him to put aside and overcome, but maybe not, and this would be his choice.

There would be no begging of K, none of that stuff, we're not children and neither is he. It would be his choice to take his lumps like a man and just re-join the conversation with grace and wit.

That would be his job. I think that K can do this.

Our job is to be fair to him...Thirty days is not fair.

Best Wishes,

Traveller

is what gives us our wan Lady-of-Shallot kind of pallor, you know, the one set off so strikingly by our turtlenecks and our Byronic curls. Not to mention it keeps fever down by balancing sanguinity (wet and hot) against melancholic humours (dry and cold).

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH