R
RandallIsland
Guest
Thanks friend.
All is well in the world.
All is well in the world.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Oh I'm in the wrong for sure.
But I hardly think blue font is morally reprehensible & I sleep pretty well at night despite my 4th line.
I'm not sure what is more silly. The board debating a .sig policy and making a new "law" or a sitting board member ignoring said policy.
I know I'm supposed to walk away on this...but...my sig line is not giant but neither is it compliant.
i think this thread is more silly than both combined.
from the *last* .sig line bitch-fest, i posted this:
it was never intended to be something that you were compliant with or not. it was a *guideline* that gave a general sense of an approach that would suit the interests of most members. three lines, four lines, 200 characters, 250... it really doesn't matter as long as it's not one big "hey look at me" that takes up a lot of page space and makes it difficult to scan the content.
it really is an issue of how much one wants to attract attention to themselves vs. be respectful of other members and accepted practices of legibility.
unfortunately, it got blown up into this big "orwellian" subversion of fundamental individual liberties.
this has, unfortunately, turned a non-issue into just one more example why our forum just ain't quite there. yet.
ian
I. User conduct & Posting Policy
Sig lines
As the world changes we are working to adapt the forum to be increasingly useful for members. We've debated various sig line policies and would like to use the one below as an initial experiment. We may modify it in the future depending on how it works out.
It is an issue to me because I believe that if the BOD wants to have policy regarding something, then is should be enforced universally, else change the policy. Unenforced policy leads to the appearance of inconstancy and charges of favoritism. It then calls into question other policies as well.
you may have missed the point where "guidelines" was used at the very top of the page. i guess it's easy to pick out one word and get a whole ****-storm started. perhaps the moderators can change the word "policies" to "guideline" and a whole lot of panties would get un-knotted?
let's just say i was disappointed how 6 months of effort in making a set of posting guidelines got presented to the board, how certain members of the board chose to respond, and the outcome within our community relative to that choice.
to answer m1ka's question: the forum should be run by the moderators. the moderators should come from the community, and there should be a regular turnover of moderators.
PS. I spent most of my working life in a state bureaucracy.
why does this not surprise me?
methinks you need to volunteer for something.
Originally Posted by SheRidesABeemer Oh I'm in the wrong for sure.
But I hardly think blue font is morally reprehensible & I sleep pretty well at night despite my 4th line.
I thought the days of MOA board members being above the rules was long gone.
I'm not sure what is more silly. The board debating a .sig policy and making a new "law" or a sitting board member ignoring said policy.