Panda
New Member
Caitriona:
In other news....
...BREAKING...CAIT CLAIMS: PANDA A 'NUTJOB'...
OK, that I can address.
The truth is I had no vision at all. It was put back up to accommodate the EI Bill of Rights discussions. I had every intention of taking it right back down as soon as that task was completed.
I remember Anakam was having a hell of a time keeping the pm's straight on EI, and I was banned at the time and couldn't even contribute. We needed a place to 'talk' that everyone could view/post like a BBS.
I remembered mm had this domain and I asked her if we could throw it back up to have those discussions. It seemed a perfect solution, and mm agreed. Hambil was a Tech God, found software and had it up in like 2 hours. [bows to the god of technology] When the discussions were done, people asked me to keep SC up. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
Now not so much.
If I had/have a vision, I suppose I would have to bow to my critics and say, I want it to be a little more adult and less PC than EI, but also more adult and structured than TK. An EI-raw or a TK-lite [bows to cait's critics]
An in-between place where you didn't have to worry about the moderating Nazi's, but calm enough that spam, flaming and baiting didn't suck the fun out of a discussion and the community.
Apparently, there are very few people in the middle. They either need to 'act out' on the Internet, or be in a very structured environment. I suppose I was counting on more adult behavior then could be expected, as IMHO people who need to control the structure and people who act out, are all children in the end.
The problem is, I'm not the kind of person who can provide a lot of structure for others, as I don't want to tell people what to think and how to act. On the other hand, I'm also not the kind of person who thinks that non-stop flaming and baiting is 'a fun time'.
My vision, after all the weirdness of how SC even came to be, was to foster the kind of environment that didn't moderate, but also drew a firm line on 'stupidity'.
I've often been accused of having a singularly different POV. Perhaps what I envisioned is actually impossible. Who knows. It was what I decided I'd try and go for anyway.
Ultimately it is the members who draw the lines. I'd hope that those who want to string up the more vocal TK'ers will give some slack, and those that want to skewer the more structured members will relax. We are all adults and ultimately we all know each other. We know where we stand on all the inter-board issues. Do we really need to battle here too?
If we do, I'll ban. I have no problem with a surgical strike at all. I'd just rather not and say we did.
I'll admit that the TK'ers have set the agenda for the last bit. But you [and everyone] had to know that sooner or later it was going to come to a head. The legend of SC has been so contorted by a few TK'ers, that it is next to impossible to ever settle the faux feud with the simple telling of the truth.
I would have thought we'd fall off TK's radar a long time ago because we're really inconsequential in oh so many ways.
Who knew the nutjobs at TK had that kind of attention span.
[oh and as soon as one of those nutjobs begins a thread on TK about this post, I'll post the link for those interested.]
In other news....
...BREAKING...CAIT CLAIMS: PANDA A 'NUTJOB'...
