I am sure most of you are vaguely aware of a once popular TV show called "Survivor," in which people interacted and eventually were forced to vote people out by consensus.

I am suggesting the possibility that if a vast majority of Hatrack citizens want to kick someone off of the forum for simply being onboxious, that they get banned. This would give everyone an incentive to be respectful and not be obnoxious. I won't name any names but there has been and continues to be problems with people technically following all the rules, but instead it is a masquerade allowing them to bother the legitimate people. To be fair this process might need to consist of a way the perpetrator could appeal to KDW, or something.

There IS behavior that OSC has emphatically stated that he would not accept on his site. If those rules are violated, you won't have to point it out.

And Kathleen has the authority to eliminate any topics or posts. I, personally, agree with what she said:

quote:

---

I'd much rather have them learn to behave in the first place.

---

We all should be here for the same reasons.

I truly think some Users get insulted too easily. I can understand. It's easy to do. But, most of the posts I've read--even if they are brutal--are honest, and designed to help.

quote:

---

could always try to come back with a different identity and continue to cause problems.

---

Otherwise, ignore. Every. Single. Post. Every post that addresses the perpetrators or draws attention to their actions (including, sadly, this one) fuels the fire.

but all I have to say is

"George Wythe."

As to the voting off the island idea, it's tempting, but there are a few problems. You won't be very happy if you got voted off, and this isn't a democracy.

I think we'll all be okay as long as SHE WHO MUST BE OBEYED is here.

The cost to me is "risk of being voted off," and the benefit is "ability to vote people off," and a further benefit is "people here have less incentive to sabotage the forum or be obnoxious, or rathe,r they have more incentive not to."

Because human behavior is highly rational and is a construct of social norms, I can safely assume that there will be less obnoxiousness, because people respond to incentives, and that I can minimize the risk of being booted off. I know I can minimize the risk (to be approaching 0) because people aren't booted off arbitraily. I can identify behaviors that endanger me to being booted off, to behaviors that don't, I will then modify my behavior to only be "safe behaviors," and tehrefore the benefits greatly outweigh the costs. So, think rationally, I am strongly in favor of the initiative, as would be anyone who doesn't value highly their individual freedom to "be obnoxious." While retaining the security of being a citizen of this board. It is reasonable to assume that anyone who values their individual freedom that highly, (more highly than the freedom to have a board with no obnoxious behavior) would only do so if they themselves had interest in being obnoxious.

Based on the above valid construct, people who are able to think objectively would be in favor of such action unless they wanted to be obnoxious themselves.

I don't really see any problems here currently. I like KayTi's idea. If you don't like someone, ignore them.

Now, get off this forum and write something!