From: Hermit (virus@hermit.net)
Date: Sun Oct 05 2003 - 18:03:19 MDT
[Hermit 2] Have you ever heard of the "broken Windows theory"? It is a proven police methodology. It is because of this that I would like to see every infraction, however small, dealt with by means of the "Disciplinary Process." Usually, when valid grounds are established, only resulting in an "acknowledgement." This makes it not only unneccesary for a person perceiving a "swipe" at them to respond, but also means that they too will consider an on-list response carefully, lest it result in a "Disciplinary Process" being instituted for them.
[Hermit 2] Within a very short time, the members will tidy up their acts, and our environment will become a much more pleasant place for all, enabling us to pursue our larger goals more effectively. A highly recommended article which explains the psychology behind this is "Broken Windows" (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/crime/windows.htm).
[Jonathan Davis 3] I like the article on my blog last year http://www.ukpoliticsmisc.org.uk/weblog/archive/2002_10_25_old.php#85601645 . Coincidentally, It was October of 2002. Just under one year ago.
[Hermit 4] A competent article. Incidently, as you would have found had you gone there, the same article as I refered to. And the first to appear in a google search. So a lot of people obviously feel the same way about it.
[Jonathan Davis 3] I recommend you read a criticism of the theory (for balance): Policing Disorder - Can we reduce serious crime by punishing petty offences? http://www.bostonreview.net/BR27.2/harcourt.html.
[Hermit 4] Also a good article, but not relevant to the circumstances here. Rather than a crackdown to prevent "serious crime" (which fortunately can't happen here), we have established a "community-librarian (to extend the parable - police is so authoritarian) relationship exercise" with the intent not of "arresting" more "offenders", but of reducing the inevitable progression of "disorder" to "more disorder" and by intervening early, reducing the need to invoke the only effective sanctions - other than community disapproval - we have - to dissassociate the community from the offender either through silencing or disownment.
[Jonathan Davis 1] On a personal level, your apparent deep involvement in the system makes me distrust it.
[Hermit 4] The request was to keep the replies impersonal, so your comment is off-topic. In addition, while you are welcome to hold any opinions you like, expressing negative opinions of other members is not part of what this community stands for.
[Jonathan Davis 2] I will decide for myself what this community stands for.
[Hermit 4] The community has already decided this, and instituted a process to determine if those standards are being adhered to - and appropriate responses when a determination is made that they are.
[Jonathan Davis 3] Furthermore, my comment was a personal aside to you about an attitude of mine. It is a relevant truth that may aid your understanding of me and so further our goals of empathy, vision and reason.
[Hermit 4] A letter sent to some 1600+ people, and appearing on a public BBS is never personal, and nobody needs to be clairevoyant to determine your "attitude" or the fact that public spats, particularly when completely unneccesary due to your assertion that it was "all in fun" (i.e. deliberate) are extremely unattractive.
[Hermit 4] Please stop.
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29437> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 05 2003 - 18:03:40 MDT