Re: Q-list Code of Practice suggestion


raoborg@...
 

John. I did suggest at the beginning of this reaction that would have been much better "to put this dog to sleep". Thank you Raoul

--- johntenhave@... wrote:

From: "JohntenHave" <johntenhave@...>
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Q-list Code of Practice suggestion
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 08:58:52 -0000

Gentlemen,

after the last disruption and having time to think about the
implications (on the beach, I must confess) I turned my attention to
how we might learn from what has gone before and make the future list
better.

There has been, as you might expect, considerable off line discussion
and it has some very useful content. Off line is off line and that is
the way it will stay, but let me float a few ideas across the group
with the aim of canvasing support and putting in place a few guidelines.

1. Disagreement is fine, personal attack is not

2. Stick to the topic

3. Name calling is out

4. Relevance is in, irrelevance is out (who decides?) moderator OTY

5. Civility is in, rudeness is out (who decides?) moderator OTY

6. Common sense check - before you post, ask this question : what does
this post add to the collective good?

7. Defence is fine, Feuding is out (who decides?) moderator OTY

8. I limit : count the the number of times I, me, my is used in the
post - (more than three and you would be better to retire to the bike
shed for personal relief)

9. 1 month ban option read only (who decides?) moderator OTY

10. Short and pithy is better than long and windy (stature included;-))

Sorry, I have run out of fingers... (but there is always one left for
emergency use)

Thoughts?

John












_____________________________________________________________
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.

Join main@Q-List.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.