permaculture

["Lawrence F. London, Jr." <venaurafarm@bellsouth.net>]

On 10/5/2010 5:06 PM, Cory Brennan wrote:
> This sounds good, thank you for creating these parameters.

Glad to move forward with that.

> Question, what is the policy for removing someone from the list? Does
> unmoderated mean that anyone can say anything and there is nothing
> that will get them removed?

No. Just common sense, moderation of tone and content and stay within 
the bounds of reason.

> The only objection I would have to this
> would be spamming or someone who was obviously here only to disrupt
> and insult people.

Spammers last only hours before getting dumped permanently. The list 
software handles that perfectly and automatically.

Behavior not tolerated:

spamming
insulting behavior
deliberate disruption of the list

> I've been on a number of lists where they had various gradients
> before someone was removed. It helped reduce controversy about it
> because the parameters are clear up front and everybody knows what
> they are.

See below.

> Below is one example from a list I was on which is a bit elaborate
> but it really is a pretty thought out and fair justice system which
> keeps the peace of the community by eliminating the most inflammatory
> encounters. I've been told that when the internet was younger, there
> were two kinds of lists, ones that had some rules and ones that did
> not, and a lot of the ones that had no rules of conduct or parameters
> were full of flaming, hate speech, insults, fights, threats, etc, and
> seemed to attract those people who wanted to do mainly that. Pretty
> much a barroom brawl types of atmosphere.

This list was around "when the internet was younger". It has never had 
formal rules or ever been moderated except on brief rare occasions of 
full moderation.

> The lists that had some
> sort of "rules" had all levels of moderation from severe to almost
> none, and they generally got more done.

This list fits that description but without any overhead.

> I've been on a number of lists (not permaculture, other subjects)
> that had some pretty workable parameters for smooth and fair
> operations, with an element of people care.
>
> The rules of one of the less restrictive were very simple:
<...>
I have incorporated this into the list guide document as:

Permaculture List Usage and Guidelines
http://ibiblio.org/permaculture/documents/permaculturelistguide.faq

Rules Of the List:
------------------

1.  No flaming, no personal insults, debate is allowed but keep it to
    the topic - nothing personal. And no spamming, defined as only
    being here to sell something and continuing to post sales pitches.
    That is really the only rule.
2.  Suggestion: Try to treat each other with respect; use the list as
    forum for the free exchange of ideas and information, not to work
    out one's personal issues on other people. There is no need to
    censor ideas if people can respectfully discuss them with one
    another. The exact point where that line is crossed is where people
    start insulting one another and making it personal.  There is a
    discipline to discussing contrary views without getting personal;
    it can be rewarding to cultivate it.
3.  Violation of rule #1 will result in the following action:
a)  A warning that they have crossed the line; this can come from
    anyone in the list including moderators and administrator
b)  If it continues, two warnings and with the third their subscription
    will be put on temporary suspension - this simply means the
    moderation and no mail flags will
    be set for that user, i.e. no list traffic to or from that user.
    This includes letting the person know exactly how they crossed the
    line - what they said that was a personal insult.
c.  Suspension from the group will last for for two weeks,
    as a cooling off period
d.  If the person comes back and continues the behavior, he gets
    another warning.
e.  If they continue, they are expelled. This means simply,
    unsubscription. In extreme cases this will mean unsubscription,
    placement in the banned users list and prevented from ever
    reapplying for subscription.
f.  If the person responds to part "a" and stops insulting for a period
    of time, they get to start over at part "a" next time. It isn't
    required that people are perfect, just that they listen and try to
    control themselves.

Let me know if anything needs alteration or deletion.

> f.  The group can set up an appeals board if they want
> to, with three people on it who are not the moderator who can
> determine if the expulsion was warrented

This can be done if anyone wants to participate.
I would be willing to add moderators to the list administration roster
if anyone is interested. This could help accomplish your f.

> People seem to feel it's ok to talk to each other much more harshly
> on the 'net than they might in person.If flaming and insulting were
> chronic behavior in a community, someone might take the person aside
> and try to work with them, so they could find a way to communicate
> without creating problems for the group. Some on-line lists become
> like a community, with a lot of support and humanity. There are some
> really great people on this list who add to that sense, for me.  It
> isn't necessary that a discussion list do that, but it might be
> appropriate, considering what we all stand for.

Well said!

Lawrence