Re: Re: Reputation and Accountability

You may note that I haven't complained about being muted per se, because maybe the muting was socially appropriate. In any case that's a question for another thread.

The issue on this thread is the anonymity of the muting. Please try to stay on topic. It's only polite.

-- Chip Salzenberg, Free-Floating Agent of Chaos

Comment on Re: Re: Reputation and Accountability

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Reputation and Accountability by KPeter0314 (Deacon) on Jun 12, 2003 at 16:52 UTC
*Summary of my off topic* post:** Don't start and you have nothing to worry about. Would you expect a bouncer to toss you out of a biker bar for bad language - NO. Would you expect somebody to confront you in other public places for bad language - YES, I'd hope they would. I agree you should probably have been given a warning but I do support the fact that the power is there and has been given to the Power Users for use at their discretion. -Kurt	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Reputation and Accountability by BUU (Prior) on Jun 12, 2003 at 17:22 UTC
YOUR MISSING HIS POINT COMPLETELY. Yes all capital letters are necessary. His point is not the fact that he got muted. He does not have a problem with that. He may even agree with the reasoning behind he was muted. THATS NOT THE ISSUE. The issue is that whoever muted him did so annonymously, atleast from the perspective of the muted user. Perhaps some other group can tell who muted who (I know I can't) but for him, he has no idea. He just knows that some monk felt it was necessary to shup him up in the most drastic manner possible.	[reply]