Rich, I know that you justified the presence of this thread here when you said the following:
Quote:
|
"Any issues related to the FaunaTopSites listings are welcome to be posted here." Please note the word Any.
|
I am still a little bit confused (and had posted the same verbage) at your conclusion, as while I fully understand the concept of "issues", I also thought that the characterization with the "thumbs-down" etc made it a BOI issue, which may have been a bad assumption on my part. You mention "many gray areas", and I agree, and also realize that they are inevitable. I do not take umbrage with your decision here, though, as the word "any" can end all debate on this thread about suitability.
I believe the root of my confusion is not this thread, but was brought to light by it. To refresh the reader, here's the rule that I referenced in an earlier post:
Quote:
Posting BOI topics in other forums - 1 point
On February 20, 2005 a payment and verification system was implemented whereby anyone wanting to post on the BOI is now required to have a minimum Participant Level membership in order to do so. Some people may decide to try and circumvent this requirement by posting Board of Inquiry types of threads in other forums where the verification restriction is not in place. Such instances will have the threads deleted as soon as they are located and the poster of said thread assessed this warning. Only the fact that some people may do this accidentally keeps this from being a stiffer penalty rating.
|
My question is:
What is a BOI type of thread? Not as the debate applies to this thread, as you explained that. I have reread the rules for posting on the BOI twice today. While there is much dialogue there about the uses and values to be had in the BOI as a source, rules of conduct, penalties, etc., I truly saw no definition or rule for what is and is not BOI content, and which would then be used as a gauge for imposing the above penalty. Once a thread is identified as having broken this rule, the penalty includes "Such instances will have the threads deleted as soon as they are located ..." There are also several characterizations of the seriousness of BOI posts, signatures, etc, to include this one which I like:
Quote:
|
......so if you are not willing to stand up, state your claim, and put your name on it, then I'm not interested in providing you the space to make anonymous accusations. Such messages will be deleted as deemed appropriate in the individual circumstances surrounding the message.
|
I don't know if you see it as a problem. If you do, my recommendation would that any issue which raises a question of integrity about any entity or business, ie good guy, bad guy, need info, deal gone bad, bad ethics, etc, be required to be a BOI thread. This could be with regards to animals, dry-goods, services, husbandry ethics, etc. Some might question the need to require "good guy" posts to be on the BOI, for if a "good guy" post stays all good, then there is no foul. But as mentioned by another post in this thread, they often attract bad comments.
I believe that many would agree with me. I think its important because as is alluded to in the above quote, the BOI requires ID, and this would be the forum for accusations, and anonymity is not allowed there. Even more importantly, any poster there is vested for at least $10, and therefore also has more incentive to not make baseless accusations or characterizations, and also to play by the rules. Basically, I am para-phrasing your reasons listed in the rules for going to a fee and requiring full name ID. In the big scheme of things, all of this is fairly minor, and may not be worth addressing anytime soon, if at all. This thread did however, raise the context for it. If my concerns are answered in the site, and I just missed them, than please redirect me, and accept my apologies. I am not getting any sharper with age!