To quickly address a couple of things I have seen.
Chat and rules - IMO, chat is subject to most of the same rules as the rest of the site...however, in most cases, action to address violations requires that a moderator actually be present to see them. Another issue is that when moderators are in chat, it isn't generally with the intention (or desire) to moderate - we're there to relax with other members of the community. The triggers, therefore, can vary according to the day & the people involved. For example, if the room is filled with regulars & someone starts cursing about his/her day, it is likely to be overlooked. If its a newcomer that just starts spouting off, he'll be told much more quickly to modify his behavior. Racist/prejudicial comments and personal attacks are
usually posted by newcomers, and are dealt with quickly.
How we deal with things depends on the situation. We can issue infractions - however, that cannot be done within chat. Since it is not tied to a post, it requires extra documentation...so it's a bit of a hassle, and
I only do things that way when I'm making sure a point is made. Yes - people can get kicked out of chat, banned from chat (that is a short lived tool that simply removes them from the chat area and denies access until it expires), or banned from the site based upon their actions in chat.
Regarding the sentiment that the transcripts of the chat be posted for everyone to judge - this isn't a usual BOI scenario, but I don't recall everybody barking this loudly over email corresponence with a thread subject. The difference here is that it impacts the community as a group; and, because the communication was brought up in a manner that suggests controversy, people feel entitled for whatever reason.
Just curious - if it were to come out that I exchanged a series of emails with Christina about this, and hadn't posted them - nor was I inclined to do so - would the uproar be as loud? If I stated as my reason that there was no great revelation, just the same old crap, would I be answered with cries of
Who are you to decide?
FWIW - I wasn't following the private chat intently (I was feeding critters, so I wandered by for a quick peek between groups). Admittedly, I probably missed a good deal, but what I saw of the Stemple accusations was that both Dean and Reagan were involved. Reagan contributed to the atrocity by trying to think of companies that might contribute an item to auction. Dean's role was that he was bidding on auctions (in some cases, just to up the ante - ohhh noooooo
). Let's see......he also sent emails to the Wises - I think some were during the auction period, and some were after the BOI thread started - the latter were the cause of the cease & desist letter sent by the most eloquent what'shispuss. Of course, Christina wasn't able to produce anything damning in those emails...the closest thing to that seemed to almost be an afterthought (well, more like a desperate grab) - an implication that she dared not post any proof of, because it was a pretty heavy twist on reality. Had she shown the email, it would have been clear to anybody reading that her statement was false. And, yes, I can attest to that, because the originals were all forwarded to me.
Time to get ready for work.
thrown together.
