Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer |
|
PerlMonks |
RE: RE (tilly) 5: Eulogy for the chatterboxby Ozymandias (Hermit) |
on Aug 26, 2000 at 03:12 UTC ( [id://29754]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
The fact that we disagree does mean you are wrong - from my point of view. Whether my point of view is correct or not is another matter, but one to be settled from the points and the facts, not by twisting the story to put words in my mouth.
I apologize for the opening comment in my post, but look at it from my perspective; I said cops may be necessary, and preferable to the kinds of rules and restrictions you seemed to be advocating, not that I'd like to be one. As a matter of fact, I'd be terrible for the job; I don't frequent the chatterbox much, I'm intolerant of certain types of behavior that the community may believe is acceptable, and finally, I don't WANT the job. Did I call it or what? As for expecting behavior, you can try to influence behavior, but rules aren't going to do that. You should know better, with all those years of experience and thought. Rules cause resentment, particularly from those who previously used the features and actions you block; rules cause troublemakers to look for ways around them, and for formerly "good" people to rebel against the tightening boundaries on their freedom. You influence behavior by actions. That can mean rewarding good behavior and/or punishing bad, it can mean setting examples for others to follow, it can mean the community punishing individual members who practice "bad behavior". In other words, "cops", even if you call them "moderators" or "role models", and even if it's the community policing itself.
In Section
Meditations
|
|