How did you determine what constitutes board rules and what are just suggestions?
Here's an excerpt from what Steve Harley wrote in 2002:
"Our community has grown to over 20,000 registered members, with countless more visitors who have chosen not to make their presence known. Our server generates more than 1.5 million page views each month and that’s just for our discussion board community alone. The past years have been an amazing period of growth.
However, what has been sad to witness is that some members of the community have failed to honor their commitment to following the rules and policies of the community and have willfully sought out to hurt and discourage other members of the community; members who are simply looking for support while learning about concepts and ideas that they feel will ultimately help them with their problem. This has typically occurred with a new member who is clearly here for the wrong reasons. But, from time to time has been experienced with a member who has been a part of the community for more than a few weeks.
What’s worse is that the amazingly dedicated volunteer deputies try to step in and address the renegade member, but when the member is unwilling to comply to redirection or continues to break their commitment to community rules, the deputies are only left with frustration because they cannot remove the offensive member. Only I, the Sheriff, can do that. And since the Sheriff is off doing other things, the time it takes for something to be done to address the problem can painfully create casualties within the community leaving other members also concerned about their own safety.
For that I am deeply sorry. I have been made aware of how a greater presence is needed by the Sheriff and a quicker response time is required so that the Marriage Builders community can become the safe, supportive, and great place it used to be. Although I am sorry for my absence, devoting more time to the community has not been presented as an option at this time.
Enter the new Sheriff!
The solution to our dilemma is the placement and introduction of our new Sheriff, Tempest. She is the original Deputy (Moderator) and has long been a well-known, respected, and skilled peacekeeper in our community. For the most part, Tempest has been carrying out the same responsibilities as the Sheriff for quite a while now. But as a Deputy, she has not had the access to the resources needed to actually be the Sheriff. Now she does. This will provide the community a greater sense of administrative involvement and support.
With the new Sheriff, what should you expect? First, I’d like to clear up some issues that have become quite cloudy over the years.
The Marriage Builders Discussion Forum is a PRIVATELY owned and funded community, which is owned and funded by Marriage Builders, Inc. Marriage Builders, Inc. defines the rules and policies that are to be followed in order to become and remain a member of the Marriage Builders community. In other words, if you believe that the discussion board is a public forum where free speech is a right to be exercised as you wish and that you can express yourself without any regard to how your words will affect other members, then you are grossly mistaken.The Marriage Builders Discussion Forum is a private community open to only those who are willing to commit to following the rules and policies presented in the registration process. Noncompliance with these rules and policies is not an option.
Compliance with the rules and policies in no way means that you have to be in complete agreement with all Marriage Builders concepts and beliefs. However, keep in mind that this is the Marriage Builders site. If you have questions about how our concepts work, then that is fine. Post your questions. Wait for a response. Then carry on the discussion without any disrespectful judgments. Just know that criticizing someone else’s perspective because it is currently different than yours will not be tolerated.
Where is the line that separates a respectful discussion and a disrespectful discussion? If you’re not sure, then I strongly recommend that you start by using other members’ perspectives regarding your actions. "
Complete post is located
HERE. Your vigilante logic is a bit over the top. No one on the board has the ability to censor, ban or otherwise remove another poster from the board with the exception of the moderators or administrators.
I quoted a definition, "a person who ignores due process of law and enacts his/her own form of justice when they deem the response of the authorities to be insufficient." and "certain volunteer associations (called vigilance committees) got together to blacklist, harass, banish, "tar and feather,... "
Is there or is there not a small group of participants who have expressed their right or duty to rid the forum of participants who they have determined shouldn't be here?
Banning and censoring aren't the only ways of exercising control.
By your definition Orchid could also be labeled a vigilante for not leaving maggie's posts regarding BA up to the mods to deal with. She took "the law" into her own hands and tried to instill HER style of posting on maggie.
No.
There is no comparison.
Orchid made a reasonable request/suggestion.
She didn't call M a loser, a psychobabbler, a stirrer of pots, tell her she was throwing members under the bus, didn't question her motivations, didn't suggest that there were secrets if known would make others think less of her, didn't suggest that she was faking her marriage recovery, didn't suggest that the tone of her messages had suddenly changed negatively, suggest that she had an agenda, question her femininity...
Do you really see no difference between "ignore the trolls" and all of the above?
Did you find it at all interesting that M thought she was responding within the acceptable "tone" of the forum by telling someone to STFU? Where do you think she got that idea? From Mimi? Starfish? LA? K? Orchid?
Sounds silly doesn't it. No, it sounds stupid.
No, it sounds like very poor reasoning.
Have you seen the name calling? Yes or no?
Who is doing the majority of name calling?
Have you seen long-term members who have provided support on these forums for years have their motivations questioned? Yes or no? Who is tarring Mimi, LA, Orchid, K, Starfish? Have you seen Mimi, LA, Orchid, K or Starfish consistently and persistently slamming other participants? Purposely twisting others words? Yes or no?
Do you really see no difference?
