Valid. My position is as follows.
- First, I acknowledge that I give significantly more feedback of the "this doesn't fit the rules/may not fit the rules/there is a concern here" variety than anyone else. I'd have to go and check, but it may be that I give more than everybody else combined - especially if you ignore the few outliers that are blatantly breaking all *sorts* of rules.
- Second, I would hold that it is important that there be some mechanism for that variety of feedback to be given. Rules that are not maintained have a tendency to loosen until meaningless. (It is also true that rules that are overmaintained have a tendency to tighten until suffocating. This has been pointed out to me, I have taken steps to reduce my tendencies in this direction, and I am always interested in feedback on how well I'm doing on the point. ref: Wangst Creep.)
- Third, I suspect (but cannot prove) that in the absence of one or more people actively and deliberately taking an interest in holding forth for the rules, people mostly just wouldn't. The call of "oooh, pretty" is quite strong, and people don't want to harsh each other's vibes or be the badguy. Many also, I suspect, do not feel they have the authority. I don't feel that I have any authority at all, but I also don't feel like this variety of feedback requires any.
- Caveat to the above: I do not feel it requires authority, but I do recognize that it is capable of being counterproductive, or even (when the dosage is too high) toxic. I open myself broadly to outside regulation because it is the best way I see to control for those risks.
- Fourth, while I *have* seen others step up to the plate to a degree (and relaxed accordingly) I have not seen enough that I would hold it to be sufficient to the purpose.
- Conclusion: I admit it is not pure, but my primary motivation is that I believe that it is important for the wellbeing of the shared world that someone do this, and I don't see anyone else volunteering. If someone else (or multiple someone elses) want to volunteer, and you'd rather have them do it? Great. I'll back right off. If you do not feel that it is important that this be done? Let me know, and I'll stop. Otherwise...?
--------------------
Incidental: I realized while writing this that part of the problem may be in response time on my end. If I'm responding to things within two to three hours of their being written, I'm not really giving other folks an *opportunity* to weigh in on them first, and I've been visiting the boards with a remarkable frequency these days. I'll pull back on that. If there are any other practical fixes that anyone would like to propose, I'd be open to hearing them. Any fixes that are suggested will be given serious consideration. If Bob or Fnord want to require rather than merely suggest, I will, of course, comply. I do strive to be a *domesticated* fascist.
- First, I acknowledge that I give significantly more feedback of the "this doesn't fit the rules/may not fit the rules/there is a concern here" variety than anyone else. I'd have to go and check, but it may be that I give more than everybody else combined - especially if you ignore the few outliers that are blatantly breaking all *sorts* of rules.
- Second, I would hold that it is important that there be some mechanism for that variety of feedback to be given. Rules that are not maintained have a tendency to loosen until meaningless. (It is also true that rules that are overmaintained have a tendency to tighten until suffocating. This has been pointed out to me, I have taken steps to reduce my tendencies in this direction, and I am always interested in feedback on how well I'm doing on the point. ref: Wangst Creep.)
- Third, I suspect (but cannot prove) that in the absence of one or more people actively and deliberately taking an interest in holding forth for the rules, people mostly just wouldn't. The call of "oooh, pretty" is quite strong, and people don't want to harsh each other's vibes or be the badguy. Many also, I suspect, do not feel they have the authority. I don't feel that I have any authority at all, but I also don't feel like this variety of feedback requires any.
- Caveat to the above: I do not feel it requires authority, but I do recognize that it is capable of being counterproductive, or even (when the dosage is too high) toxic. I open myself broadly to outside regulation because it is the best way I see to control for those risks.
- Fourth, while I *have* seen others step up to the plate to a degree (and relaxed accordingly) I have not seen enough that I would hold it to be sufficient to the purpose.
- Conclusion: I admit it is not pure, but my primary motivation is that I believe that it is important for the wellbeing of the shared world that someone do this, and I don't see anyone else volunteering. If someone else (or multiple someone elses) want to volunteer, and you'd rather have them do it? Great. I'll back right off. If you do not feel that it is important that this be done? Let me know, and I'll stop. Otherwise...?
--------------------
Incidental: I realized while writing this that part of the problem may be in response time on my end. If I'm responding to things within two to three hours of their being written, I'm not really giving other folks an *opportunity* to weigh in on them first, and I've been visiting the boards with a remarkable frequency these days. I'll pull back on that. If there are any other practical fixes that anyone would like to propose, I'd be open to hearing them. Any fixes that are suggested will be given serious consideration. If Bob or Fnord want to require rather than merely suggest, I will, of course, comply. I do strive to be a *domesticated* fascist.