|
FirmhandKY -> RE: How to petition the Attorney General (4/11/2010 9:28:45 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: domiguy
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
I think we are all pretty sure that she has issues that we are not going to solve or resolve with or for her, and it's not nice to make fun of someone who needs help.
Firm
In all seriousness, what responsibility does cm have in regards to someone that clearly does not have both of their oars in the circumcision?
Excellent question, domi.
I'm not sure CM has any legal responsibility to any poster, other than some vague "penumbra" rights from some of the privacy and cyber-bullying laws. (The question of moral responsibility isn't one I really want to address in detail, other than in a backhanded way in the below discussion.)
However, most forums and online community-based websites (and I think CM qualifies here) do have a vested interest in providing a relatively safe and interesting environment which will attract and engage the people they wish to have as part of their community.
As we are both aware, for a long time, some of the mods here were extremely strict - if not always even or consistent - in their view of posters' words and actions. Now, they seem to be more forgiving, if perhaps too lenient at times. I'm not sure that one can ever get it perfect, and make everyone happy.
Since it's really impossible to "save" or even give much help to an anonymous individual in this community, I think the most pertinent question is what does CM owe the community, not the individual.
So I think the primary goal of CM should be to keep the community as a whole, healthy.
But there is a continuum of people who post, with varying degrees of rationality and emotions. Some do not adhere to the mainstream beliefs. Some are obviously mentally and emotionally stable as rocks. Some are obvious mentally and emotionally wrecks. And there are people all along the Bell curve.
So the next point is a moral one: At what point is allowing an obviously unstable individual to participate hurtful to the community and to that individual? In other words, how do we (and CM) balance the social utility of a pariah, a clown, a scapegoat or unstable person to the community against our moral feelings and positions on what is meant by "taking advantage" of someone?
I can't answer that question for CM, for you, or for anyone else who posts here. I am just aware that I believe that some individuals deserve something more than being made fun of, and ridiculed, as doing so would make me feel like I've descended down to the level of a bully. (And yes, some deserve everything they get).
As part of the community, while I can't enforce my personal standards of action (which may even be wrong), the most I can do is to point out my position in a way that any others who might work their way through their own logic on the issue generally accept that there are limits, and that they wish to adhere to something close to those limits.
If the community in general comes to accept those limits, then it will become part of the community norm. It's messy. It's not a "firm rule" nor is it part of the TOS. It's not a law. It's not what "is owed" anyone. It's just the limits that the community voluntarily places on itself.
Firm
|
|
|
|
