Jim: it is unrealistic to think anyone is going to follow such a set of guidelines and/or enforce them.
New.Morning comments: There are 15 existing guidelines for FFL, in place for years, that you implicitly agreed to follow when you signed up for FFL. You recieved a copy when yu signed up for FFL, and recieve a copy in your e-mail every month. Is it really undrealistic to expect people to follow some basic, simple and common sense "rules of the playground" that all who sign up for FFL have been asked to follow? I suggested four new member guidelines, and three enforcement protocols for gross violators of the some of the existing 15. Suggestion for new guidelines are: a) Posts subjects should accurately reflect the subject matter in the post ... b) Posts should have a short preface ... c) Posts solely consisting of one-line reactions to the poster, ... should be taken off-line,... d) If you want to discuss politics extensively, make a case as to its relevance ... Hardly onerous or hard to follow. Or do you really feel quite differently Jim? Make your case. In addition, I suggested three enforecement protrocols for which you need to do nothing (other than make best efforts to follow the simple existing guidelines). The enforcement protocols are focussed on gross and constant violators of two of the most fundamental existing guidelines: - "Be kind and respectful of others' viewpoints." - "be highly selective in quoting a message ... and one dditonal one focussed on: - Nuturing Diversity of posters and POVs Judy: It's why I prefer FFL to alt.m.t, which had gotten in a rut. New.Morning comments: I suggest the reason AMT is ruttier and more chaotic / bizzare (IMO) is that there are no guidelines, AFAIR. The more positve manifest aspects of FFL I suggest are at least partly due to a long tradition, and core of abiding posters, who follow the simple FFL guidelines. If the guidelines are abondoned, as in my view some new members have done -- or never bought into --- then FFL will become AMT. Its evident in the stats: 40% of posts are now by four AMTers who are, at times, gross violators of the guidelines. I suggest that their sheer volume of posts, and the acidity and/or voidness of some of them, have driven away many long-term posters -- and readers. And perhaps repelling new lurkers who are viewing us to see if this is a place they would like to hang out and contribute. It seems to me that membership has stalled in the last 6 months. Rick: Let¹s just be careful not to let FFL get into the same rut. New Morning¹s post may have been long, New.morning comments: an arduous 3-4 minute read :) Rick: but it contained some good points. IMO, the ³invasion² of the alt.m.t folks has been a mixed blessing. Much has been contributed, but some good people have been driven away. New.morning comments: My vision is that if we can find away to create more of the old spirit of FFL -- as reflected in the guidelines -- word will get out and some of the former posters will return -- increasing the diversity of FFL -- which may inturn draw new vibrant, insightful posters. My suggested new guidelines is a brainstorming of "what can we do, collectively" to improve FFL (because its going downhill, IMO). I am not tied to these suggestions. If others have better ones, please share them. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
