Replies

Thank you for your reply!

Scarlet letters are the point.

That happens to the issue of contention for which the vote was called. One initiative was that a troll should not be called a troll. The other was that a troll should be called a troll only after a polite warning, followed by a refusal to behave, followed by a notice not to engage, followed by a refusal to behave.

In the vote, the troll-calling provision won in a landslide. That of course means that the willing posters will make on-thread polite warnings and notices not to engage.

If this issue is intolerable to others, then it should be brought up in the review and voted on again. If it cannot wait, we can have a review even now if some of the willing from both sides can agree to an earlier review and a mediator.

In the vote, the troll-calling provision won in a landslide.

Of course, it was already being used by one side. Why would they want to lose a weapon? Again you may have not gotten to my subsequent post, but where did the troll label in posts 58 and 59 arise? Why would anyone accept an unsubstantiated label. Those who know why the label is given, need no warning, and those that do not know why need evidence for that label.