Subject: ...or maybe I'll fix the HTML first
Author:
Posted on: 2017-05-26 03:11:00 UTC

(My bad, I missed a tag in the copy-paste)

Subject: I don't like where this is going

A lot of people are seeing Bram as someone who's manipulating the community (see, for example, in the post I'm replying to, Miah's description of Bram's recent posts as trying to bait people into letting her get away with her behavior). I, in what might be a fit of unfounded optimism, don't see it.

I see that Bramadin has a very poor understanding of the typical social protocols we, as a community, expect people to generally follow. This lack of understanding is severe enough that I don't think Bram can have many healthy interactions with the community at this time. Bram, I think it would be best for you to take some time off from here, go get the help with social interaction that we aren't equipped to provide, and then return here if you still want to. Heck, it might even be useful to talk to someone more equipped to help you about all this.

I was going to call for Bram to retract (or at least stop pressing) her claims that we were intentionally being abusive during the Permission process, but she's already done that. (Incidentally, I think the second post I linked there is evidence for very confused!Bram).

I think an apology, or at least an admission of wrongdoing, is is order for the manipulation of the Permission process. However, I'm retracting my call for a Permission revocation, since, having thought it over, the broader category of "fraud upon the Permission Givers" (for example, putting together a Permission Request intending to write a pair of very Suvian/grimdark/... agents instead of the more reasonable characters described in the request) I was thinking of is very slippery and either leads to revocations for "bad writing" or is impossible to prosecute unless someone admits to doing it. Either way, it's bad (or, at best, useless) precedent, so let's not go there.

Back to the main point, I don't think that Bram's conduct is banworthy (even though it isn't good). Banning someone is, from what I can tell, for when their behavior significantly harms the continued proper functioning of the community. For example, unapologetic bigotry is banworthy because it makes large swaths of people (either who are here or who might be here) feel sufficiently unwelcome that it freezes them out of the community.

From this perspective, the question is whether Bramadin's profound lack of understanding of the norms of neurotypical social interaction, which is an effect of her mental illness and which (from what I can see) she is attempting to remedy, has enough of a negative impact on other people's use of the community to justify hurling her out the door forever. (The word "use" in the previous sentence is meant to draw an analogy to the "use" of a real-life bulletin board or park). I don't think it is, and so I'm still voting against a ban. (To be clear, I think the recent harassment situation has been resolved, partly by hanging that temporary ban over Bram's head, so I don't think there's still something banworthy there.)

I also don't like how this ban vote would generalize. For example, I think charges like this could be leveled against Scapegrace, and I don't think she's earned a ban either.

- Tomash

Reply Return to messages