Jared - Perhaps you could tell us what the thinking is behind such a Constitution...

Maybe a COC, Code of Conduct. ???

MIP ... More information please....

I'm sorry. I'm going through these dozens of Typophile emails and see the "reason" for your post.

~Doh~

bj

fwiw, the name Constitution...maybe Code of Conduct sounds less official and/or constraining.

I'm sorry. I'm going through these dozens of Typophile emails and see the "reason" for your post.

~Doh~

bj

fwiw, the name Constitution...maybe Code of Conduct sounds less official and/or constraining.

Again I find myself in the embarassing position of agreeing with Hrant. I must be spending too much time here.

Jared and Joe own this thing. It's theirs. Those not satisfied with their policies should look elsewhere. Typophile is not a government. It does not levy taxes backed by the threat of force. Therefore what happened is, by definition, not "censorship." Those who think it is don't know what real censorship is.

Even Hrant agrees with the "censorship" he received.

Removing the f-word from posts keeps this site accessible to kids in schools, where often there is filtering software that would otherwide make it inaccessible for linking to inappropriate content. If you still feel unable to express your thoughts without obscenity, you should consider a prescription for Thorazine or Haloperidol.

I consider it a privelage to be alllowed to post here, and with privelages come responsibilities. "Rights" don't figure in here, beyond the normal rights to credit card privacy and whatnot.

If you use words such "Thorazine" maybe these ugly filters you mentioned could block this forum suposing is something similar to www.erowid.com, haha.

Anyway, In spite of I prefer unmoderated forums and, in my opinion, there should be a moderator for moderators; I like very much Typophile and my objections don't worth an argument.

I think the idea of a "Code of Conduct" should be an understood thing. We are all adults, aren't we? But if necessary, I think it is a good idea. [ed: self-censored the following paragraph.]

ok, fair enough. Feel free to jump in later if you feel so inclined.

Ditto the Butler.

Thanks, everyone for your thoughts. Suffice it to say that your voice and your input are always, always welcome. Typophile has been successful for one reason, and one reason only: you.

jb

The ONLY times we've ever had to consider a formal
constitution or code of conduct have been after a given
user's 'run-ins' with usually anonymous people. This
latest episode is no different than the ones in the past.
(Except this latest episode is tame by comparison.)

The bottom line is, it's okay to disagree. Hey, we
encourage it. It's what makes this place healthy.

Unfortunately, in the past, when we've had to moderate
posts it has created the perception that we agree with
the user that happens to be registered. This has never
been our intent. All users, both registered and anony-
mous, are subject to the same rules. We moderate the
post, not the user.

I don't want to impede any such clearly noble efforts, but I for one feel it's misguided. I don't want or need a constitution. I gladly relinquish all decisions concerning matters of state to our two benign kings, Jared Benson and Joseph Pemberton. This, in order to better concentrate on matters of type. If/when kings get overly abusive, they get overthrown - that is the least unfair system - and I will fight furiously for my freedom from choice, reserving only the right to self-determination.

hhp