This reply is not particularly a reply to Ellmyruh but a reply to all posts that have occurred in this thread and in the "Ethics Concern" thread, rooted at message 36073, link below. This seemed the best place to put it.

I've been watching this thread unfold, and it's no doubt seemed strange that I haven't piped up before now. I deliberately gave people time to think and air out their thoughts before squelching them with the Final Word of Authority. Especially since I don't necessarily have it all figured out myself. I like that people are thinking about this probably more than the conclusions people have reached.

Before I address the proper responsibilities of an operator in RinkChat, first let me talk about where I am, which, curiously, seemed to be a significant portion of the discussion. I've been wrestling with burn-out for some months now. My journal entry from a while back explains this fairly well. I'm not burnt out on new features, I'm quasi burnt out on updating old ones, but what I'm really burnt out on is managing the masses in RinkChat. I'm not in there much because I need a break from coping with it all. It's too much work to keep the conversation sane in there. When ten people are on, it only takes one or two who are incoherent, inconsiderate, ignorant, or just plain loud to ruin it for everybody. Private rooms have saved my sanity more than once, but I hate that they're necessary.

But it's not like I have all the answers. This thread is good. It's getting some intelligent minds with different opinions to think and make an effort to discover a solution. Hence why I have not been actively involved until now.

So on one hand we've got Wolf, who is advocating a system that incorporates values of tolerance and fairness and justness in the community. We have Dave, who respects that this web site is my personal property and believes in the idea that ophood is a voluntary service made to me, for which people agree to uphold my own wishes concerning what is done with my own property. We have Brunnen-G, who respects all these things but believes that excessive tolerance extended to one disruptive individual at the expense of all others is not a fair trade. We have Ellmyruh, a victim of excessive tolerance of a disruptive participant and whose interest in the chat room wanes because there are people present who are permitted to get out of hand. There are many others, of course, but I think I've covered all the major viewpoints.

I don't believe there is a clear resolution. For my part, I do believe that RinkWorks and RinkChat are "mine." I do not believe I own the community that has been built here, but I do own the site, the pages, the scripts; I pay for this site's hosting, I pay for the bandwidth, I take the advertising revenue, and as such I believe that my legal right to dictate what happens here, so long as it does not directly violate other laws, is unquestionable. Morally, that's another thing. Do I have the moral right to kick somebody out without explaining why? *shrug* I don't know -- I think it depends on the situation. In certain circumstances, I believe that's ok. If someone gets on and is purposefully abusive, I'm not just going to kick but ban immediately, without explanation or apology or regret. But that's beside the point. What is the point is that my moral obligation is between God and me. I'm not morally obliged to explain or even so much as state my moral justification for my actions, and while some may disagree with the morality of my actions from time to time and may indeed call this to my attention nicely, I'm not obliged to listen, and if I don't, the matter should end there. I'm not taking the "Nobody tells me what to do!" line. I believe very strongly in my moral responsibility to everyone that participates in RinkWorks, to any degree. But I have to make that call for me.

All that is about ME, though. What ABOUT the army of operators I have? I view ophood as a voluntary service people make to me (and by consequence to the whole of the RinkChat community) to use their judgment to run the chat room as I would in my absence -- but this statement needs clarification. No one can exactly determine how I would act under all circumstances and mimic what I would do without fail. *I* can't always determine how I might act under given circumstances, because some of it depends on my mood. So rather than expecting ops to "do what I would do," I would instead expect them to uphold the same values I do and then act on their own intelligence after that.

You guys have brains, emotions, consciences. Use them to make your own judgments. Be conscientious of what you know about what I want, and, beyond that, use your head. Ops have, at times, done things that I would not, but this is not a bad thing by any means. You're doing a favor for me, and you're doing it fully if you're acting intelligently and in the proper spirit, whether you take the same actions I would have or not.

My attitude about responsibility: if you, as an op, do something with that authority, the responsibility is MINE, not yours, at least as far as the rest of the world is concerned. If you take some sort of administrative action -- or abstain from doing so -- then I'm responsible for it. If someone who is kicked or banned has cause for complaint, it rightfully comes to me, and I deal with it and defend your right and authority to take what action you took. If I truly do have a problem, then I'll talk to you about it individually, but I generally don't have to do this and can't remember having done this at all in eons.

This is the way I want it. If I give you the power and authority to moderate the chat room in my absence, then I'm responsible for what you do with it. What this means is that each op or admin is responsible for acting morally according to his or her own selves. From a moral standpoint, what you do with your ophood is between you and God. I'm not going to intervene in that determination. If what you deem as moral conflicts with what I deem as outside the bounds of the manner in which I want my property ruled, then it comes down to a private choice of your own: conform to what I want (and there is a broad range of acceptability about that) or give up your ophood. In other words, you do what you believe is morally right, and I'm not going to intervene in that process; at the same time, I'm still going to operate RinkWorks according to my own perception of what is proper, as is my right.

Ellmyruh was justified in the actions she took in the situation that triggered her post. Period. (If you're curious, this is what I said to her in private, too, but even if it were not, this public statement of her justification would still be the truth and final word on the matter, period.)

As far as my personal philosophy goes -- which I would encourage ops to adopt but not demand that they do -- I think Brunnen-G said it best. Explanation, kick, ban. There are too many people who come around RinkChat for stupidity and disruptiveness and illiteracy to be tolerated, and yet this minimal-tolerance policy still means people have to screw up three times before they get booted for good. Any more chances than that, and you start to harm, annoy, frustrate, and alienate the longstanding, intelligent, and productive members of the RinkChat community, and if you think I'm going to let that happen because I'm concerned about some unruly kid's feelings, think again. I *am* concerned and feel responsible to *anyone* that comes to RinkWorks, but I also feel responsible for maintaining a standard of conduct which is conducive to intelligent and creative thought and *meaningful* interaction between friends.

If you are an op and don't feel comfortable with the explanation, kick, ban guideline (which, by the way, is only a guideline -- deliberately abusive language is still an instant ban, as far as I'm concerned, and I would *expect* everyone would treat that at LEAST as an instant kick), then that doesn't mean you should turn in your credentials. As long as you are prepared to exert authority when it is called for and prepared to make intelligent, reasoned decisions about when and how to do so, then I'm fine with that.