Pam's House Blend's Terms of Service/Community Guidelines reboot

It's great to be back on PHB!

I'm excited to be back - and for the great experiment to be over.  It was a good exercise and gave us some much needed perspective.

I'd like to kick off the week by wishing everyone on PHB a very happy Monday and best wishes for a fantastic week ahead.

---

by: ChlorineX @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 07:45:22 AM CDT

How nice!

A free cup of your favorite java drink, on me!

Happy Monday back atcha!  :)

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:25:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Slight confusion on #2...

I think the Monday morning coffee has not yet kicked in or something.

Does this mean our commenting handles should change? I'm "Lyonside" everywhere online, and I never change unless I'm on some bulletin board where the name is taken (which has only happened once). Although my real/full name is also out there as a sometime-commentator on Anti-Racist Parent.

Other than that, these are some of the clearest TOSs I've ever seen, and I appreciate the work that went into them. Thank you! Can you work on my credit card company? :)

---

by: lyonside @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 08:08:48 AM CDT

no, you can have an anonymous handle

We are just suggesting that for more transparency, as in taking responsibility for what you say online here. It's not a requirement. It's less likely that someone is going bomb a thread with garbage and insults if they are not hiding behind a pseudonym. But for lots of reasons (such as ramifications on the job or others they know online), some people need to be anonymous.

Also, #2 is referring to people who purposefully register for multiple accounts in order to create havoc under one name and pretend to be a rules-adhering commenter with their other handle, even to the point of advocating for the "troublemaker" handle (sockpuppeting).  

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 08:22:56 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

How do you change your user name?

Is there a way to change a user name, so as to be able to keep it linked up to one's previous content.  I have been using Burnsey as my name for 9 years online, but would be more than happy to post under my legal name.  Is there a way to change it without having to create a new account, and if not yet, can you contact soapbox and figure out a way to do so?

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:49:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

admins can change your handle

If you want to use your real name, email the tips line; admins can change your handle.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 10:09:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I've done that twice for blenders in the past two weeks

Give us 24 hours, and we'll more often than not have the change accomplished.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 10:12:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

cool to know

I've always wondered this but didn't want to bother anyone about it.  I'd love to have my handle lose its geographic specificity.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

---

by: n8nyc @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:29:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

While TrumpetDC is not my name,

it's not really an anonymous handle.  I've linked here to my Facebook page, and I'll gladly tell you or anyone else that I'm Charles Butler.  Though, honestly, it's probably easier to find me as a gay trumpet player in Washington, DC than as someone with that name.  :)

I guess I'm writing this to ask, do you see us without our names as our handles as anonymous?

---

by: TrumpetDC @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 10:45:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Anonymous handles, 'transparency', 'responsibility', and 'hiding'.

There is absolutely nothing more 'honest' about using "Jane Smith' vs 'Catlover'. A 'real' sounding name has just as much chance of being fake as any so-called anonymous handle. And they don't carry an ounce more weight with me, unless it's a public figure.

Let's not unnecessarily insult anonymous users by giving unwarranted 'legitimacy' to those who post under a full name.

Although completely out, i've had some bad experiences with guys who didn't want to take 'no' for an answer. When combined with my knowledge of what is possible for identity theft and stalking...no.

The random chaser doesn't need to know my name. The random internet bully doesn't need to know my name. The random moderator doesn't need to know my name. i think my blog is enough 'proof' that i'm 'real'.

i'm not going to lie and make up a meaningless handle or nickname. i post anonymously because of my honesty.

Are you talking about what it is you know, or just repeating what it was you heard?

Grace Slick

www.anonymous-t-girl.blogspot.com

---

by: Anonymous T-Girl @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 01:15:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I find your argument compelling.

No surprise, since I write anonymously too. :)

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 11:59:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Pseudymous vs. Anonymous

This touches on, as other comments have, the rather important distiction between pseudonymity and anonymity.

Under a pseudonym, one can still establish a reputation, friendships, etc., and thus have as much of a motivation to keep one's reputation intact by maintaining certain standards.  The issue is -- or rather ought to be --  more of being emotionally invested in an identity, than whether the name on that identity closely matches one's legal name (and for several of my friends who use nicknames for everything but legal documents, using their legal name onnline would create greater distance, not less, between their online and meatspace personae).

Speaking as someone who makes the linkage between my online and offline identities transparent, seeing what looks like a real name instead of an obvious Internet handle or nickname doesn't really suggest that I know any more about that person, unless the name is of someone I know personally or is famous offline as a journalist or author ... and even in that latter case, it doesn't take a degree in literature to think immediately of Mark Twain, James Triptree Jr., George Sand, and Dr. Seuss, as examples of folks who were pseudonymous -- not anonymous -- and made respectable contributions ... nor an historian to recall the small group of political activists publishing jointly under the name Publius, stirring up support for a particular viewpoint to shape the very future of their nascent nation.  (Pamphleteers were kind of like bloggers with no comment board, no?)

A throwaway pseudonym may as well be anonymous, but when discussing identities that are held onto and used long-term in order to make it easy for folks to know when they're listening to the same person, the difference between pseudonymous annd anonymous is vast, despite the privacy and safety differences between being psuedonymous and posting under one's legal name.  I'm not saying that psuedonyms can't be used for s***-stirring in addition to being used for protection against malicious real-world reprisals when discussing sensitive or controversial topics, but conflating pseudonymity with anonymity is often done by "can't trust them bloggers y'know" print journalists, and by bloggers upset to discover that they can be criticized and argued with and hoping to silence disagreement.  Let not the rest of us fall into the logical trap thus laid.

---

by: d'glenn @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 17:56:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thank you.

Stated much better than i could have. Well done. i would say that i am emotionally invested in my identity.

Time will tell if this will actually become a fair forum for all to participate in.

'Removing the appearance of bias' is not the same as actually removing bias.

Are you talking about what it is you know, or just repeating what it was you heard?

Grace Slick

www.anonymous-t-girl.blogspot.com

---

by: Anonymous T-Girl @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 20:42:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

How about this?

Here's a comment from someone who is one of PHB's baristas, reporters, or whatever. I find this comment to be completely out of line and want to know whether it meets your standard of civility. If so, I'm out of here.

let us know how your turn-the-back protest goes in your local cathedral.  or better yet, let us know what small town in your state is entertaining thoughts of bigotry, and we'll send in a brigade of obnoxious outsiders to whip up the locals really good.  you may feel the backlash, but so what.

I don't appreciate being threatened because someone disagrees with my opinion - especially when that person has the ability to ban me. I'd rather find a friendlier place to spend time.

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)

---

by: oldbrit @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 08:33:52 AM CDT

so what does the skin thickness scale have to be?

I wouldn't have taken that as seriously as you have, but everyone has an individual threshold. That hardly sounds like a direct threat to me (given what I receive in my inbox), just hyperbole, regardless of who said it. This is a good example of why it's impossible to have a standard that applies to everything and everyone. It's all relative.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:21:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

OK

Are you in Austin? Let me know when you plan a demonstration and I'll send a bus load of thugs to disrupt it -- even if I have to hire the bus and pay the thugs out of my own pocket.

Sorry, but a threat is a threat. That was a threat. Your moderator made a threat.

Those who appear to have administrator status do great damage by not holding their tongues and not being an example.

Can I threaten others, or is that behavior limited to those with special privileges?

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)

---

by: oldbrit @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:58:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

You have a choice to make.

At some point, you're either going to have to let this anger go so you can comfortably hang out with friends at in the Pam's House Blend virtual coffee shop lounge, or you don't let go of the anger and your experience with others here will increasingly become more and more uncomfortable.

If you so don't like one of the baristas here for what they've said to you in the past, and the barista is likely to keep her "job" here without a change in her "work rules," then maybe you need to think about trying to find a different virtual coffee house to hang out in.

That is definitely not made as a threat to you at all -- it's more of the perspective of brick-and-mortar coffee house custormer myself. If I'm not satisfied as a customer in a particular coffee house, then I find different shop to hang out in...I move on.

To me, it sounds like you're about at that place where moving on from this virtual coffee house might be a viable option for you to consider -- with the other real option being the letting go of your anger at the barista you're upset at.

If not one of those two options, what third option do you see for yourself here working for all of us here in the Pam's House Blend virtual coffee house lounge into the long term?

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:25:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good points, but not where I am

I simply want to know whether or not the attack made on me is appropriate and whether the same standard will hold for the baristas as for the rest of us.

I've been told my skin is too thin. I don't think so.

I'm not angry. I'm simply stubborn.

Given that, Lurleen can take the gigging from me, unless, of course, she's thin skinned, herself.

I stated clearly that I may move on. Only time will tell whether the TOS is enforced properly and equitably.

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)

---

by: oldbrit @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 09:15:00 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just so you know...

...Enforcement will depend a lot on what we're notified of by our blenders when we baristas aren't looking at particular threads.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 16:24:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm out of here

Lurleen attacked and threatened me. I responded in kind.

Now, I've gotten a TOS violation warning from, of all people, Lurleen.

Guess the rule is that if you're a barista, you're allowed to attack us lowly blenders, but if we dare respond, then we get warned and TOS'ed.

That's a shame and will ultimately destroy the community here.

At least I won't be around to see it.

Liz

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)

---

by: oldbrit @ Wed Jul 15, 2009 at 02:19:48 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think the comment was misread . . .

As rephrased, it seems clear that that isn't what the previous quote seemed to mean, at least to me.

The original:

let us know how your turn-the-back protest goes in your local cathedral.  or better yet, let us know what small town in your state is entertaining thoughts of bigotry, and we'll send in a brigade of obnoxious outsiders to whip up the locals really good.  you may feel the backlash, but so what.

The rephrase:

Are you in Austin? Let me know when you plan a demonstration and I'll send a bus load of thugs to disrupt it -- even if I have to hire the bus and pay the thugs out of my own pocket.

The original sounded to me more like - "we could send a busload of people from out of state to join in a local protest, but after they leave, the locals have to deal with the backlash."

"Obnoxious outsiders" was taken by me to mean "people who don't look or sound local."

In any event, there is often a different semantic content between what one person writes and what another person reads - and it isn't the words that are different.  

---

by: Joann Prinzivalli @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 10:20:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Stop making sense!

---

by: Pollyanna @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 16:33:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

PS

Perhaps, you should look at the context, which was, "I don't like what you suggested, so you shouldn't have made that suggestion, and I'm going to enforce my view by threatening to sabotage your efforts."

Sorry, but I simply don't think it is appropriate to threaten retaliation for a mere suggestion.

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)

---

by: oldbrit @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:14:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Cool, but

Can we have the ratings back?

---

by: shaz4005 @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 08:59:59 AM CDT

ratings

If they come back I'd love to see a single rating available.  A person could click on "I like this". That way really good posts could be collectively emphasized.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

---

by: n8nyc @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:26:16 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

mee too.

I would like a I like this or I don't like this so that when someon has an especially great post I can let them know without having to write about it.  Sorta like a virtual high five.

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:45:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Exactly.

I hated grading a post, so I always used a "4" for something I liked.  Trolls got a "0".  If there's nothing that can be added to a conversation, I don't post.  People should be able to get feedback of either a reply or a virtual high five, IMHO.  It keeps everyone more engaged.

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 17:05:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I like this idea alot re: "high five"

and never thought you were trollish at all, RKW/Burnsey.

FWIW, I'm sorry for the other day- was overly adamant and phrased myself not as well as I could have. Could have just as easily said "I personally was boycotting"; what I wrote did sound like a call to arms and that wasn't my intent. Then got my nose outta joint, etc...- sorry.

Friends?  

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 17:46:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

certainly.

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 22:06:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I never understood the ratings, or how to give a rating.

I was not even sure which numbers were supposed to be better - though I was hoping a "4" was good . . .  

---

by: Joann Prinzivalli @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 10:22:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh, Man! I cuss like a sailor. I WAS a Navy sailor, but I'll do my best to contain myself. ;-)

Educate me.

---

by: BethCA66 @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:20:43 AM CDT

You and me both

Re: cussing... while many in my family were sailors, I never served.

It's funny, actually... my grandfather and 2 sons all were in the Navy and none of them swore but rarely- even my cousins (children of the sons) rarely swear. It was my GRANDMOTHER, wife and mother of the sailors, was the one who swore alot and  I think I got it from her! ;)

 

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:29:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't tell anyone, <strike>but it's really my mom's fault (the cussin' ;-) )</strike>

I've always cussed, but meh. I can turn it off.

Yeah, I was in for six years. I was a Hospital Corpsman at Pendleton. I can't get it together enough to read the threads about the harm visited upon GLBTQ members of the military. I might talk about it at some point. I can't just yet.

Educate me.

---

by: BethCA66 @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:35:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Beth, I was HM2

San Diego and Yokosuka Japan.  I was in for a 4 year hitch, but after 3 1/2 years I "came out" to the legal officer on base who was having an affair with my best friend.  Word got out and was thrown out with an "other than honorable" discharge.  What a nightmare.  A group threated to throw me overboard in the middle of the Pacific.  It took me years and many anxiety attacks to get over that one.

Same-Sex Marriage is good for the economy.

---

by: CharlesMerrill @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:46:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh, man...I am so sorry.

I was an HM3 Orlando, Great Mistakes for A school, Oak Knolls NH for a few months, SD for B school, Pendleton then out of the Navy to Bakersfield! I was an advanced x-ray tech. Saw all sorts of horrible stuff people do to each other. Lots and lots of unreported rape.

I served with many GLTQ people, and in my group it wasn't a problem unless someone was gunning for you and trying to get you kicked out for some reason (this is not to say that they didn't suffer all sorts of harm by being forced to construct a straight fiction for their lives or that their lives we also in danger on and off base). I guess what I'm saying is, most of us knew who most of the G&L HMs, RNs and Drs were. And most of us didn't care.

BUT that was just my experience with the people I hung out with. Outside of the hospital, the Navy was a very different place, especially on a ship or carrier or in the field. Submariners are rumored to engage in same-sex relationships while on the subs, but that is just a rumor, and no one really seemed to care, again, within my group of friends.

But I x-rayed victims of violence, and a lot of it was homophobic in nature. ::crying:: lots of rape. Lots of bashing gay sex workers.

Educate me.

---

by: BethCA66 @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 10:14:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Outside of Camp Pendleton on Friday night...

...lots of supporting car honking for the August Provost rally, but a number of the other f-word and the q-word comments screamed at the crowd from passing cars too. Was mostly young men -- I'm assuming some were Marines -- screaming the pejoratives at us.

I know what you mean Beth. I was sexually harassed as a male FC1 while on my last ship -- so feminine I was considered to likely be gay.

On some levels, it is hard to talk about still. I talk about the experience, but 9-plus years later, I still hurt inside from those experiences of male-on-"male" (pre-out transsexual) harassement that was expressed as anti-gay harassment.

I would love to make my comment here about the colorful phrases I used in the Navy to swear with, but it is hard to get past the hurt and pain due to anti-LGBT bias in the military when I hear it talked about.

But, I also don't want to be accused of threadjacking, so let me say I too have to keep my Navy "potty mouth" in check sometimes. We even have a moderation graphic for commenting on folks' potty mouths at the ready:

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:57:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Exactly why

I just COULDN'T resist putting up the "swearing as a painkiller" post- LOL! Having a good sense of humor imo includes being able to laugh at myself...

Besides, there's threadjacking and then there's gabbing and visiting with friends. We should coin the phrase "friendjacking", but then again, that sounds really really wrong! ;)

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:15:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

whew! .....good thing I never got in the habit of naughty words

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 23:06:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

ROTFLMAO....

Oh man- on this note, I'm going to bed.

Petey won the thread... hands' DOWN. :)

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 19:38:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Done yet?

 
Can we move on or what?  

Not to diminish anything anyone ever at all sorry.  

I'm just no longer sure I should say anything.  

---

by: Patrick @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:35:00 AM CDT

Is there a way to challenge a banning?

What if a person has a conflict with a moderator, and vice versa, is there a way to challenge the veracity of the banning?  Just curious, because the moderators can make mistakes too, and much of the banning worthy offenses do have a level of subjectivity to them.  How can we make sure there is no personal animus from the moderators, after all they are human like us.

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:44:19 AM CDT

last section

"Filing a report is not a guarantee that an action will be taken by a moderator of the service. Reports that are disputed by the Blender alleged to have violated the Service TOS will be reviewed by the moderators to reach a decision."

Yes, a ban can be challenged. It's why it will be reviewed by the moderator before a final decision. A report doesn't guarantee a ban. And there isn't a way to be 100% sure that every moderator will always be objective, or who will be a heavier hand than another -- we've done our best to codify what measures can be taken to make things as consistent as possible and if it is a contentious ban, we will all discuss it. After all, we are human just like you, and I'd ask no more from any other moderator in considering a ban that was in a gray area.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:52:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

And let me just add that...

...filing an egregiously false and/or untrue Violation of TOS report against another blender, or an egregiously frivolous, libelous, malicious, malevolent, sarcastic, slanderous, spiteful, or suspicious report aginast another blender -- well, we're going to take the filing of "bad" reports very seriously just so we can minimize the posibility of the senario you describe occurring.

And too, one of the reasons we reset the recently banned people who could post on The Blend prior to the experiment -- this was to remove all appearance of bias in the recent bannings.

So yes, we have been known to resind banning decsions.

And too, behind the scenes, I know I worked it out with another one of our Baristas in this past week to make sure we have more than one set of eyes looking at comments in threads she or I believe are "bad behavior." That's especially true where there may be an appearance of bias against a particular blender by one of us Baristas. We really want to avoid the appearance of the kind of capricious behavior you describe.

I tend to believe that if more than one Barista is involved in reviewing a particular comment, then PHB (as an institution) will be less likely to act from emotion, and far less likely to make what may appear to be capricious moderation decisions. So, we're taking that into account in the decision making process.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:31:39 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thank You for this post.

And too, behind the scenes, I know I worked it out with another one of our Baristas in this past week to make sure we have more than one set of eyes looking at comments in threads she or I believe are "bad behavior." That's especially true where there may be an appearance of bias against a particular blender by one of us Baristas. We really want to avoid the appearance of the kind of capricious behavior you describe.

I tend to believe that if more than one Barista is involved in reviewing a particular comment, then PHB (as an institution) will be less likely to act from emotion, and far less likely to make what may appear to be capricious moderation decisions. So, we're taking that into account in the decision making process.

That was the exact point I was trying to have answered.  I appreciate the reply.

And thanks for changing my user name so quickly.  I have no concerns about posting under my legal name.  I was the blender formerly known as BURNSEY just so those who do not wish to "converse" with me may still keep their distance.  I do NOT want to be accused of subterfuge or of being some kind of troll because of the new name.  (Plenty already think I'm trollish because I am so outspoken-but hey we can't all be perfect, just think how boring that would be.)

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:42:16 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

just a thought

but you might consider putting something like "Blender formerly known as Burnsey" in your signature line for a while.  That way, people looking forward to continuing conversations with Burnsey will know B = RKW.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:08:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

here you go, with my own twist

I can certainly do so, and with a sense of humor to boot...

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:20:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

LOL!

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:27:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

:D

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:36:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not a darned thing

wrong with being outspoken, imo! ;)

Agreed, "Boring" is a miserable address...

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 17:49:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

email to challenge a ban

email the tips@phblend.com line, which sends the message to the moderators. We will not, however, take the initial TOS report via email, only through the form.  

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:54:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm sorry, but

I can't seem to find how to report something.  I'm sure I'm overlooking something obvious.

---

by: TrumpetDC @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 10:48:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

upper right hand corner

right beneath the "Menu" that shows you your comments and pages, diaries etc.  Scroll all the way up and it's on the right hand side.

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:21:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

right up top

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:24:00 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

You might

want to change this graphic; you just gave out your secret identity as "Super Admin"! ;)

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 17:51:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]