Can you elaborate on that one please?  If I chime in on say a gun rights  issue, do I have to say "BTW, I am an NRA member?"

Or if a person works for, or on behalf of a company, agency, or other entity, are they not to have an opinion on an issue involving that entity without first disclosing their relationship?  What if they have an opinion that may not be favorable to that entity?

I think this is a sticky issue.

I also think rewriting entries should be acceptable, so long as the edit is noted, and why.

Despite my previous comment agreeing to the gist of this Social Contract I'm beginning to feel some reservations due to the hurry at which it has been accepted and implemented. I feel concerns like darrow's have been left unaddressed. I also feel as if DC's attempt to abide by the language of the developing contract was completely blown off which causes me to call into question the contract's fundamental validity.

The individual members of the OlyBlog community are responsible for protecting each other and visitors to the blog from uncivil abuse and personal threats. Civility is not just a word; it must be present in all our interactions. Members of the community must be allowed to exercise the rights accorded them to voice their opinions with respect to basic matters of policy and other issues.

and

An essential condition for community is the freedom and right on the part of an individual or group to express minority, unpopular, or controversial points of view. Only if minority and unpopular points of view are tolerated and given opportunity for expression will OlyBlog provide bona fide opportunities for significant consciousness raising. There shall be no discrimination at OlyBlog based on race, sex, age, handicap, sexual orientation, religious or political belief, or national origin in considering individuals' membership.

Between these two paragraphs it seems pretty clear that we are to be held to the same standards as everyone else and that when a contributing member of OlyBlog points out that we are acting in a manner of "uncivil abuse" it is as true a warning as if a docent were to point out like behavior by somebody else. I would be comfortable allowing OlyBlog members to call a vote of no confidence in any given docent at any given time, the results of which would decide on replacing or retaining the docent in question.

I'm having a difficult time resolving the language of "(a)ll must share alike in...resolving differences through a process with a strong will to collaboration" with hoping that people will see the Social Contract's value post implementation. Yes, the Contract has been made available as a Wiki in order to encourage collaborative creation. Yes, given some of the recent negative disruptions and their ensuing silences on OlyBlog an expedient development of social codes with which to hold ourselves accountable to each other feels desirous. However, I think maybe setting a predetermined amount of time wherein the Wiki is open for collaboration and the topic is open to debate is good. I lobby for a month. I think that gives us time to acclimate to some of the new personalities as well as time to sleep on the language.

The social contract is well worth revisiting, even for we long term members.

I'm been thinking on how important civility is. I've noticed that sometimes I post and participate far less than I want to when I feel that I'll have to deal with resulting ridicule as consequence. I'm sure that I'm not the only person who has felt this.

I know we won't be able to please everyone all of the time but I'm glad that we are on the right track in creating safe community space.

I'm glad Steve has created a space for himself. I think it shows a lot about him that he won't give up. My initial cynicism has definitely waned, and I'm glad to see his BBS up and working. I'm glad that people feel safe there, I'm having a lot of thoughts about that, but would rather not go there.

I want to say a couple of things.

First, if anybody has any issue with any docent bring it up to me (especially if it's with me) in a PM, I'm willing to play a Q.A./dispute resolution role.

Second, there's no reason for anybody to feel unsafe here, if you feel unsafe here, something is wrong and you should bring it to my attention. I promise that I will help you, to the best of my ability, reconcile the situation. Please do not get into a war of words on the blog, it detracts from conversation and ultimately sinks the blog.

We should, in my opinion, be learning, even in disagreement, from one another. Also, I think we'd be better served by not approaching threads like a competition, but like a cooperative learning experience where even if you don't change the other person's mind you and they both have discovered a new angle on the issue. The more angles we have on an issue, the better prepared we are to solve problems.