(no subject)

[kasiawhisper.livejournal.com]

*sigh*

Comments

[ex-kiota.livejournal.com]

*random snug* What's wrong?

[kangetsuhime.livejournal.com]

Just ignore it. It's a shame that your entry had to become the staging ground for that. I hope it doesn't put you off posting here.

[princesstoots.livejournal.com]

I ran over to kick some butt, but saw I didn't need to. Can't have people messing with my Sweetie!

stupid trolls. Next one's dead for sure!

{{{{{{{{hugs}}}}}}}}}

[whispersong.livejournal.com]

I too am sorry to have seen such action go on in that thread. Unfortunate but you have others on here who do support you & enjoy your writing(s), kasiawhisper. I know I am one of the ones who enjoys reading what you post. I don't know anyone on here well and have only what people post here to judge them by & from what I've seen, your systems people are pretty nice on the whole.

One of these days I'll have to post My own thread hehe...I just keep replying. ;) Maybe I'll get bashed like you have been & thus lose My lj comm virginity?

Tatiana

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

We want to apologise; we left for three days to visit family, without having appointed someone to keep an eye on things in here in case something happened. That's our responsibility.

Shiu of sethrenn volunteered to be backup admin, but inasmuch as sethrenn are our spouse it might appear to be favoritism on our part, not to mention making it look like we were pushing a particular agenda, since many of sethrenn and we share similar views.

Again, I would like to take our case to the readership; would you mind Shiu as backup admin, or would you choose one from among you?

Jay Young & Andy Temple
(minus our usual icons due to impoverishment)

Also:

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

I'm finding out how to close a post from further comments and will do so ASAP.

As for banning the persons in question; Their remarks elsewhere have been, to put it briefly, vile. On this community, at least sakura_shinra has stuck around. She has been somewhat less offensive, but insists on an unpopular and misinformed view of multiplicity.

I can't ban someone merely for having an unpopular opinion, or even for insisting that she's right, we're wrong. Many multiples, including many on this community, do feel they have a sickness and desire psychiatric intervention. In some cases they may be absolutely right.

I admit Andy and I were amused by her assertion that it's irresponsible and dangerous to have such an "open slather, unmoderated" community as this. However, does this in itself warrant a ban? If she doesn't like the community, she can of course leave. Or she can stay and learn something.

Again, I wish to go to the community for consensus. If she's willing to keep a civil tongue in her head on this community, do you feel that sakura_shinra should still be banned? Or do you feel that the things she's said in and/or out of the community warrant a ban? What about the others (binky_stunt_cat and uziel?

We want this community's members to feel that they can speak their minds here without intimidation or criticism from outsiders who are not willing to take time to educate themselves and understand the many different views that are here.

Jay Young, sans icon

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

The discussion remains posted and we will not delete it unless we are asked to do so. We have left open the threads in which kasiawhisper's original subject was discussed rationally. We have frozen the threads started by sakura_shinra.

[whispersong.livejournal.com]

banning people who've stated an opinion (albeit perhaps not in the most constructive manner possible but still...) would only function (right word please?) to show we are as intolerant some of the rest of the world. How would that serve to put forward a viewpoint that is both tolerant & accepting of diversity as we should be *imo* simply due to the fact we are multiples (well most of us are...). I'm certain I'm not stating this very well here & I'm not the spokesperson for my House. However, My House shares this view: Banning someone for the recent little um discussion wouldn't serve any purpose but to show we can be as intolerant as alot of people we've met are to us.

We'd rather they be allowed to stay & if they show promise in learning so be it. If not fine but so long as they don't flame people for their differing opinions I/We see no reason they should be silenced. I/We hope that is a fair enough assessment of things.

*any & all typos & wrongly stated or badly structured sentences are Tatianas fault so don't blame the rest of us. :P ~Adriana*

Tatiana