Back. Blame alex.
My convictions have grown deeper in the interim. Some of them haven't changed. Feedback remains the single most important tool we as noders and editors have. If we're going to foster a healthy community of writers, it's going to need to be at the cost of enforcing some form of standards and behavior.
I believe very strongly in the need of the administration to foster and support those in staff positions. Appointment to the staff isn't the pinnacle of success here, it's another method of fostering those skills which saw us appointed. To wit, some of my best professional development has come from experiences here and discussions I've had with my fellow editors.
Time in the hot seat of technical writing has solidified other opinions. I believe strongly in the art of writing to meet standards and writing to specifications. While E2 has more of an open format than most publications or websites, we too have standards. We must encourage them as writers, as editors, if our work is to continue and improve.
In that vein - in the last 24 hours, I've had some good conversations about earning your bullshit. I'd like to thank those who've participated in that dialogue, either agreeing or disagreeing. It's good food for thought and editorial policy. My takeaway from these discussions is that you never, ever should believe you've earned your bullshit. Time in grade is not an excuse for generating sub par work. The idea that you are abruptly a good writer due to tenure, or abruptly a good staff member due to tenure, is poisonous. If any of us are going to progress as writers, as editors, as administration, it's worth the time to re-examine the assumptions that have us here.
We may be that paneled private club with posh leather seats, or we may be that coffee shop serving Folgers. My verdict is still out. I'm looking forwards to seeing where it takes us, where it takes me.