Originally posted by doc:
... each of the following points should be specifically adressed, IMHO:
-Are multiple handles permitted?
Only under conditions as described
-Is personal criticism permitted?
This would be difficult to define unequivocally - I think the moderator would have to be the judge of when criticisms cross the line
-Are friendly exchanges like 'Thanks' etc., between FT's to be discouraged?
It is not addressed - personally, i have no problem with it
-Is their a broadband problem to be considered so as to limit our posts?
I'm not attempting to solve this problem - if it is a problem - in this proposal
-Is a certain degree of anonymity permitted or actively discouraged?
Anonymity is permitted
-Are repeated exchanges between 'undisclosed' family members/close friends permitted?
To the extent a situation occurs where this is problematic, I would suggest that the UAC make recommendations re this
-What is the policy regarding tradgeties and posting them on FT? Is this discouraged?
Again, let's let the UAC gather input and make recommendations
-What language, specifically, is prohibited?
I wasn't inclined to try and develop an exhaustive list of profane terms. i believe most are aware of them, but to the extent there's any doubt, err on the side of civility 
-Are complaints and ongoing customer service issues with providers appropriate?
I'm not sure what you mean by this - but again, my instinct is to let the UAC tackle this
-Is it acceptable for FT's to disclose personal information regarding other FT's specifically against their will?
I think we all know the answer to this is 'no'. But again, I suggest we let the UAC tackle specific new policies like this one as part of their charter.
Perhaps a brief statement addressing these concerns would be helpful, IMHO!
And, btw, what effect, if any, will the switch to a new server with all the added features Randy has mentioned, specifically including "squelch" have?
Unknown - there may be additional features but I doubt this proposal conflicts w/ new technologies
Thanks!
Doc - It was not my intention to be presumptive and try to represent a position on ALL potential questions regarding usage. I have only addressed in this proposal those issues which seem to be currently problematic in a significant way. That is not to say the questions you raised previously aren't in need of a position. But I do believe that most of them could be addressed by the UAC taking stock and making recommendations.
[This message has been edited by svpii (edited 03-04-2001).]