None of this year’s snowfalls has amounted to a blizzard, but the town of Tisbury’s response might well qualify as one — a paper blizzard.

The town has decided to get tough on people who do not clear snow from their sidewalks, and in pursuit of the goal of slip-free footpaths has issued hundreds of warnings and citations to businesses and residents over recent weeks.

Yet many sidewalks still are not being cleared.

Apparently, as selectman Tristan Israel noted at Tuesday night’s board meeting, there are some scofflaws out there who consider a $20 fine a more attractive option than shoveling or paying someone else to shovel.

What to do?

Mr. Israel’s suggestion was flagged on the agenda for Tuesday’s meeting: publish the names of businesses or property owners repeatedly cited for a failure to remove snow.

“A modern-day pillory,” he called it, adding “I still want to bring the pillory back for people who leave couches by the side of the road.”

Others on the board were not so keen on the name-and-shame approach.

“I’m just not in favor of it. I’m not for embarrassing people,” said chairman Jeff Kristal.

Nor was the third member of the board, Geoghan Coogan, who said the town had the power to levy a fine of up to $300 a day, and suggested big fines were more likely to “get their attention . . . not public humiliation.”

Tisbury building and zoning inspector Kenneth Barwick, the man who actually sent out about 150 warning letters and followed up with 70 or 80 citations, also advocated a steep increase in fines.

As things stood, he said, the system costs the town money, particularly when non-payers had to be taken to court.

He suggested not $300 “but maybe in the range of $100.”

In the end, it was decided the selectmen would put an article on the annual town meeting warrant, proposing a graduated schedule of fines. The exact rates are yet to be worked out, but they will probably start at around $50.

Tuesday’s meeting also reviewed the operation of Tisbury’s system of licensing beer and wine sales in restaurants.

The consensus was that things had worked fairly well, although a couple of restaurant owners raised issues about the application of the regulations to different types of eateries.

Black Dog chief executive Rob Douglas said the requirement for table service imposed extra staff costs at the Black Dog bakery.

Mr. Coogan appeared sympathetic, suggesting that while it should remain the case that people had to be seated to be served alcohol, the rules could be changed so people could stand to order.

“I understand it can be a problem with staffing levels,” he said.

Another point of contention was cutlery and china ware. One restaurant, Rocco’s Pizza, was given an exemption to use paper plates this year after the owner complained he could not afford dishes and a commercial dishwasher.

Mr. Israel mused on the comparative environmental impact of paper plates versus dishwashers, but the greater concern to Susan Goldstein, the owner of the Mansion House and its Zephrus restaurant, was the comparative financial impact.

If one establishment had to have proper dinnerware and a commercial dishwasher, while another could get away without those things, she said, “It’s not a level playing field.”

The rules should be the same for everyone, Ms. Goldstein said.

The selectmen decided the dish ware rule would stand, but agreed to let Mr. Douglas come back to them with an analysis of the costs of table service at the bakery.