Observations on the List - "Be More Kind"
On Mon, 08 Oct 2018 12:46:48 -0700, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 10/08/2018 07:43 AM, Rhodri James wrote:
>> I appreciate that the moderators are volunteers, but they have official
>> power on this list.? Being volunteers doesn't mean that they can't get
>> it wrong, or that we shouldn't call them on it when they do.
> I completely agree.
>> They have got things wrong,
> I completely disagree.
from my reading the general feeling in the community would not support
>> and I have called them on it.
> Yes, you and a few others -- and nobody has actually talked (emailed) us
> directly, but rather talked *about* us on the list .
>> The response has been... I'm trying not to say "patronising" because
>> I'm fairly sure it wasn't meant that way, but "I'm sorry you feel that
>> way" made me feel patronised.
> You're right, I didn't mean it that way, and I apologize.
> To briefly explain our decisions of late:
> Suspending D'Aprano:
> His public post to me was shared with several people, including
> moderators of others lists, and it was unanimously agreed that his post
> was completely unacceptable and a two month suspension was appropriate.
> I restarted that suspension because, according to his own words, "I am
> ignoring the ban in this instance"; had he emailed me privately I would
> have correctly posted the notice to the list; had he not said that and
> just posted I would have fixed the filter and left the suspension alone
> (he posts from comp.lang.python).
after it be cam apparent that you had made an error, & the general
feeling that the ban was a bit harsh it would have be far more beneficial
to you reputation to have rescinded the ban on this occasion with a
public warning regarding the claimed unacceptable behaviour.
as it was your response of I made a mistake so I am going to restart the
ban simply makes you look like a petulant child, I am sorely tempted to
kill file you now myself.
> Suspending Mark Lawrence:
> He has a history of posting attacks. I sent him a private warning, he
> responded a couple days later with another attack.
> Suspending BartC:
> Many, if not most, of his posts' primary relation to Python was how his
> personal language was better. The resulting threads seemed to be
> largely unfriendly, unproductive, and unnecessary.
> Banning Rick Johnson:
> Hopefully no explanation needed .
> Shutting down threads:
> There is a problem with threads getting heated and people not exercising
> self-control and posting inappropriately. That makes the list
> unwelcoming. As soon as we feel that that is happening we are going to
> shut down the thread. Personal attacks and name-calling are not
> appropriate and will not be tolerated. The goal is not to shut down
> debate -- as long as the debate stays civil it will get no moderation
> action. If a thread is shut down and you feel there is more to be
> (civilly) said -- wait a couple days so everyone can cool off, and then
> start a new thread.
> Hopefully you now agree with our decisions, or at least support us in
> them. If you don't, I actually am sorry -- I would much rather have
> your support (and everyone's). Either way, we are not changing our
> minds about them.
> Python List Moderator
>  Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>  If one is needed: his posts can contain profanity, personal attacks,
> condescension, and completely inappropriate language.
What about WRITING it first and rationalizing it afterwords? :-)
-- Larry Wall in <8162 at jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>