<meta charset="utf-8"><div>I wouldn't want to see preemptive moderation in place, either, but I come to a different conclusion.</div><div><br></div><div>The tone of that comment by Santosh was uncalled for in any context, regardless of the underlying merit of the statement.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Santosh, I think you may mean well, and you like everyone else deserve your chance to speak, but this pattern of incivility and simple lack of common courtesy has gone on far too long.</div><div><br></div>
<div>As a long-time reader of this list, I enjoy the technical posts, I can sympathize with some degree of the politicized posts (even Santosh's), but I can't stand for those that are totally bereft of even basic decency and respect for our fellow colleagues here.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I'd support a 30-day cooling off period in this case.</div><div><br></div><div>-DeWitt</div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 9:26 AM, John Bradley <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com">ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Thanks Dave,<br>
<br>
Things did get a bit overheated, even for this list.<br>
<br>
I hope that everyone can reflect on that, and understand that personal attacks are uncalled for.<br>
<br>
Santosh did retract his statement about Andrew. That is hopeful.<br>
<br>
For those of us outside the bay area and NA the lists are a life line for our participation.<br>
<br>
It would be quite sad if the community has to resort to moderation on the general list.<br>
<br>
I encourage everyone to take a deep and thoughtful breath before we accidentally head down a path I don't think any of us want to take.<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
John B.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On 2009-11-27, at 2:08 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:<br>
<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
>> If you had any brains in your stupid head,<br>
><br>
><br>
> Folks,<br>
><br>
> This isn't random noise. It is ad hominem attack. My own view is that postings which "go to the person" are a particularly destructive bit of energy to add to a mailing list, because they inflame others to respond in kind. And that, of course, destroys any hope of having the list be productive.<br>
><br>
> As stupid as I and everyone I know often is, commenting on our silliness is something that must not be tolerated in a community discussion that is trying to get real work done.<br>
><br>
> I strongly suggest a zero tolerance policy, with an escalating banishment rule, starting with a one-month suspension from the list.<br>
><br>
> Obviously, such a policy should not be enforced on behaviors occurring prior to its establishment. Participants need to first be put on notice.<br>
><br>
> For lists that I run, this notification includes sending the list's participation rules at the time of signup and at the bottom of every posted message:<br>
><br>
> <<a href="http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html" target="_blank">http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html</a>><br>
><br>
> d/<br>
> --<br>
><br>
> Dave Crocker<br>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking<br>
> <a href="http://bbiw.net" target="_blank">bbiw.net</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> general mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:general@lists.openid.net">general@lists.openid.net</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general</a><br>
<br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
general mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:general@lists.openid.net">general@lists.openid.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>