It's not fair to single out David for that action.<div><br></div><div>I, for one, wholeheartedly supported it. Asked for it, actually.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm also boggled why people are arguing <i>against</i> asking people to leave when they cross the line and start attacking other people.</div>
<div><br></div><div>-DeWitt<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Dick Hardt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dick.hardt@gmail.com">dick.hardt@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br><div><div class="im"><div>On 2009-11-29, at 5:20 PM, Andrew Arnott wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div> On 11/30/2009 04:50 AM, Dick Hardt:</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff"><div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>I would propose that we adopt the Microformats policy except for #16 (and number them!), allow Santosh back on the list, apologize for banning him, and direct him at the new policy and ask that he (and others) comply.
</pre></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div>Eddy replied: </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">Dick, myself am not famous for overly diplomatic tones sometimes, but
calling somebody a stupid, idiotic, prejudiced human being, warrants
some actions in my opinion. That the list should even apologize to the
offender seems to me ridiculous. If the participants don't value
themselves and their dignity, they deserve none.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>+~1 to Eddy. I don't think we should return injury for injury. Everyone should be treated with respect IMO. But those who refuse to treat others with respect don't need to be privileged by the community with a medium by which their disrespect can be more easily transmitted. </div>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>... and who is the judge of what is respectful? Why are you choosing the path of punishment vs education? Why not enlightenment over banishment?</div><div><br></div><div>
Imagine what a force Santosh would be for OpenID if he was encouraged to particpate in a productive manner? Imagine how he views the OpenID community now?</div><div class="im"><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote">
<div><div>
<br></div><div>Dick also said:</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
I disagree with removing Santosh from the mail list. I prefer a fully inclusive community.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Wanting a fully inclusive community, but in which community personal attacks are allowed, is a paradox IMO. I think what we want here is a useful forum in which many viewpoints on OpenID-related issues can be discussed. We lose that when personal attacks threaten to encourage respectful people with good ideas to leave the mailing list.</div>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>I am not condoning Santosh's behaviour. I am criticizing how it was dealt with.</div><div class="im"><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<div><br></div><div>Dick again:</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
While I can empathize with the frustration of someone not being what we consider respectful, </blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'll be bold enough to say it was <i>very </i>disrespectful. To say merely that "someone might not consider Santosh's comments to be respectful" is an insult to those he flamed IMO. This isn't really a correction to your words, Dick, as it looks from context that you were speaking of the general danger of this rather than this specific case.</div>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Being disrespectful is subjective. I don't want to argue about it. If you thought it was disrespectful, did you email Santosh off list and suggest how he could be more respectful?</div>
<div class="im"><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div>I actually wasn't offended at Santosh's attack on me, because it was obvious to me he spoke in the heat of the moment. However if we really want this "all inclusive <i>of ideas</i>" community, it's very important that people don't attack others personally when they don't like the ideas that those others are sharing. </div>
</div></div></div></blockquote><br></div></div><div>That is an ideal we can strive for. Does banning Santosh going to encourage that?</div><div><br></div><div>In my view, you are either part of the problem, or part of the solution. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Inaction is being part of the problem.</div>
<div><br></div><div>IMHO banning Santosh did not solve anything. It was a divisive action instead of a unifying action. As much as I respect what David has done for OpenID, and value action over talk: this was a situation where discussion needed to occur prior to action.</div>
<div><br></div><font color="#888888"><div>-- Dick</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></font></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></div>