On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:00 AM, Dan Mashal <dan.mashal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 05/23/2013 08:38 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 08:29 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
No matter how you look at it, the cost of successfully banning anUnless I am misreading the title of the thread, I believe the request is
individual in the project will eventually come with the hefty price on
joining.
not to be someone from the project, just from the mailing lists.Hi,Johann, I am one of those people that can be called an asshole or a douchebag at times, but I always can be called human. I can also be called a contributor, ambassador, QA bugzapper and packager. In addition the human emotion of annoyance in me wants this thread to be moderated.There is an _expression_ you may or may not be familiar with called "Beating a dead horse". Stop it.
+1
I take what a lot of board members say as gospel (most of the time) and you should too.
+1 or at least give some benefit of the doubt
Herlo made a point. There are elections, if you really care that much,
+1
run.Otherwise drop it. This is not kindergarten. It's a Linux distro.
Dan
Dan has some controversy as do I and a few others. None of this relates to this specific thread. There are at least 70 follow ups. People that care and want to make sure the process is fair and open. The great offense is not being argumentative, it is crossing the line and CCing folks directly off the list. apparently to engage in debate- in a manner that appears to be very closed.
There is no - you must leave the tribe now- leave for the wilderness. The tribe has spoken. We are debating limiting his ability to email lists fairly. Of course he could create another account, but Im willing to guess it would be easy to figure out. If the word BAN freaks folks out- lets try *timeout*. We can have a timeframe of 6 months to a year. See how he is after that, either he will make attempts at getting his message out in proper way- possibly by folks acting as proxy.
I see people's worries on both sides here, let our process work- its a bit new. The CWG does not punish- they will look at things and most likely let board take over after findings. This process is OPEN, let it work.
-Dude
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
_______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
