On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Karel Zak wrote: > On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: >> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 23:22 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote: >> > Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a): >> > >> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by one of >> > > >> > > +1 The Hall Monitor Policy is cancer. >> > >> > +1000 it feels to me like in a bad old Communism when the open debate >> > was allowed only when it didn't touch the leading role of the Communist >> > Party. I really don't think anybody in this thread said anything so >> > sacrilegious that the thread should be terminated. >> >> Normally, I'd be against it killing a thread, but the thread that >> started this discussion had already been done awhile back and this new >> thread added *nothing* new to the discussion. Frankly, it was more > > This all is your subjective opinion. There is not objective and > unbiased way how evaluate any discussion, it's unmeasurable. I don't agree. There are logical ways to measure this. e.g. N people participate in a thread. -> (N/2)+1 of them complains to the moderator -> the thread gets closed. But since the number of complaints in this case was 3 only, closing the thread did not make any sense. Orcan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
