On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 17:46 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: > 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 > deserving to be on Slashdot more than the fedora-devel list. The Hall > Monitors were totally justified in killing this one imo, and frankly if > folks want more repetitive flame-bait threads like that I've got zero > interest in staying subscribed to it. I'm not actually particularly interested in whether this is true or not. What worries me is that it was always my understanding, and I think the understanding of others, that the hall monitoring policy does not grant hall monitors the power to shut down threads they judge to be repetitive. My understanding is it should only grant them the power to shut down threads which violate the 'be excellent to each other' motto - i.e., it's about the civility of the discussion, not the subject matter. Whether shutting down repetitive threads is a good idea and they _should_ have that power is a separate question; even if you think they should, it's surely not appropriate for them to exercise that power before it's actually been duly granted. (if you go to the policy to check this, you may be surprised to notice it's suddenly sprouted the following section: "In addition to non-excellent individual behavior, there can be occasions where a mailing list thread gets "out of hand", and is no longer productive. While simply being a long thread is not a problem, threads with a limited number of people, repeating their same stances over and over again with no forward progress, are also not beneficial, and detract from healthy discussion. * Hall monitors are allowed to send 'thread closure' posts to threads that, after 50 or more messages, do not appear to be making any forward progress. When this is done the subject line of the message will be prefixed with [HALL-MONITORED] and a link to this wiki page is included in the message. This is intended to spur thread participants to re-focus their discussion in productive manners, ideally in new and smaller topic-specific threads." This seems to have been added 'for review' yesterday, which to me is a rather odd approach for a policy which is already in practical use, however much the top of the page claims it to be a 'draft'. Proposed changes for review should happen elsewhere, not in the 'production copy' of the policy. But never mind. For the purposes of this email, please refer to the policy as it existed when the thread was monitored, before the above addition.) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
