On 27 Oct 2022, at 8:58, John C Klensin wrote:
... if he is forced off mailing lists until he demonstrates that he has stopped the problem behavior, he has no opportunity to make that demonstration, amounting to a lifetime ban. Moreover, at least from my point of view, it hurts the community by depriving us of the widest possible diversity of perspectives on our actual technical work.
Revocation of posting rights does not require that we never see posts from this person. Yes, it does permit (but not require) any chair or list moderator to simply bit-bucket posts. However, it would also permit a chair to check the "moderation" bit for the mailing list and require chair approval of posts before the message went to the list, and in particular it would allow them to do so without giving a formal public warning or limiting them to 30 days or requiring consultation with their AD. Without the posting rights revocation, a chair simply cannot do that. In this particular case, given that we have someone who does contribute valuably to technical discussions, I would hope that chairs would not simply blindly block posts, but rather do the moderation until such time that there is a demonstration that postings can be made without reverting to earlier behavior. Yes, that does mean more work for chairs. Yes, that does mean that if the behavior returns, chairs will have to read rude messages and then explain why those messages were not allowed on the list. Yes, this does require chairs to be fair and judicious. But at least it allows for these things to happen without the constant return to the "warning, ask AD, suspend for 30" cycle.
pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
