[ga] List Rules was Re: Suspension of William Walsh for mass postings

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: owner-ga-full@dnso.org
|> [mailto:owner-ga-full@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Sotiris
|> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 12:12 AM
|> To: dassa@dhs.org
|> Cc: Ga
|> Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Suspension of William Walsh for mass
postings
|>
|> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
|> If it means that I must be punished as well, then so be
|> it!  But the subversive activities (even if they're not
intentional)
|> must be stopped here and now.  I will gladly take the suspension
verdict
|> against myself Darryl, even though I am unaware of any abuse
reports
|> against me to the List Monitor.

Subversive activities take many forms.  Not abiding by rules as set
down and flouting of them in any way is not to be tolerated.  That
goes for the enforcers and the participants.  Abuse reports are not
necessary with regards to the posting limit rule.  I personally, am
fully prepared to respect any decision to suspend my own participation
if it is done under compliance with the rules.  However, I will raise
hell if any attempts are made to abuse the application of the rules
with respect to my own activities and to a lesser extent when others
are inconvenienced.

|> This ML must not be allowed to go the way
|> of the IDNO ML. It sickens me to constantly hear the reply: "But so
and so
|> is not being punished, why should so and so be punished then?"
Well,
|> how about TO RESTORE LIST ORDER?

Strange you would bring the IDNO ML into this.  Far as I can see it is
still operating and functional.

The point of having objective list rules such as a posting limit is to
get away from subjective application of rules and judgements.  If a
rule is to be applied subjectively it must be written in such a way to
allow it.  The posting limit rule of the GA is not.  Once a posting
limit is applied, it must be applied objectively and with maximum
force to be effective.  Deciding that some should be punished under it
and others not, is not allowable.  Nor is stating that some are immune
to this rule, the rule is written in such a way that there is no valid
way such actions can or should be condoned.  The rule applies to all
in equal force or it applies to none.  If the GA wishes to have the
right to make individual judgements by List Monitors, the rule will
need to be amended.  As written, it is invalid for any action to be
taken unless it is applied to all participants.  Otherwise, we do not
have List Order.

|> I think it would go a long way
|> towards bringing things back into focus if the suspensions were
carried out
|> against all the offenders (yes, including myself!).  Now, who has a
problem with that?
|> Sooner or later the rules must be applied, because they
|> have not been so to date does not mean they should never be...
Examples
|> have to be made (and remade if necessary!).

Rules are rules and are there not for the convenience of any one
person.  They are the tools to maintain an effective mailing list and
should never be abused.  Once a rule is enforced, unless it is
explicitly written to allow it, the rule must be applied to all and
consistently.  To do otherwise is to bring disorder and abuse of power
into the situation.

The GA mailing list rules do not allow the posting limit rule to be
applied in any way except against all participants.

If the GA wishes to change the rules such amendments must be applied
in the appropriate manner.  The rules are not available for anyone to
amend at will, be they List Chairs or Monitors.

I support a call for the formation of a working group to study and
make recommendations on improving the list rules.

Until such time as amendments are made, the rules must be applied as
they are written.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html