Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Suspension of William Walsh for mass postings

[Sotiris <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

To be fair, I think the lot of them should be suspended along with William.
Everyone on the list courtesy of DPF *know* that there is a 5 post limit.  It was
mentioned often enough during the Election for Chair and Co-Chair, indeed many of
us checked ourselves at the five post limit... even announced our intentions when
doing so..  it was bandied about quite a bit.  Everybody knows the rules.  The fact
that there were many (or few) is largely irrelevant.  The rules were broken and the
requisite penalty must be enforced in each case.  There is no degrees of breaking a
rule, or a law.  Once a set of rules breaks down, the machine breaks down.
Disorder and chaos soon follow.  Also, I think all of them could use a break from
each other, anyway (or at least in the public eye).   Speaking for myself, I am
tired of having the spiteful exchanges cluttering my Inbox.  As I am of the
democratic persuasion, I do not have a killfile.  Even when I did try to implement
one, my convictions could not allow it.  I still look to find one piece of import
in every message...  But, my patience is wearing thin.  I do not wish to see
another IDNO debacle on this List.  Ban the lot of them for the two week period.

Selah,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

david@farrar.com wrote:

> > The list monitor finds reasonable proof that William Walsh
> > <william@userfriendly.com> has sent 13 postings to the GA list dated April
> > 17, 12 postings dated April 15, and 10 postings dated April 13.
> >
> > He has been previously warned that this posting rate is not consistent with
> > previously announced daily posting limits for the GA list.
> >
> > His posting privilleges are therefore suspended for 2 weeks, ending on May
> > 2, 2001.
>
> I make no comment about the content of Mr Walsh's posts as this ruling did not
> judge them.  He has been suspended only for breaching the posting limit.
>
> Having perused the archives for this period I find the following have also
> breached the 5 posts per day limit.
>
> Chris Ambler - breached on 12, 14, 15 April
> Bradley Thorton - breached (by double) on 15 April
> Patrick Corliss - breached by double on 14 and 16 April
> Roeland Meyer - breached on 11, 12, 13, 15 and 17 April
> Dave Crocker - breached on 13 and 14 April
> Kent Crispin - breached on 17 April
>
> I am in no way asking for these people to be "disciplined" also.  I merely
> suggest that the decision to suspend Mr Walsh on *the grounds stated* be
> revisited as it seems on the published grounds, there are another half dozen or
> more people who have done much the same.
>
> Deciding whether a post is abusive or not is always going to be a subjective
> judgement of some sort.  However applying a posting limit should IMO be done
> far more objectively.
>
> DPF
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

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