Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

["William S. Lovell" <wsl@cerebalaw.com>]

For what it's worth, I believe that (a) the standards with
respect to forbidden language (no one wants to read, let
alone have directed at oneself, the language quoted below)
and (b) the new thought to cite the specific language on
which the suspension is based (out of simple fairness, due
process, and notice for future reference) are both excellent
decisions. I say again, take that sort of thing to ga-full, where
there are no rules, and leave ga to those who are willing to
abide by a really minimal standard of conduct so that the
work can  proceed. I'll also say again that it is precisely for
such purpose that ga-full was established -- as a place to
carry out the 'back alley' fights for those who cannnot resist
doing so, and with any kind of advancing maturity in the
ga correspondents the ga-full list will be silent -- but by that
fact alone serving its intended purpose.

Bill Lovell

Alexander Svensson wrote:

> Dear GA members,
>
> the purpose of the list rules is to enable focused debate to
> take place; if a list monitors decision captures much of the
> attention, it's not a good sign. As I have received several
> questions about the list monitor decision process, I would
> like to answer them, but this will be my last contribution
> about this case. (This is my personal posting, and not in the
> name of the list monitors.)
>
> We receive complaints about certain posts, and we only decide
> upon posts about which we receive complaints. Peter de Blanc
> states that there are "other postings by other people which
> did NOT result in suspensions" to which he apparently objects
> more than to Eric's, and I agree. But again: We stick to posts
> about which we receive complaints; we cannot both complain
> and judge. If you feel that postings by other people violate
> the list rules and should result in suspensions, complain
> about them.
>
> If you subscribe to GA with rules (instead of subscribing to
> GA-full, with or without a personal e-mail filter), you agree
> to the list rules. So far, most of those who have commented
> on the topic have argued that the list monitors have
> misapplied the rules, not that the list rules itself should
> be scrapped. Strangely enough, I find this encouraging.
>
> As to the postings themselves, I think that we should probably
> have made it clear to which portions of the postings the
> list monitors objected, in order to avoid the numerous
> "I couldn't find anything" replies (and I fully accept the
> blame for this). But I stand by the judgement that the
> language of the posts is insulting and offensive ("go stuff
> it", "you bad ass intellectuals", "you are pissing me and
> my dot commoner friends off"). Deciding on what level of
> personal attack is over the limit and which isn't is
> particularly hard. But I also stand by the judgement that
> the attacks on Kent ("go stuff it") and Patrick ("lied
> about his intentions and is glorified") clearly cross that
> line. This is the kind of explanation which in my personal
> opinion should probably have been included in the list
> monitors message; as said, I take the blame for this.
>
> The concerns have been voiced; I have at least tried to
> submit the missing bits of information; it is now up to Eric
> if he wants to ask the Chair to overturn the suspension
> (which has been done before). If there is still further
> need for discussion, it might be better to move it to
> GA-rules (or, if you like, drop me a private mail), so
> that work on the GA list can go on.
>
> Best regards,
> /// Alexander
> --
> 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

--
Any terms or acronyms above that are not familiar
to the reader may possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
GLOSSARY: http://www.icann.org/general/glossary.htm




--
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