Re: [ga] Motion to the Chair

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

Hi Danny

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:03:42 EDT, Danny Younger wrote:

> 3 violations --  60 posts total -- Patrick Corliss -- daily posts on days
> of violation -- (8,7,8)

We had this before, Danny, and I spent hours proving to somebody
that the time difference in Australia is such that excess postings may
be easily misjudged.  One of the things that takes the List Monitors time
is substantiating the allegations, discussing the procedures, agreeing
with each other and forming a consensus.

It's like a mini-GA and you know how hard that can be.

And I do wish you would stop making these pronouncements from "on high".
Why don't you just complaint to [ga-abuse] like everybody else?  Or even set
a good example by posting to the [ga-rules] mailing list?

That you (and others) don't, CAUSES much of the problem with noise.

The easiest way to solve the process is to go back to a systems of one list
monitor.  William X. Walsh seems to be happy with the idea so I suppose
we just need your approval and it's done.  But I like the two incumbents
and would leave them alone to do their work.

You also must remember that they have other things to do in their life.

> It is also reasonable to assume that a great many of the complaints
> forwarded to ga-abuse concern individuals who post prolificly.   If
> this is the case, then it further becomes reasonable to conclude that
> excessive postings are a major part of our problem with this list.

Danny, you really do leave yourself wide open sometimes.  All you need
to do is check your facts first.  And that should be easy if you are a
member of [ga-abuse] yourself -- which, as far as I can tell, you are.

Excessive postings are a problem because *proving it* is a lot of work.
I'm sure you realise that which is why you didn't go the extra step and
do the calculations properly -- by time zones.

Including me in your list (without consultation) might seem like a fair
thing.  In fact, it just undermines your case if I prove you wrong.

Before you can reduce the limit to two, you must enforce the existing
limit first.  I like the idea of being flexible but see your idea as
overkill.

Remember, they can just do what Jefsey suggested.  Post five on
one list.  When your credit runs out, switch to another, etc.  And
there's nothing we can do to stop that sort of misbehaviour.

If you want to make the system work, you can't leave loopholes.

Please provide me with details.  I will see if can rebut your allegations.

Sheesh, Danny !!

Best regards
Patrick Corliss


--
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