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

[Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>]

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