Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2018
From: Craig A. Berry
February 9, 2018 22:12
Message ID: CA+vYcVzrWiXnA3CE83QXPN_3SzRsb3NLJdzaWgiC07jdXa+Ehg@mail.gmail.com
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 12:18 AM, Andreas Koenig
> 6. which moderators have access to the system that handles bans?
> 7. who has access to the logs of the system?
> 8. who has investigated, how the ban against Marc Lehmann was entered
> into the system? When and for how long was it entered by whom?
What "system"? You talk as if there were some big infrastructure
built specifically to handle the moderation policy and implement bans.
I am not a moderator so I don't really know the details, but I assume
the pumpking has to bug the perl.org mailing list admins to do
something to implement the ban, and then has to remember to bug them
again when it's time to lift the ban, and these people have to set
aside what they are getting paid for and their more pleasant volunteer
activities to do this. Verbally assaulting the person whose memory
one is depending on to get one's ban lifted may not be the best way to
ensure that it happens on time. And of course nothing prevents the
banned person from writing a polite reminder to the moderators when
the ban is supposed to be up; if it included an apology for past
behavior and an expression of intent to play by the rules going
forward, there's no telling how much good will might erupt.
> I hear the questions and I have to spell them out
> because apparently nobody else does, while still they actually are
> awaiting to be dealt with.
Bans are publicly announced on list. The moderation policy is
publicly documented. The names of the moderators are publicly
documented. The rationale for recent changes was publicly documented
in the commit message. Does it really matter whether the moderators
voted on the changes or just kept revising it until it was unanimous?
It seems so obviously sensible to me that I'd assume it was the
latter, but I can't imagine why I would care. I just don't see there
is anything that needs to be "dealt with" and most of these questions
sound, as Yves said, accusatory.