<div dir="ltr">I don't know this situation too well, but I do have a few questions and observations.<div><br></div><div style>* Was this person warned and offered an opportunity to correct his behavior before being banned?</div>
<div style>* Is there a clear and clearly communicated path for him for becoming unbanned in the future?</div><div style>* Even if the ban is the right thing to do, an email subject line to a public list stating that he has been banned could be taken as a very hostile and damaging act. Could this have been done more quietly and respectfully?</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>My experience with online community management and dynamics comes mostly from Wikipedia. One thing I think Wikipedia really gets right, and which has been inspiring to me, is to adhere as much as possible to the following:</div>
<div style>* A ban is fundamentally considered protective, not punitive; therefore it is typically time-limited, and will start off for a short duration and only escalate if the undesirable behavior continutes.</div><div style>
<br></div><div style>I agree that this will probably not be the last time something like this comes up. We should remember that the passion of Sudo Room members is one of the community's strengths, and may not always be expressed in a neat and tidy way.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Pete</div><div style><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Eddan Katz <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eddan@clear.net" target="_blank">eddan@clear.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>I'll 4th & 5th that.</div><div>I was trying to direct Giovanni's enthusiasm to be most useful on the Sudo-radio list. I still think that would be the most appropriate move.</div>
<div><br></div><div>It is in fact true that this is a huge and awesome open window in spectrum allocation and it would be a shame to miss it. How Giovanni has tried to go about convincing everyone of that has clearly been counter-productive. His promise to put together a brief note about how to register before Nov. 14 and what it takes to do that - would be very useful information.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I dare say though that if annoying is a criteria for being banned on this list - as a subjective matter many would be on thin ice. (No offense. Myself included.)<br><br>I think that ad hoc unilateral banning is an overextension of the individual power any Sudo-er should have. Something that was mentioned could justify removal from the Board. I would suggest we have more than one person with the power to ban people from our mailing list. And that those people be charged with doing do according to some predictable and ascertainable policy.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br>sent from <a href="http://eddan.com" target="_blank">eddan.com</a></div><div><div class="h5"><div><br>On Oct 31, 2013, at 7:47 AM, "Danny Spitzberg" <<a href="mailto:stationaery@gmail.com" target="_blank">stationaery@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<div>I wholeheartedly 2nd, 3rd the sentiment and suggestion to have a conversation (via email if not IRL) with Giovanni to tame his exuberance and use the list more judiciously. </div>
<div><br></div>
<div>"Banning" without first taking initiative to educate and include in understanding expecte practices is straight-up draconian -- eliminating not solving the problem.</div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><p>On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Sonja Trauss <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sonja.trauss@gmail.com" target="_blank">sonja.trauss@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></p><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>Banning someone for being annoying is something you guys will probably have to do often and you should definitely not do it. </p>
<div><br></div>
<div>As far as I can tell, what makes NB dis functional is their commitment to come one come all. "All" is not a great group, necessarily. If you are trying to build a club that is self-governing, it has to have people in it whose judgment you trust. There's nothing wrong with that I think. <br>
<div>
<br>On Thursday, October 31, 2013, GtwoG PublicOhOne wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<br>
IMHO that seems excessively harsh. Banning someone from the list is
similar enough to banning them from the space, that it seems to me
such things entail a collective action by the community rather than
an administrative action or unilateral action by e.g. a list admin
or someone with keys to the door. Spambots and overt criminals are
one thing, but people who are merely annoying in some way are
another. <br><br>
Really: With all the talk about anarcho-this and collectivist-that
and consensus-the-other-thing, seems to me that unilaterally banning
someone for being merely annoying is a pretty major contradiction to
core principles.<br><br>
If you or someone else wants to ban someone from the list or the
space, aside from emergencies such as bots and criminals, there are
dispute-resolution processes in place for that. <br><br>
So I'm going to stick my neck out and ask that you reinstate him on
the list, and initiate the use of whatever collective processes
exist for resolving the issues you have with him.<br><br>
-G<br><br><br>
=====<br><br><br><div>On 13-10-31-Thu 2:54 AM, Marc Juul
wrote:<br></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:24 AM,
GtwoG PublicOhOne <span dir="ltr"><<a>g2g-public01@att.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div> <br>
What happened? I thought the "john re" address had been
captured or spoofed by a spammer, but "giovanni_re" was
a legit user, most recently discussing the FCC
application. Did the _giovanni_re" identity turn out to
be some kind of wolf in sheep's clothing? -G<br></div>
</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>He was banned for spamming the list about the FCC
thing. Nine emails in nine different threads over the
course of a few hours about a project that he has stated
that he himself is not willing to work on. That is not
reasonable. He also showed up for the sudo room and
counter culture labs meetings and took an unreasonable
amount of the community's time trying to push this project
onto others. It appears that he has been doing similar
things at noisebridge and other tech groups in the bay
area.<br><br></div>
<div>In addition: Starting and running an LPFM station is no
minor undertaking, and Giovanni has continued his attempts
to push this on people even in the face of little
interest. This might have all been fine if he was actually
spearheading the project, but he is not.<br></div>
<div>
<br>
-- <br></div>
<div>Marc<br></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></blockquote></div></div><div class="im"><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>sudo-discuss mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org" target="_blank">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a></span><br>
<span><a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a></span><br></div></blockquote></div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>