[sudo-discuss] johnny ban / process?

[Marina Kukso]

aside from any other issues, i sincerely doubt that this is a game to
johnny given that he wants to participate in the space..

let's focus on "restorative" instead of "retributive" - johnny seems (to
me) to want to follow the process in a good faith way. for anyone who is
more familiar with the omni and sudo remediation process than i am, any
ideas on how to move forward from here?

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 7:24 AM, robb <sf99er at gmail.com> wrote:

> #swish?
>
> really, this is all just a game to you johnny?
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 3:46 AM, Patrik D'haeseleer <patrikd at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Johnny,
>>
>> Is it true that Lesley's has a temporary restraining order against you?
>> That seems to rise above mere "gossip and accusations", and seems like it
>> would be substantial enough to trigger at least a temporary ban.
>>
>> Also, it's the nature of interpersonal conflicts that there may not be
>> any more than "accusations" available to make a decision on. So if someone
>> states that they feel unsafe around another person, it may be justified to
>> remove that other person from the space at least temporarily, until a
>> better informed decision can be reached.
>>
>> Patrik
>>
>> On Jul 20, 2016 2:16 AM, "Johnny" <mostmodernist at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> that link says if "someone's safety is at risk, a temporary ban may be
>> placed".  it says nothing about how, and obviously is meant to deal with
>> clear present safety issues, not gossip and accusations.
>>
>> abusing that vague apparatus of the super-system to ban people on mere
>> claims is totally fascist and supremacist behavior.
>>
>> defending it is also fascist.
>>
>> calling out for the record that Marc, Matt, Cere, Sigma, Jeremy are
>> fascists for consent to abuse system and unjustly override process without
>> sudo quorum; ya'll better not step on any cracks!
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Marc Juul <juul at labitat.dk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Johnny <mostmodernist at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Marc,
>>>>
>>>> No quorum you say?  Sub-Section 3.2.2 "Maintaining Safe Space During
>>>> Conflict Resolution" states that my ban would have had to been ratified
>>>> online without quorum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The sudo room space, being part of Omni, is also subject to all Omni
>>> rules, including the Omni safer space policy which I linked previously.
>>>
>>> --
>>> marc/juul
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20160720/c3da026f/attachment.html>