For those who care about debian-devel-announce
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Posting permissions to debian-devel-announce revoked after making a point.
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Suffield has lost his posting permission to debian-devel-announce
after making a rather sarcastic point that off-topic mails to this list are
unwanted.
Raphaël Hertzog sent a mail to debian-devel-announce that deals with a fork
of Debian instead of Debian itself and was hence off-topic and not suitable
for this list.
In response to this, and to make it totally clear that debian-devel-announce
is for information about the development in Debian and not for anything
that some people happen to be interested in, he used a subject even more
off-topic and added a link to a picture of two kissing women. This in turn
was misunderstood by several people and considered hurting for the Debian
community.
In response to that mail the listmasters have revoked his permission to
send announcements to the debian-devel-announce list. This ban is not
time-limited but permanent until a situation arises where this ban is a
serious obstacle to his job within the Debian project.
Andrews mail was discussed quite controversly and should have resulted in a
more sensible recognition about which content is suitable for the
debian-devel-announce list and which content isn't.
The charter for this list says: "Announcements for developers".
The reason given for revoking Andrew's permissions to send announcements to
the debian-devel-announce list is that his mail is considered causing harm
to the project.
Since this mail also mentions Andrews sarcastic posting
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/01/msg00009.html
I may lose posting permissions as well.
However, for me it is important that the Debian project handles
transparently. For many people it is recognised as a very well organised
and openly maintained project. When public incidents result in such a
reaction or even in the expellation of a Developer, I believe that the
reaction should be made public as well.
Additionally, for me personally this revokation sets a bad precedence about
future similar actions. Hence, at least the other developers should be
warned.
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDziRqELuA/Ba9d8YRAg5qAJwJ2xofhSXro3QPxclxFTVTuI/cIgCfTwQC
DLJ8+KxhmoM8wioTxQil4yg=
=la1s
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDznWBW5ql+IAeqTIRAiF5AKCZIfIkEOEpKVAH509Uy1+YgFTk0gCdHWj5
8+DvKTazzID3hzMxWBWnASA=
=hxXR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: