Re: About expulsion requests
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On 16 Mar 2006, Christoph Berg stated:
> > I for myself would very much prefer the rumors, and maybe even
> > publically spreading (leaking?) the word on irc than to deliver the
> > expulsion request directly to every lurking slashdot/heise/whatever
> > writer on earth. There is a difference.
> We shall not hide problems?
Indeed. If the expulsion request is so shameful it should not
be made public, then maybe it is so shameful that it should not
be made at all. Both of those that are now public knowledge
(asuffield and svenl) seem far from being a "last resort"
action: they are tactics in hate campaigns, whatever we think
about the justification of those hate campaigns.
> Having said that, the expulsion document states that the
> person who is being subjected to the process is the one who gets to
> decide whether the process is public or private, so sending the
> original mail to a public list was an error.
I disagree. The candidate only seems to get that choice
after there are enough people gathered against them. When a
totally crap request collapses without getting Q supporters,
the request and supporters details stay in the star chamber.
That allows people to make bigoted expulsion requests with
relatively little personal reputation risk. They can keep
going with the witchhunt until the candidate walks away.
Hoping da-manager will detail recent requests in public,
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct