[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Should mailing list bans be published?

On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 04:05:05PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:08:42PM +0000, Bart Martens wrote:
> > > > > What do the rest of you think?
> > > > I suggest we keep things civil, with respect for the persons involved. 
> > > > It's really not up to Debian to harm someone's reputation, and that could
> > > > reflect bad on Debian's reputation.
> > > I don't understand this argument.  What harm comes to Debian's reputation
> > > from showing publically that we do not tolerate abusive behavior on our
> > > mailing list?
> > The harm that could come to Debian's reputation is that Debian could be
> > perceived as an organization that harms people's reputation by judging them in
> > public about their behavior on the mailing lists.
> Ok, thanks for explaining.  This isn't something that concerns me at all,
> but I understand that it concerns you.

Nor I. The fact of the matter is that forcing folks to think twice
before posting complete garbage to the mailing lists is nothing but
good. If we get the reputation for harming the reputations of folks
who harass and abuse others, well, fine by me -- just don't troll the

> > > > Approaches I could support :
> > > > - post the bans with reasons on debian-private
> > > > - or maintain a list of bans with reasons in a text file on a Debian machine
> > > >   where DDs can read this info.
> > > 
> > > I think posting this on debian-private is not as good as posting it
> > > publically, for some of the reasons mentioned in my original mail.  (E.g.,
> > > making it clear to outsiders that certain behavior will not be tolerated.)
> > That can be made clear without harming individuals' reputations.
> How do you think it can be made clear?  We do have a list code of conduct
> already (<http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct>), but the rules
> are vague; past attempts to make them more explicit have foundered.  So
> while in theory there are other ways to make this clear, in practice it
> seems to be quite difficult.

Indeed. The "I know it when I see it" method isn't very good to explain
the rules; a list of behavior that caused bans would be pretty nice in
this regard.

> > > I don't think maintaining a list "somewhere" is sufficient; there should be
> > > some notification to the project when the bans take place.
> > I can imagine that some DDs prefer to receive notifications, which can be
> > obtained by simply using diff in crontab.
> That would fail to provide any of the benefits outlined in my original mail.

+1 for publishing bans.

There's a line between privacy and transparency; and this isn't a
privacy issue (indeed, the lists are public) - bad behavior in public
almost warents discipline that's public, otherwise folks (such as
myself, who didn't even know there was a ban) might continue to think
that listmasters would turn a blind eye so such emails.

Happy to hear of the ban, happy to hear of this discussion; +1


 .''`.  Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org>
: :'  : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'`  4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352  D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
 `-     http://people.debian.org/~paultag

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: