Banning for meta-discusion [was RE: [uf-discuss] previously non-referenced in the spec"References"]

[Colin Barrett]

On Jan 3, 2007, at 5:11 PM, Christopher St John wrote:

> On 1/3/07, Tantek Çelik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> On 1/3/07 5:07 PM, "Joe Andrieu" <joe at andrieu.net> wrote:
>>
>> > For the record, I do object.
>>
>> Joe, thanks very much for your input.  You are the only person (in  
>> email or
>> IRC) who has objected to banning Andy.
>>
>
> I'm a little late, but for the record, I'd object to banning Andy as  
> well.
>
> I've been on lists where disruptive people had to be banned, but in
> this case Andy is both well-intentioned and often (*cough* choking
> this one out, hard to form the words) has good points.

This is definitely true. He has offered useful commentary, and I  
appreciate that. However, I definitely would like to interject that I  
think something does need to be done, and I applaud Tantek for taking  
action -- the situation was becoming increasingly annoying and. As  
someone who has, in another community, had to take moderative action  
against a well-intentioned, visible member, I understand how delicate  
something like this can be, and I approve of Tantek's decision to  
moderate Andy, rather than ban him.

I would also like to thank him for bringing this issue into the  
limelight so we can discuss it, and hopefully, help Andy to become a  
better member of the community.

-Colin