Michael Banck wrote:
If josh got banned for his conduct, maybe deadcat should also get
banned?
Well, maybe, yeah. I am not a channel operator, though. Also note that
deadcat is AFAIK at least a semi-regular, i.e. he spends a considerable
amount of time in #debian and might be helpful at other times. I
believe we should be much more cautious to ban (semi-)regulars not just
on one or two bad occasions, the accusation that Debian Developers are
power-hungry freaks who tend to ban regulars for no good reason has been
voiced before, see this from the same log even:
[01:38] PerfDave: azeem: No, it is true. Every now and again a bunch of
Debian people come along, get all shitty and ban all the
regulars for no reason, then they get bored and fuck off again
and things return to usual :)
I don't think this is actually true, of course, but me should be very
sensitive to this in order to avoid alienating the helpful and good
regulars in #debian.
Are regulars who are helpful only "some of the time" but who act like
deadcat did at others really necessary? deadcat should have had, at the
very least, a stern warning. I don't think allowing such conduct without
so much as a word just because he might have been helpful at one time
and because nobody wants to scare him away is a good idea. deadcat's
messages might not offend other regulars, because they are used to that
sort of thing, but newcomers will take them more seriously. I'm more in
favor of being careful not to scare away the newcomers than being
careful not to offend regulars who should know better.
Michael Spang
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
