On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:19 PM ben...@gmail.com <benh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > permanent bans were given to multiple individuals, with no possibility for > > appeal > > I don't disagree with the bans, but this part -- the "no possibility for > appeal" seems very ... totalitarian. What if a mistake was made? (Again, not > saying it was here, but in general, to err is human.) I'm comparing to > various legal systems, in which there is almost always the possibility of > appeal, even for heinous crimes. Another aspect is that sometimes people > change and realize their mistake later, sometimes even because of an > excommunication like this. What's the rationale for "no possibility of > appeal"?
My take on this is that if someone has chosen for whatever reason to attack a project, an appeals process just provides another mechanism for them to consume project resources. Also, in practice, we are all pseudonyms here anyhow. If people change their ways, they will likely benefit from adopting a new pseudonym that is free of any toxicity attached to the old one. Finally, this is a process run by human beings, not computer code or even a legal system. There can always be adjustments and exceptions over time if there are good reasons for them. Ian -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAOyqgcV8OnZWJKXbxz4negUipa2Vd3v_%3DF2PNZtdt3WcTuYDVg%40mail.gmail.com.
