> Rules or policies should be enforced equally in an unbiased way. Even > moderated forums allow certain "unpermitted" discussions while deleting > / closing others immediately.
As much as I (and presumably everyone else) was getting sick of updates on the topic coming into my inbox, there's definitely an argument, given the position Jacob held, that it is/was at the very least Tor Project related - so tangentially on topic, And as noted, there are plenty of other discussions in the past that have wandered far, far off course. But, for my 2 cents, it's some of the bans I have an issue with. Even if we agree that the stuff related to Jacob was off-topic, for me personally, it still doesn't sit right. ja.talk was spamming the list with reposts - sure, chuck them a ban. But some of those responding (described as "ludicrous rape apologetics".... nice, classy....) were responding to say they felt the evidence doesn't weigh up. It's an emotive topic for many, so of course people are going to respond to repeated posts that colour someone elses character - especially early on when the evidence was best described as anecdotal and flimsy, and particularly if they happen to know the guy and believe (for whatever reason) that the allegations are false. Put it another way, regardless of forum, if you saw someone you knew being (to your mind) libelled and labelled a rapist, would you sit back or would you respond? IMO a warning would have sufficed - assuming there isn't other stuff that's happened in the background At the end of the day though it's the Tor Project's call. I'm not going to miss the JA related threads, though I may miss some of the input of some of those who've been banned. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
