On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 11:13:43AM -0800, Darren Benham wrote: > > 2. Having that, there should be policy allowing the dismissal of people that > > gratitiously violate policy. > > It's implicit. Do we need to make it explicit? What is "gratitiously"? > Who'll make the accusation? Where will the burden of proof be? (ie. was it > gratitious? not was it a violation). This is another thing I think can be > handled via peer-pressure. If you(general) think someone is "gratitiously > violating policy" bring it up on one of the lists and let the whole project > decide and decide action on a case by case basis.
I agree that sounds fine, but there is nothing anywhere that I've seen that gives the Project that capability. > > -- > Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also. > ========================================================================= > * http://benham.net/index.html <>< * > * -------------------- * -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- ---------------* > * Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 * > * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++* > * KC7YAQ * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- * > * Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ * > * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ * > * -------------------- * ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------* > =========================================================================
