Andrew Gaffney wrote: > Matthias Langer wrote: >> by banning non-dev contributors from this list some of you may feel >> better >> - but gentoo as a whole will probably suffer. silencing people doesn't >> make their opinions invalid. > > I keep seeing this argument over and over again. Many people are just > completely misunderstanding. > > This is not a blanket silencing of any non-dev on the list. This is > simply delaying the posting of messages from non-devs (and even devs > that have "improperly" moderated in the past). If nobody moderates a > particular message to the list within a set amount of time, the message > passes through. > > Making the list "moderated" isn't the same as making a channel moderated > on IRC. Anyone will still be able to speak, just with a slight delay, > which allows us to maintain a good signal-to-noise ratio, and hopefully > prevent re-occurrences of some of the nastier flamewars we've seen on > the list lately. >
Oh dear. "slight delay" in an email list forum? That's like saying "you can take part in this face-to-face conversation but you have to wait 30 seconds before you can say anything" In effect you reduce that person to an on-looker who can throw in the occassional comment. The comments themselves are reduced in their relevance or impact because by the time they are heard, the conversation has moved on. In effect, it's a ban: at the very least a two-tier system demarcated along ill-chosen lines (dev / non-dev). Calling the proposal a "ban" is not misunderstanding - it's simply foresight. At the very least, this is exactly the sort of reaction you get when you exercise poor change management in a context where all participants (dev and non-dev) are heavily invested in the success of the whole. W. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
