On 03/20/2018 08:08 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:54 PM, Benda Xu <hero...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> William Hubbs <willi...@gentoo.org> writes: >> >>> I do feel that this decision reflects badly on us as a community and >>> should be reversed immediately. The proper way to deal with people who >>> have bad behavior is to deal with them individually and not put a >>> restriction on the community that is not necessary. >> >> I agree with William. Dealing with individuals makes more sense. >> >> It boils down to an attitude of assuming outsiders are good (blacklist >> to ML) or bad (whitelist to ML) by default. > > Actually, I think it is more of a technical constraint. It is > basically impossible to blacklist somebody on a mailing list, since > all they need to do is roll up a new email address. > > I can think of various arguments for whitelisting or not whitelisting, > but it seems silly to blacklist. >
require active stewardship (moderation, blacklisting, etc.) entry barriers to participation (default deny / require whitelist) if there are limitations on free speech, someone has to bear the burden. for gentoo to have list moderation (blacklist approach) which isn't dysfunctional, the main barrier to resources will be the human resources end of things, not technical constraints. The tools themselves are easy enough to use, but people who are willing and able to use them, and with a clear guideline for how it needs done is a comrel issue which the foundation needs to sort out.
