Alexandre François Garreau, le sam. 22 févr. 2020 22:43:36 +0100, a ecrit: > Le samedi 22 février 2020, 21:10:33 CET Samuel Thibault a écrit : > > Alexandre François Garreau, le sam. 22 févr. 2020 19:21:18 +0100, a > ecrit: > > > I recall some of them (likely one of those you’re thinking about is > > > the > > > same as I), > > > > Possibly. > > FDN right?
Yes. > > > > > you prefer to “aknowledge” this “will have to be done at some > > > > > point”. Is if there wasn’t any middle ground for compromision > > > > > there. > > > > > > > > Sometimes you can't find any. > > > > > > No, you can’t know. > > > > Strictly speaking, sure, but at some point when things only get worse > > and worse, it's way better to resort to exclusion than continuing to see > > a project get stuck due to only one person, even if with several dozen > > years you might find a solution. > > However I’m still dubitative about the fact a single person could get ALL > A PROJECT project stuck alone, without exception. I was indeed taking an extreme example. But a much simpler case would be somebody calling everything names, thus driving away newcomers, who will wonder that the heck this project is about. > > How different is this from exclusion? > > It is different in that that anybody have the free choice of moderation, or > not. You could have your own moderation filters overriding those of your > trusted friends, you could change the amount of trust you give to each, > etc. Ok, so newcomers would have to know about it and make it work to avoid the nasty messages? Samuel
