+1 It's true that everyone can setup their own filters, but why should they have too.
You don't get to conduct yourself however you want without consequence. Cheers Joe On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 6:52 PM, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3 January 2018 at 17:28, Chase Peeler <chasepee...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think self moderation still solves this. If the person is disruptive > > enough, eventually enough people will block them and there won't be many > > instances of them getting quoted or poisoning the thread. > > > > If certain people decide to engage them, then others will start to block > > them as well. > > > > That all sounds like a lot of wasted effort. If we're not careful, > endorsing that behaviour would end up with people sharing mail filter > definitions, proxying the list through a shared filter, or just setting up > a rival discussion forum. All of which just distract us further from making > PHP better. > > > > > Maybe, maybe not. Either way, I don't want you making that decision for > > me. I should be allowed to determine at which point someone's negative > > contributions outweigh their positive ones to a point that I no longer > feel > > they are productive. > > > > > I think maybe we have a different view of what a list like this is. To me, > it's a forum where we're collaborating to a common aim; it has an existence > in its own right, and we collectively shape that existence. I may be > misunderstanding, but it sounds like you view it more as a public space > where you can find individuals to communicate with, and you retain the > right to shape those communications. Does that sound a reasonable > characterisation? I'm not seeking to criticise, only to understand where > this idea of "making the decision for me" comes from, because to me, > moderation doesn't seem like a personal decision which is being taken away. > > Regards, > -- > Rowan Collins > [IMSoP] >
