I would propose a more lenient rule:
- No flaming! (i.e. no ad hominem attacks, and no profanity) - Perpetrators who repeat the offense after being reprimanded will be put on moderation for a month. The list moderators will approve all mails except those that contain “flaming“. This way a member can still participate but the rest of us be spared from reading the insults. Am 11.12.2017 3:40 nachm. schrieb "Oliver Stegen" <[email protected]>: If we cannot agree on committee etiquette, i.e. rules about interaction which respects human dignity, we will not succeed in setting up rules about anything else either. I propose the following rule: - No flaming! (i.e. no ad hominem attacks, and no profanity) - Perpetrators who repeat the offense after being reprimanded will be blocked for one month. Feel free to discuss, add and/or amend. I still think we have to start somewhere to get our interaction to an acceptable level again. There are some widely agreed-upon netiquette standards out there (e.g. [1]-[3]; the slide inserted below is from [4]). I would have hoped that we don't need such rules but frequent flare-ups over the years have finally convinced me otherwise. I herewith *ask for votes on my proposed rule* within the usual 7-day deadline. Should discussion lead to additions or amendments (like including more detailed rules from the examples I listed below), the deadline will be postponed accordingly. Fwiw, Oliver [1] https://lifehacker.com/5473859/basic-etiquette-for- email-lists-and-forums [2] http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/7-netiquette-guidelines- writing-emails-forum-posts/ (esp. no.7) [3] https://www.simplehelp.net/2006/08/14/how-to-be-polite- while-youre-online-practicing-good-netiquette/ [4] http://images.slideplayer.com/47/11762279/slides/slide_3.jpg On 11-Dec-17 12:21, Milos Rancic wrote: On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Oliver Stegen <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: I support Michael's call to stop offensive rants. And to be precise: Miloš, I perceive your posts and attitude to be highly disruptive (and that is not just my personal opinion but based on the standards of committee etiquette of several other non-profit organisations I'm familiar with) - it is impossible to work together in the face of such accusations and language. Please change and interact with us in a civil way. If you cannot do that, I support Michael's suggestion to reconsider your participation here. I see this kind of emails useless. I've already said I will do the same whenever provoked and I've already said what you should do to "reconsider" my position here. _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
