Evan: As to you request to reconsider: already done. IT came up with a filtering mechanism as per Alan's original suggestion (I think). It will be implemented this week.
scott Evan Leibovitch wrote: > > > On 21 June 2010 11:05, Alan McKinnon <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > This is correct, but consider how these annoying things happen: > > User signs up for some social service and it tells him if he gives > it his > gmail account, it will invite all his friends so we can all have FUN!!!! > > > Not always. Sometimes the networking is intended to be serious, notably > on networks such as Linkedin which people have used to help get jobs. > (Indeed, a well done Linkedin profile doesn't look much different from > most resumes). And given the nature of certification, people want to > share their new-found status with others who might be looking for > certified people. > > I agree that the practice is rude but IMO the punishment is way out of > line with the serverity of the infraction. The person didn't try to take > down the list and did not try to hide intentions in the Subject line. > It's quite easy to program a filter in Gmail or elsewhere to > delete/trash such messages (or, even worse, mark them as spam, which > could in the long term be worse for the sender than a ban from LPI lists)... > > Usually I find that a polite message accomplishes the task of stopping > the disruption without having to go too far in punishment. I would agree > with those who have cautioned that, given the global nature of LPI, it > needs to consider that cultural definitions of rudeness vary quite a lot > from place to place. The target of the ban may not even realize that > what they're doing is annoying to others, and by the time they find out > they're banned. Then, as others have said, an awareness of this policy > can be exploited by jerks to deliberately get people banned by forging > rude email -- doing so is actually quite easy if someone really wants to. > > In other words, the reasons against such heavy-handed action are many, > and compelling. Too much room for abuse, too little understanding of > relative cultural norms. > > Scott, I humbly suggest that you reconsider. > > - Evan > -- Scott Lamberton Director of Communications Linux Professional Institute http://www.lpi.org [email protected] +1-905-269-0862 **Introducing www.lpimall.com in North America!** -- Scott Lamberton Director of Communications Linux Professional Institute http://www.lpi.org [email protected] +1-905-269-0862 **Introducing www.lpimall.com in North America!** _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
