A quick google search with his name brought me this gem:
https://goo.gl/images/94Nics
In my experience, only predators use this sort of rationale.

Since nettime is a mostly male space, I’d like to propose that we adopt a 
community guideline asking participants to watch their misogyny and, when they 
accidentally engage in women hating behaviors, to listen and take time to 
reflect. Maybe in the form of a temporary ban. If they continue with 
misogynistic behavior after multiple instances, I do propose we ban them. I 
don’t see any reason to tolerate people who don’t respect women on a list with 
already implicit rules, just so we can avoid making any explicit guidelines.

I don’t think that would be too hard to follow. This list doesn’t lack male 
voices, so no one has to be afraid of it turning into a “witch hunt.”

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 6, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Menno Grootveld <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> Although I certainly do not share all of Alexander's notions and ideas, and 
> although I do not discount the possibility that he actually is one of these 
> 'trolls', I don't support banning him from nettime permanently. I have to 
> admit that I am a bit shocked by the eagerness with which some people seem to 
> be wanting to 'shut him up,' as I do not consider this a productive way of    
>    having a discussion. The problem remains of course that a lot of people 
> feel offended by his posts and that the discussion I am referring to has 
> gotten out of hand recently, so the best solution would probably be to put 
> him temporarily on 'moderation watch'.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Menno
> 
> Op 06-11-18 om 15:16 schreef Felix Stalder:
>> At the moment, nettime is largely unmoderated, with a very small number
>> of people set to manual approval by the moderators.
>> 
>> The difficult part is, of course, to decide when to put someone on
>> "moderation watch". Personally, I've been quite reluctant to do that,
>> not for some absolutist notion of free speech -- there is no right to
>> attack and denigrate people, no right to produce confusion and hatred,
>> and no right to bore everyone to death with belaboring the same points.
>> Also, nettime still has a collective focus, which involves trying to
>> think through the contemporary condition from a point of view of
>> producers of media culture (if such a thing can be still delineated).
>> 
>> The reason I'm reluctant to do is that I think it's better to draw such
>> boundaries collectively, to use these moments to rethink what the list
>> is. This is, admittedly, a somewhat "inefficient" approach and it often
>> creates not very productive loops until everyone gets so annoyed that
>> they speak up, but I personally don't know a better way.
>> 
>> So, please help us to respond more quickly by speaking up on the list or
>> sending us private mails.
>> 
>> Felix
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 06.11.18 12:19, Andreas Broeckmann wrote:
>>> friends, i'm an active lurker on this list since 1996; my answer to
>>> angela's question ("What is Nettime's policy on whether or not it should
>>> give fascists a platform from which to recruit?") would be that
>>> "nettime" probably doesn't have a "policy" on anything, other than the
>>> openness to questions; i'm sure there are people here who can put this
>>> in a more nuanced theoretical language, but i imagine the list and the
>>> discourse it supports as "in flux" and as something that takes its shape
>>> through the things that people write, and through the ways in which they
>>> respond to each other. - in the given case, the point for me would be
>>> not to ask what some (general) "policy" might be, but to state clearly
>>> and concretely that i'm against allowing anything that smacks of fascist
>>> trolling or recruitment. a statement like this constitutes the quality
>>> of this list which has, as its "policy", only a certain, vague
>>> collective spirit which requires critical voices like angela's to
>>> express their opinion. therefore: i support ted's decision to moderate
>>> some of the contributions since, given 22 years of trust-building, i
>>> believe he is acting in the spirit of the list and the discourse it
>>> serves to constitute.
>>> (not sure whether this is an answer to julia's question.)
>>> regards,
>>> -a
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 05.11.18 um 01:57 schrieb Julia Röder:
>>>> about that
>>>> 
>>>>  > dear angela,
>>>>  > relax dear.
>>>>  > it is ok.
>>>>  > noone is recruiting anyone here.
>>>>  > chill.
>>>>  > best,
>>>>  > w
>>>> 
>>>> so, is that it? silence about this from the whole list except from
>>>> angela?
>>>> do you all not say anything because you think this is trolling or this
>>>> is normal??
>> 
>> 
>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
> 
> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Reply via email to