On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:08:11PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> > > Can we just generate that procmail file or at least the section in
> > > question?
> >
> > Not easily, no.
>
> It's difficult to ima
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:08:11PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> > Can we just generate that procmail file or at least the section in
> > question?
>
> Not easily, no.
It's difficult to imagine this presenting a problem. Procmail reads on-disk
config
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> Can we just generate that procmail file or at least the section in
> question?
Not easily, no.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
"Do you need [...] [t]ools? Stuff?"
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomi
Can we just generate that procmail file or at least the section in
question? We can take this to private email if you like and blog about
next steps and or progress.
- "Don Armstrong" wrote:
> There isn't any. You write procmail in the correct configuration file
> to add a ban. You remove pr
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> Obviously the parties responsible for empowering me to do this are on
> this list because they would ban me if I called them mean names.
> Responsible parties, please let me know where to start reading the
> code for the existing ban process.
There isn'
- "Russ Allbery" wrote:
> The actual code may be extremely simple, only two or three lines. It's
> getting the right lines in the right place in a way that works for the
> people who are doing the day-to-day work that's the hard part.
I hereby do solemnly volunteer to write an "coc unban [AD
Ean Schuessler writes:
> - "Charles Plessy" wrote:
>> I guess that the story is simpler than this: time-limited bans do not
>> seem to be supported natively in Debian's mailing list engine
>> (SmartList), so if one wants to see our listmasters use time-limited
>> bans more often, then somebo
- "Charles Plessy" wrote:
> I guess that the story is simpler than this: time-limited bans do not seem to
> be supported natively in Debian's mailing list engine (SmartList), so if one
> wants to see our listmasters use time-limited bans more often, then somebody
> has to spend time to implem
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Also, the concept of lifting bans only on demand creates a black list as a
> byproduct, and it is strange to imagine such a list in 10 years containing
> random people who happened to have misbehaved some time ago, of whom we had no
> news since, but who
Le Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 07:09:15AM +0900, Norbert Preining a écrit :
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > limits as placing a permanent ban, which isn't what I mean. By not
>
> But what it is. It is a permanent ban that *might* be lifted
> by listmasters' graciousness.
>
> So perpetra
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
> limits as placing a permanent ban, which isn't what I mean. By not
But what it is. It is a permanent ban that *might* be lifted
by listmasters' graciousness.
So perpetrators have to beg for redemption.
Hail to the King, we are back to what I always cl
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Francesco Ariis wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:13:55PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > I generally don't place specific time limits, because I don't believe
> > in punitive action...
>
> I'd consider a ban without length limitation is way more punitive
> than, say, an x-w
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 09:34:47PM +0200, Francesco Ariis wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:13:55PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > I generally don't place specific time limits, because I don't believe
> > in punitive action...
>
> M, I'd consider a ban without length limitation is way more
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:13:55PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I generally don't place specific time limits, because I don't believe
> in punitive action...
M, I'd consider a ban without length limitation is way more punitive
than, say, an x-weeks ban, both being more severe than a warning.
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> However it does presume some statute of limitation on ban length.
> Don's message earlier in this thread does not indicate any particular
> ban length in this particular case. It's not clear to me whether this
> is an indefinite ban, or one subject to
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 10:02:12PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> As I've mentioned in previous discussions of this topic, I'm quite
> comfortable with the thought that lightweight process means that I could
> get banned for an ill-conceived message even though I *am* actively
> involved in Debian de
Norbert Preining schrieb:
> On Mon, 08 Sep 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
>> This is by design; the people who make decisions in Debian are the
>> people who do the work.
>
> Wow, so you are telling me that I am not doing work?
You are doing *other* work. And where you are doing the work, you get
to
Norbert Preining writes:
> On Mon, 08 Sep 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
>> > Let's be frank: GR is such a heavyweight process, that it's
>> > impractical for overriding "small" decisions like this one.
>>
>> This is by design; the people who make decisions in Debian are the
>> people who do the wor
On Mon, 08 Sep 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Let's be frank: GR is such a heavyweight process, that it's
> > impractical for overriding "small" decisions like this one.
>
> This is by design; the people who make decisions in Debian are the
> people who do the work.
Wow, so you are telling me th
On Mon, 08 Sep 2014, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Don Armstrong , 2014-09-05, 10:04:
> >If anything more than a warning occurs, it is announced on
> >debian-private@, which enables Debian Developers to review the actions
> >that listmaster@ has taken, and override them via GR.
>
> Let's be frank: GR is s
* Don Armstrong , 2014-09-05, 10:04:
If anything more than a warning occurs, it is announced on
debian-private@, which enables Debian Developers to review the actions
that listmaster@ has taken, and override them via GR.
Let's be frank: GR is such a heavyweight process, that it's impractical
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Mailing list bans are not done in public to avoid harming the
> reputation of the individuals banned. If the individual in question
> wants the ban to be disclosed publicly, they can email listmaster@,
> and we will do so.
Zenaan Harkness requested that
* Mason Loring Bliss (ma...@blisses.org) wrote:
> It just strikes me that we can do better, and I'd like to see us do so. I
> value Debian as the most relevant vehicle for distributing and promoting free
> software in existence by a very wide margin. The community already values
> many important th
Mason Loring Bliss writes:
> It just strikes me that we can do better, and I'd like to see us do so.
Personally, I think everything you've proposed so far would be doing worse
than what we're doing now in terms of the desired outcome here, which is
to keep our mailing lists useful, productive pr
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:24:59AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Debian does not ban people from the mailing lists for expressing dissenting
> opinions. If Zenaan told you this was the cause of his ban, then he has
> deliberately misled you.
No, no, he didn't suggest that. His concern was that
Mason Loring Bliss writes:
> Alright. Thank you. I would like to see some public process for review
> machinery, and I'd like to see a requirement that rather than "no
> objections" there be a quorum for a banning decision, but that these
> actions are recorded in debian-private seems sufficient.
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 12:38:01PM -0400, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
> I received a rather dismayed email from Zenaan Harkness last night, saying
> that he's been blocked from posting to any Debian mailing lists as a result
> of his emails to debian-project regarding the recent CoC discussion.
> Wh
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 10:04:19AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> If the complaint warrants a ban or warning, the opinions of other
> listmasters is canvassed for a short period of time, and if there are no
> objections, the action proceeds. If anything more than a warning occurs, it
> is announced
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
> Was there process involved with his expulsion, or did the person who
> told him he had been blocked acting alone?
The process for temporary or permanent bans on Debian mailing lists is:
1) Someone makes a complaint to listmaster@
2) A listmaster r
I received a rather dismayed email from Zenaan Harkness last night, saying
that he's been blocked from posting to any Debian mailing lists as a result
of his emails to debian-project regarding the recent CoC discussion.
While I thought his points were entirely valid - the actual "offense" noted
wa
30 matches
Mail list logo
