| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 2008.07.14 07:35, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 5 |
> Can people be entirely banned from Gentoo? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> - What would such a ban include? Some ideas -- the person could not: |
| 8 |
> - Post to any gentoo mailing list; |
| 9 |
> - Post to gentoo bugzilla; |
| 10 |
> - Participate in #gentoo- IRC channels; |
| 11 |
> - Contribute to gentoo (hence my corner case of a security fix) |
| 12 |
> except |
| 13 |
> perhaps through a proxy; |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
All of these things require the co-operation of the banee. |
| 16 |
email addresses to subscribe to lists are unlimited and easy to |
| 17 |
change. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
IRC nicks can be registered for the asking. |
| 20 |
Does #gentoo- include non-English channels? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
We should not make rules we cannot enforce, the best we can do it to |
| 23 |
make it difficult for the bannee to do these things without pushing |
| 24 |
them to the trouble of swapping email addresses, IRC nicks etc. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> - Why would we do it? |
| 28 |
We wouldn't - its more trouble than its worth to enforce. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> - Under whose authority would it happen? |
| 32 |
*rel against 'contrubutors' with a history. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> - Would it be reversible? What conditions would cause this? |
| 36 |
N/A |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Since the banned person couldn't participate in Gentoo, we'd never |
| 39 |
> know whether anything changed. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> - How would one appeal this? Would there be a chance to respond |
| 42 |
> before |
| 43 |
> the ban? |
| 44 |
Why would there be any right of appeal at all? |
| 45 |
Its not like the bannee would have had no warning. |
| 46 |
While I don't see this being implemented at all, its really a desparate |
| 47 |
last measure. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> - Would moderating the gentoo-dev mailing list obsolete this concept? |
| 51 |
No. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
It would make it less likely to be used as potential banees would get |
| 54 |
gentle tugs on their leashes more frequently, as they currently do in |
| 55 |
#gentoo and on the forums. Even there, some contributors are |
| 56 |
permanently banned and a some are known to have come back with new |
| 57 |
identities. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Following on that model, I could go with a permanent ban on an online |
| 60 |
identity without a permanent ban on the individual holding it, so that |
| 61 |
if they come back with a new identity, after a suitable period and |
| 62 |
behave, they are permitted to remain. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
That also gets around all the 'mole' hunting. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
> -- |
| 68 |
> Thanks, |
| 69 |
> Donnie |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
> Donnie Berkholz |
| 72 |
> Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 73 |
> Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com |
| 74 |
> |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
- -- |
| 77 |
Regards, |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
Roy Bamford |
| 80 |
(NeddySeagoon) a member of |
| 81 |
gentoo-ops |
| 82 |
forum-mods |
| 83 |
treecleaners |
| 84 |
trustees |
| 85 |
|
| 86 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 87 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
| 88 |
|
| 89 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkh7mbgACgkQTE4/y7nJvas+ggCcC3QfJLRrXt2NiM3U4E/5uhfK |
| 90 |
P7oAnREQU5IVGmFeU2G1jfYGcedgu6mE |
| 91 |
=FCE4 |
| 92 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 93 |
|
| 94 |
-- |
| 95 |
gentoo-council@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives