| 1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Tue Jun 05 2007, 05:00:28PM CDT] |
| 2 |
> As a member of the Council, I find it personally offensive that the |
| 3 |
> Proctors have taken this action on what wasn't even a "problem" thread. |
| 4 |
> I'm sick of this. I call for the immediate disbanding of the Proctors. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> As much as I dislike many of the posts from geoman/ciaranm, they really |
| 7 |
> had not done anything worthy of being banned. I ask that this ban is |
| 8 |
> undone *immediately* and that the Proctors have their powers revoked. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
*Sigh* I, too, was quite surprised to see people banned for what |
| 11 |
appeared to be reasonable behavior (in this case). That said, I wish |
| 12 |
you'd started w/ a more temperate response, instead of going all nuclear |
| 13 |
on the proctors. It's likely to create some hard feelings, and that |
| 14 |
just makes things harder to fix. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
So, how about using this incident as an opportunity for a calm |
| 17 |
discussion about the mandate and role of the proctors? The proctors |
| 18 |
clearly felt that they should shut down this thread _before_ things |
| 19 |
got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were |
| 20 |
not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to |
| 21 |
be a proctor directive.) Or are people really looking for the proctors |
| 22 |
to get involved only when behavior is particularly egregious? Is there |
| 23 |
a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked entirely, as |
| 24 |
has been suggested? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Well reasoned thoughts and opinions welcome. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-g2boojum- |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Grant Goodyear |
| 31 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 32 |
g2boojum@g.o |
| 33 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
| 34 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
Archives