| 1 |
On Monday, October 3, 2016 12:17:50 PM EDT Raymond Jennings wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> This is important contextual information to include. Have you included |
| 4 |
> this in your appeal? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I have never appealed anything. What I would appeal has never been clear. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Other than appealing the 15 day ban. Which at the time enough noise was made |
| 9 |
on -core, and else where. Despite devrel's inability to deescalate the matter. |
| 10 |
It was within my power to just end the matter by going away, which I did. Thus |
| 11 |
no appealing the 15 day suspension. Though the appeal process may have taken |
| 12 |
15 days or more, so what would have been the point? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Since the 15 days suspension it is not clear what I would be appealing to the |
| 15 |
council. Would I be I appealing a decision of all of comrel/recruiting or from |
| 16 |
a single member? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
How does that work after appeal? Say I win, if comrel/recruiting already does |
| 19 |
not like me. Having council say you must do this is not likely to make that |
| 20 |
any better. Then what if comrel wants to come after me afterward? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I believe the appeal process is half baked, maybe a good concept but in |
| 23 |
reality how does it work, after the fact? If a appeal is denied no problem, |
| 24 |
but otherwise, problems... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> Then the council needs to be made aware of this. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
It likely should have made the council and others aware. But keep something in |
| 29 |
mind comrel frequently disregards. I did not want to escalate this matter. I |
| 30 |
did not want to make it bigger than it was, and get any others involved. There |
| 31 |
is lots of should have done, but I was trying to keep things to a minimum. The |
| 32 |
entire situation spiraled out of control. Others did not seem to be able to |
| 33 |
stop that, only I could by doing nothing sadly. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> I meant kicked out of the nfp list. Sorry for not being specific :P |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
I wasn't even kicked off that list. I just could not post for a period of |
| 38 |
time. But I never knew about any of that till a post was rejected. Which is |
| 39 |
why I sent a single post, of outrage and insult. The nerve to take actions |
| 40 |
against a former trustee on the -nfp list. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
See my comments, no one contacted me. I was not unruly in that post, nothing |
| 43 |
violating CoC. Just they did not like me posting after they tried to control |
| 44 |
me. I question the ban in the first place, thus every action afterward. |
| 45 |
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-nfp/message/ |
| 46 |
7ef33e6807214587fdb825bebe590887 |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
After that post, I unsubscribed, never to post again. Good job devrel/comrel. |
| 49 |
I hope they go to resume the work with the IRS I was doing that is still yet |
| 50 |
to be done. Though Trustees have made efforts since. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
> Since you have now included the context (that you were never notified |
| 53 |
> of the ban), you were apparently the victim of bad communcation that |
| 54 |
> accidentally set you up for a suspension you didn't actually earn. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
And it continued. The ban was never removed, the 15 day suspension also was |
| 57 |
never removed. Even though I resigned, these things were never done right. |
| 58 |
Nothing was done per policy, not a single thing... |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
> With this in mind, I fully support an appeal! |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Appeal to what? What took place in 2008 or stuff since? |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
I do not feel it is good use of the councils time to be dealing with such |
| 65 |
appeals. I do not believe such situation should ever exist. The purpose of |
| 66 |
comrel is to resolve matters. We should not have to rely on appeals, and I |
| 67 |
doubt comrel will be happy if their decisions are overturned on appeal. |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
> Not if you were never notified of your ban from nfp in the first place. |
| 71 |
> That turns this from a ban dodge to a simple accident. |
| 72 |
|
| 73 |
It does not matter. comrel/devrel will never enforce CoC against themselves. |
| 74 |
If that was the case, those harassing me citing the CoC on devrel at the time |
| 75 |
would have had their own action. |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
I was not acting in a vaccum, and others were responsible for my behavior just |
| 78 |
as much as I was, as they were participants. To punish one side is unfair, not |
| 79 |
to mention going after the wrong one because others were members of devrel. |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
I was a trustee, if anyone has a right to post to -nfp list it was a Trustee. |
| 82 |
Respect should be given to past trustees, and only in VERY extreme situations |
| 83 |
should action be taken against a former Trustee. I was elected as a Trustee, |
| 84 |
devrel is not elected.... |
| 85 |
|
| 86 |
> Have you pointed this out in an appeal? |
| 87 |
|
| 88 |
No appeal, I do not see myself ever wasting time with such. Even if I knew |
| 89 |
what I would be appealing specifically. |
| 90 |
|
| 91 |
-- |
| 92 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives