On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:38:21 Anurag wrote:
Continue flaming each other, and both of you will be put on moderation for a week.
frankly I do not understand this. Neither of them are newbies. Both of them are valuable members of this list. What are you going to achieve by moderating them for a week? Are you going to counsel and reform them? Or do you feel 'punishment' will make them 'repent' (if they have committed some crime)? This whole 'crime and punishment' outlook does not sit well in a community like this. Agreed, obvious spammers should be banned (not moderated). Newbies doing things because they dont know the rules should be politely corrected by peer pressure. Apart from that, nothing constructive will be achieved by moderation which is an archaic concept from the dark ages and more suited to places like china where the whole country is under moderation.
Also moderation is not good for the moderator. When an admin starts moderating people, however nice a guy he is, he starts to get a little power mad. I was once kicked from a channel by a guy who did it just to show me that he had been granted ops on the channel!
If you moderate non-newbies, they will most probably leave the list and never rejoin. And the community will be the loser.
In this case, the discussion is highly relevant as it gives a clear pointer as to why so few women appear on community mailing lists. This is a problem that worries a lot of us. I personally was horrified at the sexist way a woman respected in the community was addressed as 'my dear'. And am appreciative of the fact that she is holding her own.
Please do not bring up things like 'moderation' and threats to ban people who are non-spammers. Rely on peer pressure. That is the way a community grows. Check the mailing lists around the country - the more heavily moderated a list is, the faster it dies down. For the past few years both Chennai and Mumbai lists have been very free with the admins keeping a very low profile. Please continue this.
2009/2/18 Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org:
frankly I do not understand this. Neither of them are newbies. Both of them are valuable members of this list. What are you going to achieve by moderating them for a week? Are you going to counsel and reform them? Or do you feel 'punishment' will make them 'repent' (if they have committed some crime)? This whole 'crime and punishment' outlook does not sit well in a community like this. Agreed, obvious spammers should be banned (not moderated). Newbies doing things because they dont know the rules should be politely corrected by peer pressure. Apart from that, nothing constructive will be achieved by moderation which is an archaic concept from the dark ages and more suited to places like china where the whole country is under moderation.
Not allowing their posts in seemed like the best way to stop them from posting even after repeated request, and give some time to cool down.
In this case, the discussion is highly relevant as it gives a clear pointer as to why so few women appear on community mailing lists. This is a problem that worries a lot of us. I personally was horrified at the sexist way a woman respected in the community was addressed as 'my dear'. And am appreciative of the fact that she is holding her own.
Sure. We can always have a new "peaceful" thread to discuss this issue.
Please do not bring up things like 'moderation' and threats to ban people who are non-spammers. Rely on peer pressure. That is the way a community grows. Check the mailing lists around the country - the more
But you have to draw a line somewhere. The idea of peer pressure got this thread so far. Total waste of everyone's time and energy.
Anurag
Just wanted to chime in ...
Anurag wrote:
2009/2/18 Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org:
frankly I do not understand this. Neither of them are newbies. Both of them are valuable members of this list. What are you going to achieve by moderating them for a week? Are you going to counsel and reform them? Or do you feel 'punishment' will make them 'repent' (if they have committed some crime)? This whole 'crime and punishment' outlook does not sit well in a community like this. Agreed, obvious spammers should be banned (not moderated). Newbies doing things because they dont know the rules should be politely corrected by peer pressure. Apart from that, nothing constructive will be achieved by moderation which is an archaic concept from the dark ages and more suited to places like china where the whole country is under moderation.
+1 to everything Kenneth said in his mail. I agree moderation is not really a good long term policy even if in the short term it might seem effective. The punishment method only encourages the trolls to wait for the next chance they get.
Not allowing their posts in seemed like the best way to stop them from posting even after repeated request, and give some time to cool down.
Actually, the best way to stop a troll is not to even dignify it with a response.
For example, I am choosing to do that Dinesh's latest 'i didn't do anything wrong' troll post too. He is a troll and not worth my bytes.
In any case, the thread /was/ amusing and entertaining besides being insightful too, as kenneth pointed out. I was waiting for Godwin's law to be invoked ...but i wonder if that happens in Indian mailing lists. Maybe, there is something else that is more relevant to Indian sensibilities which parallels godwin's law.
Anyone know of any such thing ?
cheers, - steve
<snip>
so is the thread over now?
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:31 AM, steve steve@lonetwin.net wrote:
For example, I am choosing to do that Dinesh's latest 'i didn't do anything wrong' troll post too. He is a troll and not worth my bytes.
Steve, calling me a troll isn't going to do any good. If you really care to ignore "trolls" then you gotta not reply at all. Probably set a filter on the trolls name and filter out all posts by that person. That is what a person whose real intention is to ignore trolls. Unfortunately you didn't do anything except indulge in name calling :) Sure, you're entitled to your opinion but I cannot emphasize enough when I say this, you got nothing on me :) You didn't choose to logically and rationally counter my arguments. This is exactly what KG did too.
As I said earlier, I am open to change my opinions, unlike you :-) The real question is, are you upto the task? If you believe I am wrong, convince me :-)
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 17:01:28 steve wrote:
i wonder if that happens in Indian mailing lists. Maybe, there is something else that is more relevant to Indian sensibilities which parallels godwin's law.
s/nazi/sri rama sena/
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
In this case, the discussion is highly relevant as it gives a clear pointer as to why so few women appear on community mailing lists. This is a problem that worries a lot of us. I personally was horrified at the sexist
Stop right there. I was *not* being sexist in any manner. If you think so, thats your opinion and it is *wrong*. Her behavior was completely uncalled for when she provoked me. The problem here is that these days people rarely understand that their actions have consequences. I wasn't the one indulging in *repeated* name calling or provoking others. There was a thread which I replied to. She had no business provoking me or any member on this list. She did that and these were the consequences.
These days people make issues out of millions of things. Seems they have nothing better to do but to pick a topic and make an issue out of an non-issue. As I've reiterated time and again, helping a minority group by providing them means is one thing. Herding them into using something just because you think its the best thing around *and* doing it all under the pretext of helping them is pure BS. You give them the means, educate them. Thats just about it. Let them decide.
Secondly the issue of equality. The moment you start dividing or identifying or classifying any individual, you've started to discriminate. I treated Ms.Ayer as I would treat any person irrespective of their gender. That is called equality. Live with it.
Thirdly, if people think women should be given preferential or different treatment because they cannot tolerate our behavior then they should go form a separate community ( which is what Linuxchix is about ) but they should be given a good lesson in tolerance.
In todays world there is nothing impeding well women from entering into any field. They know their choices and they have the means. There are some nasty social problems and I am definitely against them. If Ms.Ayer or anybody here on this list feels that I should've been more polite or whatever *because* shes a woman then they're the ones who need a lesson in equality.
The mere fact that I have treated Ms.Ayer as a person and not someone of the opposite sex is ample proof that I value equality.
Lastly, a person's principles go with him no matter where he is. I can see that Ms.Ayer doesn't believe in her own principles as I mentioned in an earlier reply that she broke no less than 4 codes of conduct that had her name on it. I value my principles and I dont abandon them. I believe in helping the needy but definitely *not* at the cost of hurting the sentiments of the majority or by putting them at a disadvantage.
This is precisely the reason why this world still has quota raj and minority politics.
I am definitely *against* misbehavior and harassment. But at the same time everybody should learn to accept and treat people equally and this *cant* be accomplished by categorizing ourselves.
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 13:44:42 Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon@au-
kbc.org> wrote:
In this case, the discussion is highly relevant as it gives a clear pointer as to why so few women appear on community mailing lists.
This is
a problem that worries a lot of us. I personally was horrified at the sexist
Stop right there. I was *not* being sexist in any manner
to address a woman as 'My dear' on a mailing list is sexism.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
to address a woman as 'My dear' on a mailing list is sexism.
Please quote the law which says I cannot do that.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Dinesh Joshi dinesh.a.joshi@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
to address a woman as 'My dear' on a mailing list is sexism.
Please quote the law which says I cannot do that.
ROTFL ! sorry but i cannot control laughing on this one. good one dude. you need a vacation
-- Regards, Dinesh A. Joshi -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Harsh Busa harsh.busa@gmail.com wrote:
Please quote the law which says I cannot do that.
ROTFL ! sorry but i cannot control laughing on this one. good one dude. you need a vacation
My dear Luggers,
Err.
I need vacation too ;)
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:38:21 Anurag wrote:
Continue flaming each other, and both of you will be put on moderation for a week.
frankly I do not understand this. Neither of them are newbies. Both of them are valuable members of this list. What are you going to achieve by moderating them for a week? Are you going to counsel and reform them? Or do you feel 'punishment' will make them 'repent' (if they have committed some crime)? This whole 'crime and punishment' outlook does not sit well in a community like this. Agreed, obvious spammers should be banned (not moderated). Newbies doing things because they dont know the rules should be politely corrected by peer pressure. Apart from that, nothing constructive will be achieved by moderation which is an archaic concept from the dark ages and more suited to places like china where the whole country is under moderation.
Also moderation is not good for the moderator. When an admin starts moderating people, however nice a guy he is, he starts to get a little power mad. I was once kicked from a channel by a guy who did it just to show me that he had been granted ops on the channel!
If you moderate non-newbies, they will most probably leave the list and never rejoin. And the community will be the loser.
In this case, the discussion is highly relevant as it gives a clear pointer as to why so few women appear on community mailing lists. This is a problem that worries a lot of us. I personally was horrified at the sexist way a woman respected in the community was addressed as 'my dear'. And am appreciative of the fact that she is holding her own.
Please do not bring up things like 'moderation' and threats to ban people who are non-spammers. Rely on peer pressure. That is the way a community grows. Check the mailing lists around the country - the more heavily moderated a list is, the faster it dies down. For the past few years both Chennai and Mumbai lists have been very free with the admins keeping a very low profile. Please continue this. -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate NRC-FOSS http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/
very late,but +10.Go KG.
Regards, Easwar Registered Linux user #442065
-
Anurag -
Dinesh Joshi -
Easwar Hariharan -
G Karunakar -
Harsh Busa -
Kartik Mistry -
Kenneth Gonsalves -
steve