[ga-abuse] Re: Frequent abusers

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

Hi Harald

> In order of severity, I think we have:
>
> - Joe Baptista
> - Jeff Williams
> - William Walsh
> - Eric Dierker
> - Sotiris, Dave Crocker, Roeland Meyer, Jefsey Morfin, Joop Ternstra,
> Patrick Corliss +++++ - all of which are capable of acting before thinking
> when provoked.

My feeling is that Dave Crocker must be lifted up the list.  I can cite
hundreds of examples of "ad hominems" from him including his recent
criticisms of Michael Froomkin.  However, his command of the language allows
him to get away with many subtle insults.

Whilst I agree that I have responded to provocation, such responses are
rarely temperamental.  The fact is that many provocations cannot be allowed
to stand as they simply become accepted dogma.  One such was my association
with a call for a motion against the Chair in which I was carelessly added
as a spiteful afterthought.

Whilst I have tried to temper provocation (that's what got me attacked by
WXW) I do believe that the serious blame should go to the instigator.
That's why Joe Baptista, Jeff Williams, William X. Walsh, Eric Dierker AND
Dave Crocker are all more blameworthy.

They cause the trouble in the first place !!  They should ALL be suspended.

People like Joop Ternmstra have suffered much abuse from people who set out
to deliberately destroy his almost spiritual vision of an IDNO.

> There are 2 different roles a suspension may serve:
>
> - Allowing a person to cool down (this would have served Eric well - if he
>    could have stayed offlist until the medication kicked back in, or
whatever
>    happened to him)
> - Getting rid of permanent troublemakers in a fair manner
>
> Given that we are one management team, I would suggest that we take it on
> ourselves that once a troublemaker is suspended at least from the GA list
> and 2 sublists, we can block him from all GA lists.

Still difficult to administer.  Especially since we are so generous with
warnings and so slow to suspend.  I note that in all of your cases, many
quite serious offences, the chance of suspension is so remote as to be
almost non-existent.

Do you seriously mean that in all this time, and with all those insults, WXW
has never, ever been suspended?  Not even once?  Other than recently for
excess postings

And you cite him as one of the worst culprits!!  That's truly a very lenient
policy.

> This will ensure that most "occasional flamers" are banned in only one
> place, and that consistent troublemakers know that they can be banned from
> all lists.

You wish @!!

> This can be adopted for sublists only - no need to change the rules for
the
> GA list, I think.
>
> WDYT?

It's so unlikely that somebody will be banned, the rules have little force.

Regards
Patrick Corliss