[ga-abuse] Re: Posting Rights - Six New Mailing Lists

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@Alvestrand.no>]

At 00:13 03.05.2001 +1000, Patrick Corliss wrote:
>Hi Harald
>
>Looking at your list of past actions I can't quite understand the following;
>
>   Joe Baptista                                Jeff Williams
>18 FEB 2000       2 weeks            7 FEB 2000      2 weeks
>20 MAR 2000    4 weeks           11 APR 2000     4 weeks
>11 JUN 2000       8 weeks          27 MAY 2000    8 weeks
>22 AUG 2000    16 weeks          22 AUG 2000   16 weeks
>21 DEC 2000     32 weeks          29 MAR 2001    8 weeks
>
>After they were both banned for 16 weeks,  Joe Baptista's punishment doubled
>to 32 weeks but Jeff Williams punishment halved to 8 weeks.
>
>Was this to do with their seriousness of the offence?

No, it was because between the end of Williams' last ban and his next 
offense,  he had actually behaved fairly reasonably.

Baptista, on the other hand, sent his "watch what you eat this Christmas" 
message as the first message that got through to the GA list when his ban 
expired; no sign of improvement there.


>Elisabeth has advised the procedure to suspend people is as follows;
>
> >  Filtering of a list is always done by myself [Elisabeth]
> >  The procedure is:
> >      (1) List Monitor writes to ga list (ga-something) and states
> >          suspension, duration, reasons w/r/t GA Mailing List rules.
> >      (2) List Monitor writes to myself to do it (to be sure I receive
> >          the message OUT of the flow of any list)
> >  Then I add filtering, and ACK to List Monitor.
> >
> >  I will not do ANY move without (1).
> >  (2) is to be sure I READ it promptly.
>
>However, I understood the procedure was to suspend the person first then
>notify them of the decision.  Otherwise then can post something abusive.
>
>As a majority of three list monitors have agreed, I will advise Elisabeth to
>suspend Jeff Williams and Joe Baptista from the six new mailing lists.

This decision must be published to the GA - saying it is a job for the 
chairs, I think. Any debate should be done on ga-int, I think.
And suspensions on the new lists should wait until the policy has been 
announced.

I am not among the three who agree, in case anyone was in doubt....but will 
submit to the will of the majority on the matter.


>I'd also ask Harald to confirm that William X. Walsh may have his posting
>rights restored from the 2nd of May 2001.

Confirmed, and restored.


>Please note that other determinations are still pending.