Re: [ga-abuse] [ADMIN] Two Week Suspension of Roeland Meyer

[Bruce James <bmj@bmjames.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Corliss" <patrick@corliss.net>
To: "Alexander Svensson" <svensson@icannchannel.de>
Cc: "[ga-abuse]" <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Sent: May 09, 2001 18:16
Subject: Re: [ga-abuse] [ADMIN] Two Week Suspension of Roeland Meyer


Hi Alexander, Bruce and All

>>Roeland Meyer has apologised to me privately for his breach of the rules.
This raises an interesting issue as to whether we should take contrition,
apologies etc. into account either (a) when making the decision or (b) after
the decision or (b) during the suspension.<<

***Would you forward to us the email he sent?   3 of us have made a
decision.***

It seems to me that our purpose is not to go round enforcing list rules.  It
is, indeed, to create an atmosphere of civil discourse.  Apologies, or
expressions of regret, should be taken into consideration.  I'd actually
like to see some sort of undertaking not to offend again.

Finally, on that subject, I think we should keep matters under our control
as much as possible before going to appeal.  Otherwise we could say "Oh well
it's too late now" and refer the person to the Chair.  I don't like that as
we are not a court of law just list monitors.

>>>I agree that we shold not use the term List Monitor Committee in relation
to
a decision (made by two list monitors) as this provides an incorrect slant.
However, we can say LMC when we are referring to a collective action such as
when we adopted our rules of procedure.<<<

***I have no problem in dropping this phrase, but it is a group decision.***

****************************************************************************
********
> Additionally, I think that at least all suspensions
> should contain the list rules URL
>  http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules-v0.4.html
> and specifically note that the action of the list
> monitor may be appealed to the GA Chair.
****************************************************************************
*********
****OK, I agree with this phrase.***********

We need a standard template for all notices.  I don't like the idea of
entering into debates with persons subject to a complaint except in a mere
superficial way like answering a procedural question.  Can Harald and others
provide such a copy?  I had one served on me but can't find it now.  I'm
getting tired so have now got the procedures clear in my mind.

>>>>>>Do we notify the complainant separately?  If so what do we say?<<<<

****I like the current way of posting it to the [GA] List, with the
offernder already blocked.

I agree we should not decuss our decision, just tell them to appeal to the
Chair.******

Regards
Patrick Corliss

Regards,
Bruce James



----- Original Message -----
From: Alexander Svensson <svensson@icannchannel.de>
To: <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 7:38 AM
Subject: Re: [ga-abuse] [ADMIN] Two Week Suspension of Roeland Meyer


>
> I do agree with Roeland's suspension, but I wonder
> whether we shouldn't generally try to avoid the term
> > The List Monitor Committee
> and simply use "list monitors" instead. (Yes, I'm
> guilty of committeeizing, too... :))
>
> Additionally, I think that at least all suspensions
> should contain the list rules URL
>  http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules-v0.4.html
> and specifically note that the action of the list
> monitor may be appealed to the GA Chair, i.e. Danny.
>
> Best regards,
> /// Alexander
>