Re: [ga-abuse] M1 against Bill Lovell

[k@widgital.com (Kristy McKee)]

At 02:27 PM 7/27/2001 +0200, Alexander Svensson wrote:

>M1: Alexander Svensson
>Against: William S. Lovell, wsl@cerebalaw.com
>Complainants:  William X. Walsh, william@userfriendly.com
>Complainant Comments: "7th post for the day for him."
>"8th post for the day, and also not relevant to the
>business of the GA."
>Date:  27-Jul-01
>Messages:
>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 14:03:52 -0700
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00070.html
>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:07:52 -0700
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00080.html
>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:48:42 -0700
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00082.html
>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:53:01 -0700
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00083.html
>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:12:42 -0700
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00090.html
>   Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:15:45 -0700
>   http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00092.html
>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:39:41 -0700
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00093.html
>
>Grounds: Posting limit violation, off-topic posting
>Recommendation: Ignore
>
>M1 Comment:
>William X. Walsh seems to have counted a posting too
>much. Additionally, one of the messages is a resend of a
>message Bill Lovell presumably thought didn't arrive on
>the list, which leaves six messages. Two of them are
>reactions to a list monitor decision, which are certainly
>not off-topic (even though GA-rules may have been more
>suitable). Additionally, I think we should make sure
>that we do not convey the impression that someone is
>lured into a trap by responding to list monitors
>decisions. I would therefore recommend to ignore the
>complaint.
>
>M2:  Kristy McKee
>M2 Comment: Agree with Alexander
>Action: Ignore