Re: [ga-abuse] M1 against Kent Crispin

[k@widgital.com (Kristy McKee)]

Kent has already received two warnings for this behavior since I have been 
a monitor.  We have already made an exception for Kent by sending the 
second warning.  Sending a third does not seem fair to the other members.

It is time to suspend Kent Crispin.

:)

At 12:04 PM 8/16/2001 +0200, Alexander Svensson wrote:

>Hi Kristy,
>
>thanks for reminding me -- I didn't look it up!
>I may have overlooked something, but I just found one
>previous warning, about this message by Kent Crispin:
> > However, the GA, at least, has effectively been
> > captured by delusional people who think that they have
> > much much more power than simply giving advice.
>(http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg01568.html)
>
>The message Joop rightly complains about refers to Milton
>Mueller's message
> > The self-organization took place back in Spring 1999.
> > An IDNO organization has been around since then, the
> > powers that be just didn't like the people behind it.
> > Can we agree that when _another_ such proposal comes
> > before the NC that it will be treated less politically?
>(http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00461.html)
>
>...and questions Milton's claims (writing to Roeland):
> > It's interesting how you take Miltons characteristically inaccurate and
> > insulting statement and run with it.
> >
> > The "powers that be" may or may not like the personalities involved, but
> > the FACT is that the "cyberspace association" (aka as the "IDNO") simply
> > does not credibly represent those that it claims to represent.  That is
> > a completely sufficient grounds for rejecting it.  In fact, it would have
> > been totally irresponsible for the Board to do otherwise.
>(http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00497.html)
>
>There's no question that these personal sideswipes must come
>to a stop. As Kent has been warned before (presuming this
>has happened only once), I think we have the choice between a
>strong warning and a suspension. When I look at the
>personal attacks that have led to suspensions in the past,
>I would choose to send a warning (worded stronger) -- a
>suspension looks disproportionate to me here.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>Kent,
>
>The list monitors for the General Assembly (GA) of the DNSO
>have issued this warning to you concerning complaints received
>about the following post:
>
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00497.html
>
>According to the rules for participation in the GA of the DNSO
>   http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules.html
>the messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
>   - Not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander
>   - Not using offensive language
>
>In the posting mentioned above you are referring to
>Milton Mueller's statements as "characteristically inaccurate
>and insulting". Sideswipes such as this are unacceptable
>personal attacks.
>
>You have already been warned against such list rule
>violations. As you know, the practiced policy of the GA is
>to grant a two week suspension of your posting privileges
>if this happens again.
>
>Regards,
>[Kristy or Alexander for the list monitors]
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>
>What do you think?
>
>Best regards,
>/// Alexander
>
>
>
> > At 02:50 PM 8/15/2001 +0200, Alexander Svensson wrote:
> >
> >
> >>M1: Alexander Svensson
> >>Against: Kent Crispin, kent@songbird.com
> >>Complainants:  Joop Teernstra, terastra@terabytz.co.nz
> >>Complainant Comments: "These childish vendetta's (or are
> >>they deliberate provocations?) have to be stopped, if the
> >>GA is ever going to get anywhere."
> >>Date:  14-Aug-01
> >>Message:
> >>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00497.html
> >>
> >>Grounds: Personal attack
> >>Recommendation: Warning
> >>
> >>M1 Comment:
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>Hello Kent,
> >>
> >>The list monitors for the General Assembly (GA) of the DNSO
> >>have issued this warning to you concerning complaints received
> >>about the following post:
> >>
> >>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg00497.html
> >>
> >>According to the rules for participation in the GA of the DNSO
> >>   http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules.html
> >>the messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
> >>   - Not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander
> >>   - Not using offensive language
> >>
> >>In the posting mentioned above you are referring to
> >>Milton Mueller's statements as "characteristically inaccurate
> >>and insulting". Please refrain from such personal sideswipes.
> >>
> >>Best regards,
> >>[Kristy or Alexander for the list monitors]
> >>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>M2:  Kristy McKee
> >>M2 Comment: Kent has already received two warnings for this: it is
> >>absolutely time for him to be suspended.
> >>Action: Suspension Two Weeks
> >>
> >>
> >> > Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:42:48 -0700
> >> > From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
> >> > To: ga@dnso.org
> >> > Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Documentation request
> >> > Mail-Followup-To: ga@dnso.org
> >> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
> >> > Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 11:28:41AM -0700, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> >> >  > Denying a proposal because one doesn't like the people supporting it
> >> is not
> >> >  > politics of any honorable variety. It is slimey, subjective, and
> >> personal.
> >> >  > It also doesn't serve the best interests of the ICANN, in the 
> long run.
> >> >
> >> > It's interesting how you take Miltons characteristically inaccurate and
> >> > insulting statement and run with it.