[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: list moderation

From: Mark Wielaard
Subject: Re: list moderation
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2019 22:11:23 +0100


On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 14:29 -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> Thanks to all of those that provided input into the list moderation
> and censorship discussions.
> My moderation is certainly biased towards posters that write well, and
> argue without attacking the original poster, and create an environment
> for effective communication. Lots of people on this list were able to
> do that and their posts were approved. These guidelines are
> long-enshrined in the list description. Enforcement is up to the
> volunteers who run the list.
> In all transparency I volunteered to moderate the list, because nobody
> else was actively moderating, and Mark and I were worried about toxic
> discussions derailing the conversations. Mark and I were given
> moderator and admin access because we were trusted to do that. We are
> long-time GNU Maintainers, and our goal was specific. You don't get
> list moderator or admin access without that trust. I don't see that we
> have abused that trust.
> We did alter the list description to include an updated description of
> the kind of moderation that was going to happen, however it was for
> all intents and purposes an extension of the existing rules that say
> anything can be discussed.

And even that only happened after we started discussions with Mike and
Brandon on how to do moderation with the four of us. I was happy we
were going to do this together and so I posted about it to the list to
start the discussion about it and introduced Mike and Brandon to the
And I believe we had consensus on how to word some of that better after
some on-list and off-list discussions. And were just about to do so.

> I don't clearly understand why Brandon or Mike removed us from
> volunteer moderation. If they want us to help out with the list again,
> I'm happy to help. We engaged with them to discuss how we should
> handle the moderation issue, and I thought we had achieved a consensus
> on that. We were going to post about shortly, and effectively do what
> Brandon is doing right now.

I am happy we achieved consensus on how to handle moderation on this
list and I do hope it works out better and makes the list a more
productive place for discussions, but I am completely demotivated now
to help out with that.

>  However, I'm disappointed that there has
> been a sudden decision to remove us as volunteers. I think this comes
> down to clearer roles and responsibilities in the GNU Project, which
> is something we are all already talking about.

It does add a nice meta-governance discussion theme to the list :)

> All-in-all it doesn't change the end goals we are working towards.
> I encourage everyone to follow the GNU Kind communication guidelines
> when posting. I encourage all of you to call out unkind behaviour. I
> encourage all of you discuss about GNU Project governance while
> avoiding specific discussions about people and their capabilities.

I do certainly agree with that.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]