[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed

From: Mike Gerwitz
Subject: Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 22:38:37 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 20:48:43 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:26:22AM -0800, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) 
> wrote:
>> On 2020-02-22 01:22, Andreas Enge wrote:
>> > And another ad-hominem attack. Can you substantiate the claim of us
>> > being
>> > powermongers?
>> "Enforcement", "Ban", "Correction", "Warning" ....
>> You are sick.
> Could I kindly ask for this person to be put on moderation? I find it
> difficult to interpret the last statement as anything but a gratuitous insult
> (following a message that was not even directed at them). Notice that there
> is a pattern of overly aggressive messages by Kaz Kylheku.

I think we can handle this without having to resort to blocking a
person's messages.

Kaz, please avoid use of subjective terms like "powermonger" and focus
on facts that can be debated effectively.  We ask that you also refer to
the kind communication guidelines and avoid insults---they do not add to
constructive discussion and only serve to further inflame existing

> If anything, this message shows how much a code of conduct is needed.

The very nature of this list, and the topics that have been presented on
it, invite strong emotions and criticisms.  We're not moderating patch
discussions where it's much easier to draw the lines.  While people do
not always choose language that is kind, we should try our best to
handle it through constructive discussion before resorting to harsh

Mike Gerwitz

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

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