On 3/9/07, Steve <subsume(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Of course you don't. The fact that continue it is
equally pitiful.
Please elaborate on your class-system idea of this list. I'm sure its
very fascinating.
-S
On 3/9/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think it was inappropriate. That's what matters here - what I
> think, and what the list admins think.
>
> Mark
>
> On 09/03/07, Steve <subsume(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hmm, sure. I also think administrative skepticism is > always <
> > neccessary, regardless of the tally of charges. Demonization is always
> > a very useful tool against people who have done something wrong, and
> > is a very effective marginalizer.
> >
> > Your initial smarmy, condescending rant was totally inappropriate, and
> > I was glad that George Herbert followed it up with a measured
> > description of the problem.
> >
> > -S
> >
> > On 3/9/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > It becomes an issue when somebody espouses racism in every post and
> > > uses it to personally attack others. "You guys won't listen to
me
> > > because you must all be Koreans", for example.
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > On 08/03/07, Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:
> > > > Mark Williamson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Because you are a racist :-) You probably even deny the
indigenous
> > > > > status of the Ainu.
> > > >
> > > > I would hope that's not the reason... if we were to block people
for
> > > > holding objectionable opinions (even exceedingly objectionable ones),
I
> > > > could submit a very long list of names of people to be blocked,
> > > > including many admins!
> > > >
> > > > -Mark
Please stop trolling Mark here...
The reasons that our Asian user was removed from the list have been
explained. That some of the unblock-en-l participants have also
vented that they don't like him is perhaps not the single most focused
calm response, but neither do they reflect a generic list intolerance
for minority opinions.
We didn't remove them from the list because they're personally
distasteful; we removed him from the list because he's abusive and he
absolutely should not still be seeing anyone else's unblock request
filings.
Had this been an official policy or position statement, it would also
have been inappropriate for Mark to mention that here. But it was
just an informational response to queries.
I think it's unreasonable to expect us not to form personal opinions
regarding some of the unblock-en-l complaintants. It's reasonable for
the community to insist that we still deal with them professionally,
and I think we're doing that.
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com