IIRC, the person in question wasnt "banned" --they were blocked indefinitely, which doesnt mean permanently. Any sysop can go unblock him, if they were so motivated (I think Ill be too busy, myself). But FEI, only two cases would make such a block permanent: A ruling by the esteemed but understaffed Arbcom, or a ruling by the benefcient & dedicated founder-at-large.
One belonging to the former should have a keen understanding of the circumstances and reasons under which the Arbcom was founded. IAC, what needs to happen now is the DR process needs to catch up in growth to scale with the community. "Bigger government"? Government needs to be in proportion to the society, otherwise we fall back to the rule by decrees, which, irrespective of the particular case in question should be taken as a sign of DR's failure in any particular circumstance, and weakening of DR. In this case, some seem to be suggesting that DR can't handle certain types of trolls, which I think is rather sophistic.
SV
--- JAY JG jayjg@hotmail.com wrote:
The point is admins are not allowed to ban others based on
differences of POV, because that violates both the
letter AND the
spirit of the blocking policy, as well as NPOV.
Um, no, that's not the point, because that's not why Amalekite was banned.
Jay.
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com