On 11/16/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
"Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it."
The fact that they've been indefinitely banned *is* strong evidence to the contrary.
And conversely, when assuming bad faith:
"Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who are banned are trying to hurt the project, not help it."
Which leaves open the possibility (and necessity) of strong evidence being provided. So obviously we have to leave the door open a crack, or we'd never allow anyone a chance to prove themselves. But we don't owe them any favours.
Steve