[Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

Virgilio A. P. Machado vam at fct.unl.pt
Wed Oct 20 04:44:19 UTC 2010


I agree with you. You raised some very good points.


Virgilio A. P. Machado

At 03:47 20-10-2010, you wrote:
>________________________________ From: Austin 
>Hair <adhair at gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation 
>Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org> 
>Sent: Tue, October 19, 2010 12:35:07 PM Subject: 
>Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian On 
>Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Nathan 
><nawrich at gmail.com> wrote: > If it pleases the 
>moderators, might we know on what basis Greg 
>was > banned and Peter indefinitely muzzled? 
>Greg Kohs was banned for the same reason that 
>he's been on moderation for the better part of 
>the past year—namely, that he was completely 
>unable tto keep his contributions civil, and 
>caused more flamewars than constructive 
>discussion. Peter Damian is only on moderation, 
>and we'll follow our usual policy of letting 
>through anything that could be considered even 
>marginally acceptable.  We really are very 
>liberal about this—otheerwise you wouldn't have 
>heard from Mr. Kohs at all in the past six 
>months. I'm sure that my saying this won't 
>convince anyone who's currently defending him, 
>but nothing about the decision to ban Greg Kohs 
>was retaliatory.  I'll also (not for the first 
>time) remind everyone that neither the Wikimedia 
>Foundation Board, nor its staff, nor any chapter 
>or other organizational body has any say in the 
>administration of this list. I hope that clears 
>up all of the questions asked in this thread so 
>far. It is not about defending anyone but about 
>the fact that the "I know bannable when I see 
>it"  theory of moderation is unconstructive and 
>leads to dramafests.  The next ban is the one 
>that will likely cause a real flame war.  I 
>suspect *more* people would be on moderation if 
>any sort of objective criteria were being 
>used.  The lack of explanation over this bothers 
>me so much because I suspect that you *can't* 
>explain it.  It seems to be the sort of gut-shot 
>that hasn't been thought through.  Moderate more 
>people based on real criteria, rather than how 
>you feel about them. Birgitte 
>foundation-l mailing list 
>foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: 

More information about the foundation-l mailing list