[Foundation-l] moderation soft limit

[Andreas K.]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas at googlemail.com
> wrote:

> >
> > There was a 30 post per person monthly "soft" limit on foundation-l.
> >
>
> My apologies; I was unaware of this soft limit.
>
> Happy to abide by it :) and I hope others will too! And, so, this should be
> my last post for this month. FWIW I entirely agree that less vocal posters
> may be put off by large volume of email by the same individuals.
>
> Is there an easy way to keep an eye on our own volume of mail?
>
> > I think people who think have got the point, but we still have to "whack
> the mole" at trolls and endless griefers.
>
> I'm also annoyed at being characterised in this way by someone who has
> maintained only the barest level of civility in their postings. So I am not
> inclined to "troll" or "grief" further anyway.
>
> My apologies to everyone else.
>



Likewise, my apologies to anyone who resented the long dialogue between
myself and David Levy here on this list. David and I have continued to
discuss this in private mail.

For those interested, there is a current request for arbitration on English
Wikipedia related to the board resolution on controversial content, which
contains some further views and discussion. I have summarised my view that
our illustrations, just like our texts, should follow good practice
established in reliable sources here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=457335488#Statement_by_Jayen466


As John Vandenberg pointed out in his comment at the arbitration request,
the board's resolution on biographies of living people led to several
community RfCs on en:WP last year. Wikipedia may need a similar community
process to discuss the implications of the board resolution on controversial
content, and the principle of least astonishment.

Andreas