[haiku-development] Re: Banning Jorge
- From: sami vuokila <varjosanomat@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 15:47:57 +0900
jorge just announced on the japanese haiku ml that he's pulling out from the
project for good and that this it, last message, thanks all, o-tsukaresama.
The biggest impact with him leaving is for us japanese / japan based haiku
users. maybe somebody will step in his boots here, we dont know. whatever.
please just close this thread, I feel there is no need to discuss the matter
anymore.
best,
sami
On Nov 3, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Ingo Weinhold wrote:
>
> On 2010-11-03 at 09:32:42 [+0100], Michael Pfeiffer
> <michael.w.pfeiffer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> PS: BTW complaining about being removed from the contributors list was
>> justified.
>
> Yep, complaining about being removed was justified and that's what Simon and
> I (and Alexandre agreeing) did. Jorge wrote his mail after his name had
> already been readded with the only purpose of trolling ("I am glad to see
> there is some decency left in Haiku").
>
>> Using "it" in the commit message when his name was re-added was also not
>> very nice.
>
> it == name. Given that the commit message was phrased exactly like the second
> part of the sentence in my previous mail, I wouldn't assume any subtext here.
>
>
> On 2010-11-03 at 09:36:24 [+0100], Niels Reedijk <niels.reedijk@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> On 3 November 2010 08:43, Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> since we stopped banning Jorge after he seemed to understood his
>>> negative impact, and left, he obviously forgot so hard about it that
>>> reading about it doesn't help anymore.
>>> I would like to actually ban Jorge this time. Just for the books.
>>> Any opinions? How should we proceed?
>
> Half a year ago he allowed banning his email address (literally). He might
> have changed is mind now, but that doesn't mean that we have to, too.
>
>> I don't think there is any effective way to 'ban' anyone, due to the
>> openness of our mailing lists and our websites.
>>
>> I really think that in this case "don't feed the troll" should be the
>> mantra.
>
> I basically agree. I'd still continue to NOPOST his mail addresses to at
> least raise the hurdle.
>
> CU, Ingo
>
Other related posts:
