[haiku-development] Re: Banning Jorge

  • From: "Humdinger" <humdingerb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 17:50:11 +0100

Philippe Houdoin, on Thu, 4 Nov 2010 13:56:00 +0100:
> > Over years it was proven that not-feeding-the-troll didn't work.
> 
> I kindly disagree.
> 
> I consider we failed at not-feeding-the-troll. Inteast, we
> instinctively feed it.

I didn't make myself clear. I agree with this. What I meant is, the 
not-feeding didn't work, because there's always someone who can't help 
himself, but to post that one more reply. Also, Jorge's style makes it 
sometimes very difficult to just walk away.
Plus, new people are not familiar with Jorge and will get dragged into 
a fruitless discussion. With the "non-feeders" ignoring the discussion, 
people may get frustrated by not getting backed-up, concluding that 
everybody must see things like Jorge and maybe even leave.

> On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 17:54 +0100, Humdinger wrote:
> > But without an official ban, we IMO don't have a basis for what was 
> > done so far, i.e. NOPOSTing someone.
> 
> Well, seeing that this has been done already, and the general 
> consensus
> in doing it, I find it a bit unfair to now ask for an official ban, 
> as,
> looking at the action, effectively it was already there.
> 
> The question should have been raised / statement should have been 
> made
> before any NOPOSTing happened, asking it now is just hypocrisy IMHO.

I don't see hypocracy, it's trying to correct the error of not 
following procedure. I suspect we'll see accusations of being banned by 
the "elitist in-group" without others being asked. Even though the 
majority didn't object and this can be viewed as a consensus.

Regards,
Humdinger

-- 
--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-
Deutsche Haiku News @ http://www.haiku-gazette.de


Other related posts: