|FROM ||From: "Thompson, David"
|SUBJECT ||Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] list moderation
|From hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com Tue Nov 5 21:31:02 2019
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (www2.mrbrklyn.com [188.8.131.52])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83219163F5B;
Tue, 5 Nov 2019 21:31:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id E0BB216113A; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 21:26:48 -0500 (EST)
Resent-From: Ruben Safir
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 21:26:48 -0500
Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [184.108.40.206])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9F38161132
for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 16:58:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:50774 helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
for ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 16:58:21 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51670)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from ) id 1iS6jU-0005qw-Qf
for gnu-misc-discuss-at-gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 16:51:28 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
(envelope-from ) id 1iS6jT-0007Nr-0U
for gnu-misc-discuss-at-gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 16:51:24 -0500
Received: from mail-vs1-xe33.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::e33]:39949)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from )
for gnu-misc-discuss-at-gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 16:51:22 -0500
Received: by mail-vs1-xe33.google.com with SMTP id m9so2670167vsq.7
for ; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 13:51:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
X-Received: by 2002:a67:6ac7:: with SMTP id f190mr13161630vsc.55.1572990680555;
Tue, 05 Nov 2019 13:51:20 -0800 (PST)
From: "Thompson, David"
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 16:51:09 -0500
To: Brandon Invergo
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not
Subject: Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] list moderation
List-Id: NYLXS Tech Talk and Politics
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 4:17 PM Brandon Invergo wrote:
> Thompson, David writes:
> > I hope you can see the terrible optics this has. Something has
> > happened behind the scenes, shortly after you and Mike became
> > moderators, that makes it appear as though Carlos and Mark were
> > retaliated against for being critical of GNU leadership.
> Optics are funny...there are just so many angles to consider.
No one considered the retaliation angle before this announcement was made?
> > I appreciated what they were doing and think they should be reinstated
> > as moderators. I find it difficult to trust the current moderators as
> > things stand now.
> Aside from turning off the global "emergency" moderation bit, I've stuck
> to the same general guidelines that they were using. Since I started
> actively moderating yesterday morning (GMT), the only person being
> attacked on-list is me, which I am taking in stride. I've even allowed
> through posts by non-subscribers to allow the criticism of me. If
> there's anything else that you think I'm coming up short on in my
> moderation, please tell me and I'll try to improve.
If you're sticking to the same guidelines, what's the harm in allowing
the former moderators to continue doing the same?
It's not that I think you cannot do or are not doing a good job
moderating, but the circumstances by which you became a moderator are
alarming to me. Here's an analogy: The temporary workers that replace
unionized staff during a strike might perform their tasks well, but
they have no legitimacy. The former moderators were suddenly removed,
new ones were assigned, and given the disagreements between former and
current it is difficult to not be concerned about the rationale behind
this decision. Retaliation is a very possible explanation. Is it
true? I hope not, but perhaps you could shed some more light on the
> We do have a problem with someone under moderation who is sending
> messages off-list. It probably would have happened eventually anyway,
> no matter who was moderating. Anyway, I do not know how to moderate
> that. If you have suggestions on how to handle it, I'm all ears.
I don't know either. I think at that point it's up to the receiver to
block mail from them. Thank you for stopping their messages from
reaching this list, though.
Hangout mailing list