Reasons for hall monitoring

[Karel Zak]

On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 11:10:39PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Seth Vidal wrote:
> >      *  Hall monitors are allowed to send 'thread closure' posts to
> > aggressive or problematic mailing list threads to curtail issues before
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is nonsense. The problematic could be individual e-mails, but
it's not reason to stop the whole discussion. If you see an aggressive
e-mail then ask author of the e-mail to be more polite, but never try
to control whole discussion.

> > they become serious enough to warrant an official warning. When this is
> > done the subject line of the message will be prefixed with
> > [HALL-MONITORED] and a link to this wiki page is included in the message.
> 
> This vague paragraph can be abused to justify censoring pretty much 
> everything.
> 
> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by one of 

+1  The Hall Monitor Policy is cancer.

All sane e-mail clients support "delete e-mail" and "delete thread"
functions.  It's better to have 1000 useless e-mails in INBOX than 1
HALL-MONITORED e-mail. Yes, freedom is expensive...

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak at redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com