Reasons for hall monitoring
kzak at redhat.com
Thu May 6 10:28:08 UTC 2010
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
> 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 Zak <kzak at redhat.com>
More information about the devel