Pardon me if you receive this message two times, I'm not sure it went to the
ml the first time:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 04:49:12PM -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 14:08 -0300, Mauricio Lima Pilla wrote:
> > Good luck for the remaining proctors, they will need as they aparen
Dawid Węgliński wrote:
> Dnia 06-06-2007, śro o godzinie 18:32 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> napisał(a):
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
> > > > because you did not abide by a rule and got your punish
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 13:14 -0500, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> Great job Chris, way to stick it to them.
Yes. It absolutely *is* a great job that I voiced my opinion in a
manner that I thought was most beneficial for Gentoo. Shame on me for
ever thinking about what might be best for Gentoo. Sha
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 14:08 -0300, Mauricio Lima Pilla wrote:
> Good luck for the remaining proctors, they will need as they aparently can't
> even expect any support from council members.
There's a *BIG* difference between support and blind support. Nobody
ever promised the proctors blind supp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anders Hellgren wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
>> Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
>>> could keep your
Dnia 06-06-2007, śro o godzinie 18:32 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
napisał(a):
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
> > > because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
> >
> > I'm claiming it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Grant Goodyear wrote:
>
> So, how about using this incident as an opportunity for a calm
> discussion about the mandate and role of the proctors?
>
> Well reasoned thoughts and opinions welcome.
>
> -g2boojum-
Benjamin Judas has probably been walk
> drawn in flames.
drown, please excuse my spelling.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Josh Sled wrote:
> I find it disappointing (maybe "telling", if one is less charitable) that
> the Proctors never censured the original poster for either the tone of the
> message, nor the personal invective it contained, and still haven't. I'd
> imagine clear violations of the CoC to result in at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Josh Sled wrote:
> Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were
>> not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
>> be a proctor directive.) Or are peop
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to
Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were
> not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
> be a proctor directive.) Or are people really looking for the proctors
> to get involved only when behavior
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Doty wrote:
> Perhaps you should go take a long walk off a short pier.
> [snip]
> Oh, I'm so hurt. You think I'm a hypocrite. Man, what will I ever do?
> Newsflash, I know I'm a hypocrite, which is a lot better than the
> childish passive-aggres
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 10:29:47AM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> > So, how about using this incident as an opportunity for a calm
> > discussion about the mandate and role of the proctors? The proctors
> > clearly felt that they should shut down this thread _before_ things
> > got out of hand.
On Wednesday 06 June 2007 13:48:53 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> That wasn't what I said. What I said was that the forums staff have no
> accountability, and that the proctors were suffering as a result of
> containing too many of said forums staff.
That's bullshit. We are subject to the same rules as
Mike Doty wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
>> Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
>>> be a proctor directive.)
>> He changed the subject and signed "on behalf of gentoo-proctors".
>>
>>> I
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:33:29 -0700
> Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
>>> proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so
>>> used to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyo
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:33:29 -0700
Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
> > proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so
> > used to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyone who
> > dares say anythi
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
> > because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
>
> I'm claiming it because plenty of other people agree. You *did* see the
> response that the proctors go
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
> Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
>> be a proctor directive.)
>
> He changed the subject and signed "on behalf of gentoo-proctors".
>
>> Is there a way to fix t
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 18:08:30 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
> because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
I'm claiming it because plenty of other people agree. You *did* see the
response that the proctors go
Am Mittwoch 06 Juni 2007 17:53 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
>
> Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
> > could keep your fucking trap shut?
>
> If I'm asked by someone with a good rea
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
> Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
>> could keep your fucking trap shut?
>
> If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to by
> someo
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 10:29:47AM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Tue Jun 05 2007, 05:00:28PM CDT]
> > As a member of the Council, I find it personally offensive that the
> > Proctors have taken this action on what wasn't even a "problem" thread.
> > I'm sick of this. I ca
Am Mittwoch 06 Juni 2007 17:42 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
> > Is there a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked
> > entirely, as has been suggested?
>
> The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
> proctors.
I feel like _anyone_* who willingly acts against a
dont
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
> could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to by
someone on a power trip with a history o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
> Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
>> be a proctor directive.)
>
> He changed the subject and signed "on behalf of
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
> be a proctor directive.)
He changed the subject and signed "on behalf of gentoo-proctors".
> Is there a way to fix the current system, or should it be c
Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Tue Jun 05 2007, 05:00:28PM CDT]
> As a member of the Council, I find it personally offensive that the
> Proctors have taken this action on what wasn't even a "problem" thread.
> I'm sick of this. I call for the immediate disbanding of the Proctors.
>
> As much as I disli
On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 15:43:49 -0600 (MDT)
Jason Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[..snip..]
But who are people going to accidentally hilight now?! :'(
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 15:43 -0600, Jason Wever wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Wernfried Haas wrote:
>
> > So far we have temporarily suspended both ciaran's and geoman's account
> > from posting and encourage everyone to do as Roy initially sugges
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:00:28PM -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> As much as I dislike many of the posts from geoman/ciaranm, they really
> had not done anything worthy of being banned.
1) Someone posts a thread which is about to go up in flames.
2) After a short period of time, the proctors pos
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Jason,
If you leave, the plants win.
That has just made my day.
--
Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:08:27PM +0100, Richard Brown wrote:
> Proctors: please let me know when my ban expires.
You're not even banned?
--
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne (at) gentoo.org
http://forums.gentoo.org || http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/proctors/
forum-mods (at) gentoo.org || proctors
On 05/06/07, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As a member of the Council, I find it personally offensive that the
Proctors have taken this action on what wasn't even a "problem" thread.
I'm sick of this. I call for the immediate disbanding of the Proctors.
As much as I dislike many o
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 15:43 -0600, Jason Wever wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Wernfried Haas wrote:
>
> > So far we have temporarily suspended both ciaran's and geoman's account
> > from posting and encourage everyone to do as Roy initially sugges
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 23:13 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:44:23PM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> > Please step back, take a deep breath and avoid posting to this thread
> > for 24 hours.
>
> Folks, while we're cutting some slack to the people replying
> somewhere else in
On Tuesday 05 of June 2007 23:45:22 Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> as you have, because apparently, neither of us can follow a simple
> instruction.
I couldn't care less about proctors' instructions after their latest decision.
--
Best Regards,
Piotr Jaroszyński
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:13:25PM +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:44:23PM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> > Please step back, take a deep breath and avoid posting to this thread
> > for 24 hours.
>
> Folks, while we're cutting some slack to the people replying
> somewhere e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 of June 2007 23:13:48 Wernfried Haas wrote:
>> So far we have temporarily suspended both ciaran's and geoman's account
>> from posting and encourage everyone to do as Roy initially suggested.
>
> Haven't roy ju
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Wernfried Haas wrote:
So far we have temporarily suspended both ciaran's and geoman's account
from posting and encourage everyone to do as Roy initially suggested.
Regardless of whether their postings are viewed as useful or no
On Tuesday 05 of June 2007 23:13:48 Wernfried Haas wrote:
> So far we have temporarily suspended both ciaran's and geoman's account
> from posting and encourage everyone to do as Roy initially suggested.
Haven't roy just said that jokes "should normally be avoided in international
forums such as
On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 23:22:04 +0200
"Fernando J. Pereda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Common sense? Where the hell are you?
Common sense abandoned Gentoo months ago. Maybe years.
Unless it was the other way around, which seems more likely.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Way to go Proctors! I think you just tipped few more people over the edge.
Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:44:23PM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
>
>> Please step back, take a deep breath and avoid posting to this thread
>> for 24 hours.
>>
>
> Folks, while we're cutting som
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:44:23PM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> Please step back, take a deep breath and avoid posting to this thread
> for 24 hours.
Folks, while we're cutting some slack to the people replying
somewhere else in the thread because they may not have gotten the mail
by Roy yet (and
45 matches
Mail list logo
