Subject:
|
Re: List of suggestions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:50:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5653 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Orion Pobursky wrote:
| |
| |
That depends. I would expect usually not but sometimes maybe.
|
Why? If a reasonable explanation can be given, a explanation should be given.
This is not the military (I get enough of that at work) and user donations
drive this site. Therefore I think that if a user request is rejected, a
reason for the rejection is warrented. I do, however, realize that it is not
always prudent (e.g. sensitive matters, etc.) to explain every single
decision. This is why I think the admins should explain their decisions but
should not be obligated to do so.
-Orion
|
I agree. But I think that admins should be obligated to explain a rejection,
but at their own discretion. I think preference should be given to explaining
a descision rather than not, but of course, that isn’t always possible.
Legoswami
(PS Rob, thanks for the plug ;-) )
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: List of suggestions
|
| (...) -snip- (...) "At their own discretion" ... wouldn't that also mean that Admins shouldn't be obligated? I'm a bit confused. Perhaps a good compromise would be, Admins are obligated to give a reason, but that reason need not be detailed. A (...) (19 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: List of suggestions
|
| (...) Why? If a reasonable explanation can be given, a explanation should be given. This is not the military (I get enough of that at work) and user donations drive this site. Therefore I think that if a user request is rejected, a reason for the (...) (19 years ago, 29-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
