Subject:
|
Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:11:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1037 times
|
| |
|
|
(I'm trying to guess where the FUT was supposed to be - .admin.general?)
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 05:23:10AM +0000, Kelly J. McKiernan wrote:
> Suspending posting privileges is a serious step, not one to take
> lightly or capriciously and therefore the policy we will use has been
> given some thought. By convention and agreement, it will take at least
> two of the abovementioned folks to agree that a timeout is necessary
> for a particular case, and to agree on the length and groups that it
> applies to. Although, mechanically, anyone with the authority can add
> (or remove) privs at will for any user can do so by themselves, we are
> going to do so only after consultation within the group.
>
> This is a matter that we will enforce ourselves, if members of the
> group violate our internal guideline we will take action as necessary.
> When a timeout is deemed warranted by at least two administrators,
> action will be taken. All admin action is always subject to review by
> all administrators.
I think this is a good idea (not just the accoutnability, but the whole
suspension bit). But I'm trying to understand the technical details -
when someone is suspended, will it be noted someplace? If it's not (at
least not to the public), will the admins get notified? Or does
everyone that get suspended have to write to all those people to make
sure that the process was followed? (Can you guess which way I think
would be better? :)
> When a timeout is given, there will be a note sent to the user at
> their posting address saying that the timeout has been imposed and
> referencing the specific post or posts that caused the admins to take
> the action. The user will need to acknowledge receipt of the note and
> understanding of the consequences, and agree not to circumvent the
> timeout by posting from a different email identifier, even if that
> email identifer is already registered and was not administratively
> restricted. Failure to acknowledge the note back, or trying to
> circumvent the timeout may be cause, in the sole judgment of the
> admins, for imposition of additional timeouts.
This sounds like a good idea, but I worry about stale emails in
profiles. Especially for people who post via the web, there isn't
anything right now that checks that their email address is still valid.
If someone switched ISPs, but forgot to update their profile, they'll
never get the notice. If that happens, will they have any options
except posting on .admin.general (assuming they're still allowed)?
Ideally, when they try to post elsewhere, they'll get the note that was
sent to their email isntead of the posting page... But that would
require some code, which I understand isn't an option right now.
I do think this new "power" is a good thing, and should have always been
there. I just don't want the technical details of it to get in the way.
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
| (...) Kelly set .terms on purpose, by the precedent that Suz set when she announced ((URL) the "New Policy on Bickering in LUGNET Newsgroups", not by mistake. I've reset the FUT there to keep things together (there is already another followup there) (...) (19 years ago, 28-Dec-04, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
Message is in Reply To:
48 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
|
|
|
|
