> -----Original Message----- > From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu > [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of Olin Lathrop > Sent: 2004 Oct 18, Mon 17:37 > To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. > Subject: Re: [OT] Looking for a few good... moderators > Importance: Low > ...[I] am not trying to make trouble for you, although I > sometimes feel you treat me that way. You HAVE made a lot of trouble for me , but I don't assume you intended to! It's nothing personal. You just have a way of doing things that conflicts with some people, me included. What I'm trying to do is find a way to "take the good and leave the bad behind" (that is bad from my point of view) because I really do feel you are a brilliant engineer and an asset to the list. But in the past, so many people have complained about you and I've had such distaste personally for SOME of your comments, that I've had to do something. > > > Newbies will be moderated for the first few posts and > anyone who has > > been on the list for a while can post directly. > > What problem is this intended to address? "Olin: ...that was the stuipidest... " "engineringinfo: XXXX YOU XXXXXXX!" He would have been moderated at that point and so his post would have been rejected. As a result, we would not have needed to kick him off the list. In time, he would either have gotten used to the list and been released, or remained moderated. Who knows? He could have ended up being a valueable list member (although apparently very thin skinned) and now we have lost him. Right? > Also, how does a newbie graduate from moderated to > unmoderated? Is this done automatically by number of posts, > or a time limit? Do you do this manually when it "feels" > right? Does someone have to explicitly ask for this, then > the record gets reviewed and decision made? Those are all good suggestions. We are working that out now. > I did NOT make any remark about the person. Even though I > was not paying the attention I should have been, I was at > least careful not to do that. We could argue for a long time about the difference between saying that a post was stupid and the implication that the person was stupid... ...but how about this? I'll back off and say ok, maybe you didn't technically violate the rules. Come back on the list. Give it a try again and lets see how it goes. > I stayed away from the list for a number of months. When I > came back I made sure not to do any of the things that you > objected to previously. I was back for two months and > probably a few hundred posts. None of them were contrary to > James' warning. Yes, in a moment of excessive mirth I did > make a mistake, and I'm sorry about that. Then I was off the > list again for a few weeks. So what does it take to get past this? Lets call it "over" now, ok? Thank you for understanding the effect of a careless slip. If you really understand that and are trying not to make that sort of trouble, then I can put it into the "hey, he is human too" column and get on with life. > I didn't think I was proposing a complete shift. The only > difference I proposed for the admins is sending warnings > publicly instead of privately... Absolutly NOT. NO! NO! NO! And that is the entire crux of the matter. The only public warnings I'll send will be to ask that people stop posting on a thread. Those must be public because they are a warning to all the people who MIGHT otherwise post. This is the point of difference between you and I, Olin and I'm worried that you still don't see it. You feel it is appropriate to leverage the power of public embarrasment to influence people. I don't. For MOST people, it triggers flame wars, outbursts, loss of temper, etc... Doesn't it feel that way to you? I feel bad for whatever embarrisment I have caused you in all this. I have broken my own rules with you in the past (and now) and I don't like doing it. The only reason I'm discussing it publicly is because so many other people have jumped into it and because you have expressed no concern for your public exposure. > and telling people "You have > been banned for XX days", instead of "You have been banned". Let us try moderation first ok? Then if that does't work, I'll keep your sugestion in mind. > Not one person. I tried to point out how this would have > saved you considerable time. We wouldn't be having this > discussion if I had been banned for a a week or two. It didn't seem to work the first time, but perhaps that was just a misconception on my part. > Anyone can make a mistake. If EI was told he was banned from > the list for a month, do you really think he'd say what he said again? > As a list member and the target of his remark, I would have > no problem with him being allowed back. Life's too short for grudges. > If nothing else, it's too much trouble to keep track of whom > you're supposed to have what grudge against ;-) That may very well be true. I'll keep it in mind if the moderation thing doesn't work out. > Please put yourself in my shoes for a moment. Would you not > find that insulting and degrading if done to you? Yes. I'm sorry, and that is not my goal here. I want you to be a full member of the list. I want to benefit from your excellent advice, but I really don't want to have to burn the cycles required to deal with another of these blow ups. Yes please, do let us try to get along. Just don't publicly humiliate anyone else and I won't feel the need to do anything, much less remove or moderate you or do anything else that might be painfull for either of us. _______________________________________________ http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist