Jeroen Massar writes:
And then suddenly somebody makes a seriously good contribution and your
filter accidentally filters out that message which does have a lot of
value and thus importance for the working group.
Banning someone has the same effect, if that person has ever made any
useful contributions at all (and that applies to just about everyone).
Besides, you can filter without loss--by actually looking at messages.
The signal to noise ratio has risen way too much by all this talk
about one person and simply takes away a lot of time from a lot of
people who can do a lot more technically interesting work when that
ratio is brought back to signal instead of just being noise. Being
able to completely shutdown a person after having repeatedly warned
that person about his behavior is the only real solution here.
Most of the noise and disturbance I see isn't coming from a single
person, but from a lynch mob so obsessed with silencing someone they
don't like that they can't even do their jobs.
Why aren't you working on something productive, instead of joining in
this discussion, which precisely matches your apparent definition of
useless noise? Why is it bad when someone else does it, but okay if
you do it?
Yes, it is excluding somebody from giving his viewpoints, but it is not
without arguments that this will be done and the person who this is
bestowed upon has had many chances of bettering his way of posting and
drifting off topic all the time.
What about excluding everyone else who whines about that person?
Wouldn't that make sense, too?
Then again, would there be anyone left if the same rules applied to
everyone?
Thus in your opinion you tolerate the behavior where people contact your
boss for actions you take personally (IETF is on personal basis not on
business basis, at least in theory) on a public forum!?
No, I don't ... but I don't discuss them on the public forum. I
discuss them with my lawyer, and all corrective action is taken
offline. When someone libels you to your employer, complaining about
it on a mailing list is not the answer.
Another way to look at your point of view is to say that mailinglists
should accept spam. As the enduser who receives the list should simply
filter them out.
Yes. There's no way to reliably eliminate spam in an automated way,
so either you let it through and tolerate a lot of mail that isn't
important, or you block it and lose legitimate messages that you need
to see. I need to see legitimate messages a lot more than I need to
block messages I find inconvenient, so I don't filter anything. That
means I have to spend a few seconds deleting hundreds of spam messages
or more each day, but it vastly diminishes the possibility of me
losing legitimate e-mail.
That is is true of course, looking at the situation, taking a bit of a
stand-off point of view, reiterating things before doing etc are a good
thing, but sometimes the SnR ratio simply becomes way to high...
No, sometimes the ability to stay cool is way too low. But that's the
problem of the person who flies off the handle, not anyone else.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf