Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

Manu Sporny wrote:
> I'd like to see the ban on Andy reduced to a month or
lifted  
> completely.

I shall be concise, because Manu has already gone into
plenty of  
details, but...
+1

-- 
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mailtobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk
>



_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

Hi all,

On Mar 8, 2008, at 2:22 PM, Toby A Inkster wrote:
> Manu Sporny wrote:
>> I'd like to see the ban on Andy reduced to a month
or lifted  
>> completely.
>
> I shall be concise, because Manu has already gone into
plenty of  
> details, but...
> +1

I don't know about "Unjust"  --- I sympathize with
the amount of grief  
the Admins have had to go through because of Andy -- but I
do feel  
that 18 months is a bit severe; especially given that the
previous  
suspension was (if I remember correctly) only a week.

I think a suspension of 1-3 months -- along with Andy
agreeing to a  
new code of conduct -- would be more than sufficient.

If after that Andy still refuses to admit than his behavior
has been  
in any way problematic or difficult, then I can see grounds
for  
extending the suspension further.

-- Ernie P.


_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 10 Mar 2008, at 04:54, Ernest Prabhakar wrote:

> I don't know about "Unjust"  --- I sympathize
with the amount of  
> grief the Admins have had to go through because of Andy
-- but I do  
> feel that 18 months is a bit severe; especially given
that the  
> previous suspension was (if I remember correctly) only
a week.

iirc (and I'll hunt back through and confirm) Andy's first
ban was for  
7 days. His second ban was for 30 days.

I appreciate how an 18 month ban seems harsh when read out
of context.  
When you look at all the rules and regulations we've had to
put in  
place, and pretty much the fact that the group of admins
exists at all  
(there's very little 'admin' work around microformats by
design) all  
because of Andy, it's not so unreasonable.

Take into consideration those who have reported that they've
been put  
off contributing because of Andy's behaviour, and I'm sure
countless  
others who have just gone away for the same reason without
letting us  
know. Take into consideration two separate bans of
increasing length  
that resulted in no modification of behaviour.

Andy has made positive contributions over time, but those
have vastly  
been outweighed by negative side-effects of his presence.
Andy has  
demonstrated that he's not willing or capable of modifying
his  
behaviour to reduce the negative impact on the community.  
Unfortunately at that point we've just had to take the bull
by the  
horns and ban him for an extended period. We all need to
focus energy  
and our limited resources on moving microformats forward,
not on  
treading water.

The fact that Andy has also been banned for an extended
period from  
Wikipedia is not related, but it is extremely telling.

drew.

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 5:40 AM, Drew McLellan <listsallinthehead.com> wrote:
>  iirc (and I'll hunt back through and confirm) Andy's
first ban was for
>  7 days. His second ban was for 30 days.

>From 30 days to 18 months seems high but I understand
why the action
was taken. Although I haven't crossed paths with Andy
(largely because
I lurk) I do think he was prone to bullying with words. As a
lurker I
will guess that a barrier to participate for a lot of people
are
overly aggressive and pedantic remarks that amount to people
sitting
around saying "UR DOIN IT WRONG" instead of
teaching.

99% of the time that is not the case with this community but
I have a
feeling Andy, with that participation rate, was part of the
1% that
made some people afraid to participate. Do people need to
toughen up?
Yes. But I wonder about an individual's motivations that
constantly
accuse the 'administrators' of wrong doing and unfair
practice yet
continuously come back for more.

Jesse
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:40 AM, Drew McLellan <listsallinthehead.com> wrote:
>
>  I appreciate how an 18 month ban seems harsh when read
out of context.
>

It wasn't read out of context. Manu gave comprehensive
context, but
your response ignored it.

Manu is currently one of the most active and productive
contributors
(much more active recently than any of the admins) and the
lead
editor on a complex and important microformat, yet his
points have
gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little over the top
to ignore
what Manu has to say?

-cks

-- 
Christopher St. John
http://artofsystems.
blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 11 Mar 2008, at 05:24, Christopher St John wrote:

> Manu is currently one of the most active and productive
contributors
> (much more active recently than any of the admins) and
the lead
> editor on a complex and important microformat, yet his
points have
> gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little over the
top to ignore
> what Manu has to say?

Unanswered, yes. Ignored, no.

drew.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Drew McLellan <listsallinthehead.com> wrote:
> On 11 Mar 2008, at 05:24, Christopher St John wrote:
>
>  > Manu is currently one of the most active and
productive contributors
>  > (much more active recently than any of the
admins) and the lead
>  > editor on a complex and important microformat,
yet his points have
>  > gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little
over the top to ignore
>  > what Manu has to say?
>
>  Unanswered, yes. Ignored, no.
>

Sarcastic answers may be appropriate for individuals (or
not) but
they certainly are not appropriate for people acting in an
official
capacity on the list.

The admins have stated that it's a lot of work to administer
a
large, active and growing community. I think those of us
that
have helped out with similar things are not surprised, but
fair
enough: it _is_ a lot of work, and as the community grows
it
will just be more work. The most helpful and well-meaning
people
in the world will still have conflicts that need resolving,
and
misunderstandings that need working out.

So how about those among the current admins who are sick
of it step down and we have some elections? To be followed
by
an open, documented, public discussion of how the community
wishes to be governed?


-cks


-- 
Christopher St. John
http://artofsystems.
blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Christopher St John
<ckstjohngmail.com> wrote:
>  So how about those among the current admins who are
sick
>  of it step down and we have some elections? To be
followed by
>  an open, documented, public discussion of how the
community
>  wishes to be governed?

I believe that establishing governance of the Microformats
community
would require that the Micformats community actually has
some
centralized authority that has control over the use of
Microformats. I
don't see why that is warranted... The Microformats
themselves aren't
standards, they are patterns and I would consider them best
practices
at the moment. The site could be deleted tomorrow and the
web wouldn't
stop nor would the movement.

I agree some transparency would be nice. Emails, IRC, wiki
edits, and
all other things that led to Andy's expulsion would be
helpful to
understand what happened but to be honest, I don't care.
What I do
care about is how people (and only a few) jump on the folks
that try
to keep things focused.

Jesse
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 11 Mar 2008, at 13:10, Christopher St John wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Drew McLellan  
> <listsallinthehead.com> wrote:
>> On 11 Mar 2008, at 05:24, Christopher St John
wrote:
>>
>>> Manu is currently one of the most active and
productive contributors
>>> (much more active recently than any of the
admins) and the lead
>>> editor on a complex and important microformat,
yet his points have
>>> gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little
over the top to ignore
>>> what Manu has to say?
>>
>> Unanswered, yes. Ignored, no.
>>
>
> Sarcastic answers may be appropriate for individuals
(or not) but
> they certainly are not appropriate for people acting in
an official
> capacity on the list.

No sarcasm intended, just a statement of fact. Perhaps a
little terse,  
so apologies if it sounded bad. I was simply saying that
although  
Manu's message is presently unanswered, that doesn't mean it
will not  
be answered or that it is being ignored.

Also not in an official capacity, just as me. 'Official'
stuff is  
clearly flagged.



> The admins have stated that it's a lot of work to
administer a
> large, active and growing community. I think those of
us that
> have helped out with similar things are not surprised,
but fair
> enough: it _is_ a lot of work, and as the community
grows it
> will just be more work. The most helpful and
well-meaning people
> in the world will still have conflicts that need
resolving, and
> misunderstandings that need working out.

The simple fact is that the microformats community is *not*
a lot of  
work, save for the disruption Andy has caused. That we even
seen to  
spend effort having this conversation rather than working on
 
microformats is further evidence of that disruption.

drew.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Drew McLellan
<listsallinthehead.com> wrote:
>
> That we even seen to
>  spend effort having this conversation rather than
working on
>  microformats is further evidence of that disruption.
>

Andy was acting as a stalking horse for many community
issues.

It wasn't fair to let him do that. I think people who
allowed him to
express their frustration risk-free are starting to feel a
bit guilty. I
know I am.

-cks

-- 
Christopher St. John
http://artofsystems.
blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss