Re: It's time for some new steps (was: [Welcome to the "Ietf-honest" mailing list])

[Scott Brim <[e-mail]>]

Excerpts from Dave CROCKER on Tue, Feb 10, 2009 09:25:14AM -0800:
> Scott Brim wrote:
>> I see your point, but does it warrant a perpetual irrevocable ban on
>> all interactions?  

> When someone demonstrates a permanent pattern of disruptive behavior, 
> with no counter-balancing pattern of useful contribution, their presence 
> is purely a distraction.  Ignoring a distraction is preferable, but some 
> distractions cannot be reasonably ignored; they force themselves on us.
>
> They constantly cost us wasteful effort; in the aggregate -- over time, 
> and across the community -- quite a lot of effort.

OK, you are looking at cumulative disruption.  Previously you had just
referred to this one occurrence.  Even if you think this one deserves
banishment, I still believe (1) you should go through the established
warning process, and 

> Such folk warrant banning.  Permanently and completely.

(2) a permanent irrevocable ban on all possible means of communication
is way over the top.

Just remember, "dogs bark, but the caravan rolls on".