RE: [mpowr] Mailing List Management

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com wrote:

> The rest of your proposal would seem to add considerably more
> overhead to this process, and I'm not sure what the benefits would
> be.

Here are a few benefits:

	- all participants are more aware of the rules

	- a formal warning to those who do not know the law or
	  misinterpret the law/context is given before
	  the punishment is administered

	- a clearly documented procedure makes suspension easier

	- a clearly documented procedure makes suspension easier
	  to appeal when the safeguards were ignored

> In general, I would not like our BCPs to contain the level of detail
> that you've included in your note (3 private warnings, etc.).
> Although I think that this would be a reasonable approach for most
> situations, I'd prefer to leave the details to the chair and AD.

Reminds me of a typical site usage or privacy policy that says "we can
change the rules of the game at any time, and without notice, and you
are supposed to know the new rules immediately after the change".

Punishment levels should not be hard-coded, but the procedure to avoid
the punishment (warnings and such) should be hard-coded so that
chair's, AD's, victim's, and WG's expectations match as close as
possible.

> There are possible situations (obvious and/or offensive spam,
> posting non-English mail, threats, serious verbal abuse) where I
> think it would be appropriate for a WG chair to revoke someone's
> posting privileges for 30 days without three prior warnings.

A newbie subscribes to the mailing list, posts something like "I
believe there is a serious problem with your latest protocol draft,
but I cannot explain it well enough in English, so here is a French
description, FWIW". The guy gets his ``privileges'' revoked for 30
days without warnings and never bothers the WG or the IETF again.
Accidently, the Chair was the only WG participant who knew French, but
did not share the guy's technical opinion.

Three warnings may be an overkill, but a clearly marked _last_ warning
must always be present if you want to formalize the procedure.

Alex.

_______________________________________________
mpowr mailing list
mpowr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr