Home » General (non-technical) » Eclipse Foundation » Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment
| Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #11112] |
Fri, 14 January 2005 11:33  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Numerous people have made well-considered requests that I request community
feedback on my move to ban Ilias Lazaridis from the Eclipse newsgroups. I am
happy to do so, and in retrospect should have done it in the first place.
So here is my request: please post on this thread as to whether you believe
that banishment is warranted in this instance.
Perhaps I should clarify a few points that have come up along the way.
1. First, we *are* trying to block Ilias from Bugzilla and the newsgroups.
The Bugzilla blocking was done because he was disrupting the developers. The
newsgroup blocking was done because of his trollish behaviour had hijacked a
significant amount of discourse on our site. So Ilias is correct in saying
that we are (so far unsuccessfully) attempting to banish him from the site.
There are various technical reasons why we have been unsuccessful to date.
2. I did this on my own authority. I did not consult the Board. This has
nothing to do with any director or Member of Eclipse. Anyone who thinks that
IBM (or any other Member) has anything to do with this is unequivocally
wrong.
3. I have never worked directly for IBM. I did, however, work for Object
Technology International. So for the period Feb. 1996 to May 1999 I was
indirectly an employee of IBM. (OTI was a wholly owned subsidiary of IBM.)
But what that has to do with anything, I have no idea. I have also in the
past worked for Oracle (another Member) and WebGain (a founding member of
the Eclipse consortium).
This is not a conspiracy. It is an attempt to (a) prevent disruptions to our
committers and (b) restore our newsgroups to something other than the Ilias
show.
/mike
Mike Milinkovich
Executive Director
Eclipse Foundation
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #11129 is a reply to message #11112] |
Fri, 14 January 2005 13:09  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
My two cents:
If he's impeding the developers (bugzilla), then give hime the boot.
Otherwise, who cares? Just ignore him. But if you feel the need to
expunge him completely, go for it. I could care less.
As for "(b) restore our newsgroups to something other than the Ilias
show.". This is like the NHL lockout, the players salaries are too
high because the owners are willing to pay. Ilias has the prominence he
has because people keep responding to his garbage.
Geoff
http://spindle.sourceforge.net.
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> Numerous people have made well-considered requests that I request community
> feedback on my move to ban Ilias Lazaridis from the Eclipse newsgroups. I am
> happy to do so, and in retrospect should have done it in the first place.
>
> So here is my request: please post on this thread as to whether you believe
> that banishment is warranted in this instance.
>
> Perhaps I should clarify a few points that have come up along the way.
>
> 1. First, we *are* trying to block Ilias from Bugzilla and the newsgroups.
> The Bugzilla blocking was done because he was disrupting the developers. The
> newsgroup blocking was done because of his trollish behaviour had hijacked a
> significant amount of discourse on our site. So Ilias is correct in saying
> that we are (so far unsuccessfully) attempting to banish him from the site.
> There are various technical reasons why we have been unsuccessful to date.
>
> 2. I did this on my own authority. I did not consult the Board. This has
> nothing to do with any director or Member of Eclipse. Anyone who thinks that
> IBM (or any other Member) has anything to do with this is unequivocally
> wrong.
>
> 3. I have never worked directly for IBM. I did, however, work for Object
> Technology International. So for the period Feb. 1996 to May 1999 I was
> indirectly an employee of IBM. (OTI was a wholly owned subsidiary of IBM.)
> But what that has to do with anything, I have no idea. I have also in the
> past worked for Oracle (another Member) and WebGain (a founding member of
> the Eclipse consortium).
>
> This is not a conspiracy. It is an attempt to (a) prevent disruptions to our
> committers and (b) restore our newsgroups to something other than the Ilias
> show.
>
> /mike
>
> Mike Milinkovich
> Executive Director
> Eclipse Foundation
>
>
|
|
| |
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #11139 is a reply to message #11112] |
Fri, 14 January 2005 12:47 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: joerg.von.frantzius.artnology.nospam.com
I'd prefer blocking him from bugzilla only, if that was possible. If
blocking from bugzilla doesn't work without blocking from the
newsgroups, than unfortunately that seems necessary.
If he is able to post but not able to use bugzilla, I'd absolutely
favour not wasting time and energy on trying to prevent him from posting!
Mike Milinkovich schrieb:
>Numerous people have made well-considered requests that I request community
>feedback on my move to ban Ilias Lazaridis from the Eclipse newsgroups. I am
>happy to do so, and in retrospect should have done it in the first place.
>
>So here is my request: please post on this thread as to whether you believe
>that banishment is warranted in this instance.
>
>Perhaps I should clarify a few points that have come up along the way.
>
>1. First, we *are* trying to block Ilias from Bugzilla and the newsgroups.
>The Bugzilla blocking was done because he was disrupting the developers. The
>newsgroup blocking was done because of his trollish behaviour had hijacked a
>significant amount of discourse on our site. So Ilias is correct in saying
>
>
If people would just ignore him, the discourse wouldn't get hijacked. He
seems successful at stirring interest, and I'd absolutely say that
people should be able to discuss anything related to eclipse that they
find interesting. At some point it's more related to Ilias than Eclipse,
but everone should be able to find out that point for him-/herself.
>that we are (so far unsuccessfully) attempting to banish him from the site.
>There are various technical reasons why we have been unsuccessful to date.
>
>
>2. I did this on my own authority. I did not consult the Board. This has
>nothing to do with any director or Member of Eclipse. Anyone who thinks that
>IBM (or any other Member) has anything to do with this is unequivocally
>wrong.
>
>3. I have never worked directly for IBM. I did, however, work for Object
>Technology International. So for the period Feb. 1996 to May 1999 I was
>indirectly an employee of IBM. (OTI was a wholly owned subsidiary of IBM.)
>But what that has to do with anything, I have no idea. I have also in the
>past worked for Oracle (another Member) and WebGain (a founding member of
>the Eclipse consortium).
>
>This is not a conspiracy. It is an attempt to (a) prevent disruptions to our
>committers and (b) restore our newsgroups to something other than the Ilias
>show.
>
>/mike
>
>Mike Milinkovich
>Executive Director
>Eclipse Foundation
>
>
>
>
|
|
| | | | | | | |
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #11245 is a reply to message #11174] |
Sat, 15 January 2005 15:46 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:56:11 -0500, Kim Horne <kim_horne@ca.ibm.com> wrote:
I agree with Kim's suggestion, +1 to bugzilla, going based just based on what I've
heard, I haven't been affected ... but bugzilla does have a prettey specfic purpose,
specific rules and procedures. -1 newgroups ... seems only obscenities, personal attacks, etc.,
would warrent that -- noise is in the ear of the beholder :).
> +1 to Bugzilla banination. The Eclipse developers work hard and don't
> need someone peeing in their cornflakes. He made work for people and
> that is not cool.
>
> -1 to newsgroup banination. Call me a masochist but I think the
> newsgroups need an agitator like Ilias. He has on occasion come up with
> some valid points. Besides, as people have pointed out repeatedly, it's
> easy to ignore people in newsgroups if you're really irked by them. You
> can't kill a troll by feeding it.
>
|
|
| | | | | | | |
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #11721 is a reply to message #11112] |
Mon, 17 January 2005 10:56 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ilias.lazaridis.com
[posting via http-nntp gateway, using an anonymous proxy, to bypass IP
blocking. I've kept this last joker for this moment. ]
-
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> Numerous people have made well-considered requests that I request community
> feedback on my move to ban Ilias Lazaridis from the Eclipse newsgroups. I am
> happy to do so, and in retrospect should have done it in the first place.
I don't think that your regret sincerely.
Otherwise you've immediately taken back any sanctions against me.
So, you 'punish' and _then_ ask the folks 'should we punish'? - whilst the
punished one cannot take part on the 'court' (due to the punishment).
I call this: tyranny.
Are you a tyrann, Mr. Mike Milinkovich?
My assumption is strengthen, as your technical way of applying the
sanctions violate the eclipse foundations privacy policy:
[ECLIPSE] [PRIVACY] - Direct Violation of Eclipse Foundations Privacy
Policy
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.softwaret ools/msg/65338948c9f6818f
> So here is my request: please post on this thread as to whether you believe
> that banishment is warranted in this instance.
Please decouple with precision:
I got from Buzilla this ridiculous message:
"
Your account has been disabled
I apologize, but your posts are no longer welcome here.If you believe your
account should be restored, please send email to webmaster@eclipse.org
explaining why.
"
I've not even tried to bypass this, e.g. whilst posting through a new
acount.
I like to keep the integrity of my writings, thus I write just with my
original identity.
[And of course I've not contacted the webmaster in private.]
I wanted to discuss this issue (a perfectly valid issue) on the
eclipse.foundation newsgroup (a perfectly valid forum, for this issue).
-
Now, I cannot discuss the above issue on the eclipse.foundation newsgroup
- as I was cowardly censored (blocked, whilst using anonymous data, whilst
violation privacy policy of eclipse).
> Perhaps I should clarify a few points that have come up along the way.
> 1. First, we *are* trying to block Ilias from Bugzilla and the newsgroups.
> The Bugzilla blocking was done because he was disrupting the developers.
As the Eclipse Foundation director, you should be more carefull with your
statements.
[This is true for the title of this thread, too]
> The
> newsgroup blocking was done because of his trollish behaviour had hijacked a
> significant amount of discourse on our site.
"trollish behaviour"
funny terminology.
"Hijacked a significant amount of discourse on our site"
I see.
> So Ilias is correct in saying
> that we are (so far unsuccessfully) attempting to banish him from the site.
> There are various technical reasons why we have been unsuccessful to date.
Additionally there is an Privacy Policy - which you ignore!
> 2. I did this on my own authority. I did not consult the Board. This has
> nothing to do with any director or Member of Eclipse. Anyone who thinks that
> IBM (or any other Member) has anything to do with this is unequivocally
> wrong.
=> {don't think - believe}
Eclipse - A Religion is Born.
> 3. I have never worked directly for IBM. I did, however, work for Object
> Technology International. So for the period Feb. 1996 to May 1999 I was
> indirectly an employee of IBM. (OTI was a wholly owned subsidiary of IBM.)
> But what that has to do with anything, I have no idea. I have also in the
> past worked for Oracle (another Member) and WebGain (a founding member of
> the Eclipse consortium).
=> {ex-OTI(IBM)}
> This is not a conspiracy. It is an attempt to (a) prevent disruptions to our
> committers and
This was achieved by disabling my bugzilla access.
> (b) restore our newsgroups to something other than the Ilias show.
I do not violate any rules of the system "eclipse.org Newsgroups".
Other people (including you) do so with their permanent off-topic stuff.
I write since long time only in "eclipse.foundation", protecting this way
developers from any annoyancies.
Point b is nothing else than a censorship attack against my person and the
criticism that I express.
I've not insulted anyone - and If someone goes nuts due to my
writing-style or due to a lost argumentation, then this is his very
personal problem.
-
Even with an 100% consens of the Community [which you don't have]:
Point b remains a clear case of _censorship_ - and nothing else.
-
I've lost very much time due to this - and I ask you to immediately enable
my access to the nntp server.
I don't expect an apology - I don't think that this folks a able to do so.
-
But, please at least respect my situation and just let me continue my work.
see section "TOUCHING LIMITS" and the end of the message:
[EVALUATION] - E07 - Sun Microsystems Talent Detection Mechanisms
http://www.netbeans.org/servlets/ReadMsg?msgId=861153&li stName=nbusers
> /mike
> Mike Milinkovich
> Executive Director
> Eclipse Foundation
..
--
http://lazaridis.com
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12185 is a reply to message #11576] |
Tue, 18 January 2005 16:39 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: roelandm.roelandmeyer.org
Excuse me. If I may be so bold as to interject here.
A hostile troll is the very last one that you want to have writing
documentation. I've read some of his posts and they are hardly objective. I
might also point out that the OSS community, in general, suffers from a
great lack of honest and current documentation. This attitude is one of the
causes.
I have recently had my third unfortunate encounter with a really nasty
troll, the first one being cjIII (aka Colin James III. Yes, I was listed on
his website, along with Grady Booch and Bertrand Meyers). That experience
tells me that banishing such is far preferable to putting up with them. Any
benefit that they bring far outweighs the negative feelings of hate and
general discontent that they bring.
If http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Ilias+Lazaridis% 22 is the same
guy then banishment is long overdue. I read some of that and I though that
it was the Right Reverand come back from the Internet dead. The Eclipse
community does not need the aggrivation.
"Ross Gardler" <rgardler@come_now_no_spam-apache.org> wrote in message
news:csen45$1ao$1@www.eclipse.org...
> ted stockwell wrote:
> > James D Carroll wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Ilias obviously has a passion. Is banning him really the best way to
> >> address
> >> him?
> >>
> >> I think not.
> >>
> >> It's obvious, to some extent, that Ilias is looking for work. So give
> >> it to
> >> him. Nice and open and free. He gets to say that he contributed to
> >> "Eclipse"
> >> and you get to channel his energy into helping the community for the
> >> benefit
> >> of all.
> >>
> >
> > Hey,
> >
> > I'm passionate about Eclipse too. And I do much more than just
> > relentlessly bombard the forums with my opinions. I'm spending my free
> > time developing open technologies around the current Eclipse offerings.
> > Giving Ilias full-time employment just because he's made a huge PITA of
> > himself will send a *very* wrong message to many other developers that
> > are working hard to make the Eclipse community a success by contributing
> > without demanding that the Consortium jump whenever they snap thier
> > fingers.
>
> I think you misunderstood the post. I do not think the suggestion was
> that such people be given paid employment. The suggestion is to give
> them productive things they can do within the community, particular jobs
> that most of us don't want to do, like writing documents.
>
> Ross
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12187 is a reply to message #12185] |
Tue, 18 January 2005 16:46 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: roelandm.roelandmeyer.org
s/far outweighs/far outweighed by/
"exquisitus" <roelandm@roelandmeyer.org> wrote in message
news:csjvmd$gqk$1@www.eclipse.org...
> Excuse me. If I may be so bold as to interject here.
>
> A hostile troll is the very last one that you want to have writing
> documentation. I've read some of his posts and they are hardly objective.
I
> might also point out that the OSS community, in general, suffers from a
> great lack of honest and current documentation. This attitude is one of
the
> causes.
>
> I have recently had my third unfortunate encounter with a really nasty
> troll, the first one being cjIII (aka Colin James III. Yes, I was listed
on
> his website, along with Grady Booch and Bertrand Meyers). That experience
> tells me that banishing such is far preferable to putting up with them.
Any
> benefit that they bring far outweighs the negative feelings of hate and
> general discontent that they bring.
>
> If http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Ilias+Lazaridis% 22 is the same
> guy then banishment is long overdue. I read some of that and I though that
> it was the Right Reverand come back from the Internet dead. The Eclipse
> community does not need the aggrivation.
>
> "Ross Gardler" <rgardler@come_now_no_spam-apache.org> wrote in message
> news:csen45$1ao$1@www.eclipse.org...
> > ted stockwell wrote:
> > > James D Carroll wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Ilias obviously has a passion. Is banning him really the best way to
> > >> address
> > >> him?
> > >>
> > >> I think not.
> > >>
> > >> It's obvious, to some extent, that Ilias is looking for work. So give
> > >> it to
> > >> him. Nice and open and free. He gets to say that he contributed to
> > >> "Eclipse"
> > >> and you get to channel his energy into helping the community for the
> > >> benefit
> > >> of all.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > I'm passionate about Eclipse too. And I do much more than just
> > > relentlessly bombard the forums with my opinions. I'm spending my
free
> > > time developing open technologies around the current Eclipse
offerings.
> > > Giving Ilias full-time employment just because he's made a huge PITA
of
> > > himself will send a *very* wrong message to many other developers that
> > > are working hard to make the Eclipse community a success by
contributing
> > > without demanding that the Consortium jump whenever they snap thier
> > > fingers.
> >
> > I think you misunderstood the post. I do not think the suggestion was
> > that such people be given paid employment. The suggestion is to give
> > them productive things they can do within the community, particular jobs
> > that most of us don't want to do, like writing documents.
> >
> > Ross
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12190 is a reply to message #11112] |
Tue, 18 January 2005 16:51 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Is there any kind of policy that he vilolates? I think we should
minimize and clearly define the limitations on
"freedom of speech" unless absolutely necessary (this is open source
project after all).
Not annoying the developers can be definetely included in some policy,
but I agree it's hard to define.
Btw, if I don't mistake Ilias is now posting to this newsgroup only, so
he does not interfere
with the majority of the discussions.
My suggestion - if there is no policy - define it. Meanwhile I think
newsgroup posts are ok, bugzilla
submissions probably not.
Genady
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
>Numerous people have made well-considered requests that I request community
>feedback on my move to ban Ilias Lazaridis from the Eclipse newsgroups. I am
>happy to do so, and in retrospect should have done it in the first place.
>
>So here is my request: please post on this thread as to whether you believe
>that banishment is warranted in this instance.
>
>Perhaps I should clarify a few points that have come up along the way.
>
>1. First, we *are* trying to block Ilias from Bugzilla and the newsgroups.
>The Bugzilla blocking was done because he was disrupting the developers. The
>newsgroup blocking was done because of his trollish behaviour had hijacked a
>significant amount of discourse on our site. So Ilias is correct in saying
>that we are (so far unsuccessfully) attempting to banish him from the site.
>There are various technical reasons why we have been unsuccessful to date.
>
>2. I did this on my own authority. I did not consult the Board. This has
>nothing to do with any director or Member of Eclipse. Anyone who thinks that
>IBM (or any other Member) has anything to do with this is unequivocally
>wrong.
>
>3. I have never worked directly for IBM. I did, however, work for Object
>Technology International. So for the period Feb. 1996 to May 1999 I was
>indirectly an employee of IBM. (OTI was a wholly owned subsidiary of IBM.)
>But what that has to do with anything, I have no idea. I have also in the
>past worked for Oracle (another Member) and WebGain (a founding member of
>the Eclipse consortium).
>
>This is not a conspiracy. It is an attempt to (a) prevent disruptions to our
>committers and (b) restore our newsgroups to something other than the Ilias
>show.
>
>/mike
>
>Mike Milinkovich
>Executive Director
>Eclipse Foundation
>
>
>
>
|
|
| | | |
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12201 is a reply to message #12199] |
Tue, 18 January 2005 19:04 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Like I said, I've been down this road before and the latest experience was
Sep04.
You heard my piece so I won't repeat it. However, having been goaded to
Hani's state a few times, I can well sympathise. Another point, most trolls
can never be had by any sort of rules. They always push right at the limit.
They stay at the limit, and just as close to the edge of that limit as they
can possibly get, and they stress the entire community by doing so. It
doesn't take much of that sort of stress before people start leaving.
Usually in droves. Most people don't like pain.
The constant whining and complaining isn't quite the irritant as the barely
polite rude behavior. Trolls that rant and rave all the time usually get
deleted fast and that species is, thankfully, almost extinct. It's the
almost intolerable but legally within bounds troll that depopulates and
sours entire communities. It's really a tougher, more evolved troll. This is
not a test of character and it doesn't have to be a test of "how much pain
can everyone stand". Life is too short to put up with that.
If such a troll, one that doesn't ever seem to learn civilized social
behavior, is spotted then they should be ousted before they destroy the good
will in the community. I leave it to your decision as to whether this one
qualifies. However, I did google the record and you can too. Passive
behavior doesn't work with this sort of troll. It only gives them the time
and space to destroy or damage the community.
FWIW, my two centimes.
Good night.
--
--
E X Q U I S I T U S
Neuchatel, CH
--
"James D Carroll" <jamesdcarroll@hotmaill.com> wrote in message
news:csk62e$jih$1@www.eclipse.org...
> From the post Eric links to (written by Hani Suleiman to Ilias) :
>
> "Writing broken English is a lot more likely to reveal that you're a brain
> damaged turd..."
> "your ideas and opinions ... have more in common with a crack addled
> whore's "
> "you're so clearly the result of an inbreeding generic experiment gone
> horribly wrong"
> "If you have children, please smother them, you'd be doing them and us a
> huge favour. If you have parents, neuter them, that genetic line is a dead
> end anyway. "
>
> If you can show me where Ilias has said anything even remotely as
offensive
> as that post I'll be the first to wish a hearty "Don't let the door hit
you
> where the good Lord split you" to the young man. But I typically define a
> troll by the vitriol he spews, not just what he engenders.
>
> Impudent? Yup. Immature? Seemingly. Impatient? Definitely. Nefariously
> opportunistic? Perhaps.
>
> But I firmly believe that this is a VERY important test for Eclipse as an
> open community. It should be taken with great care.
>
> James
>
>
>
>
> "Eric Clayberg" <clayberg@instantiations.com> wrote in message
> news:csk22u$thk$1@www.eclipse.org...
>
> > They started out nice to him, but things quickly followed the familiar
> > pattern. As an example, Hani Suleiman posted a very harsh response to
> Ilias
> > toward the bottom of this thread...
> >
> >
>
http://www.intellij.net/forums/thread.jsp?forum=27&threa d=122131&tstart=0&trange=15
> >
> > -Eric
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12203 is a reply to message #12199] |
Tue, 18 January 2005 21:07 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: rgardler.come_now_no_spam-apache.org
James D Carroll wrote:
> But I firmly believe that this is a VERY important test for Eclipse as an
> open community. It should be taken with great care.
Yes, and this is the real issue, thank you James D Carroll for bringing
us back on track.
Discussing the ins and outs of each individual case is futile, have a
community vote and take action, that's it.
In this case I believe the community vote has been had. It is now up to
the Board to decide on the appropriate action given the feedback
received in this thread.
As a community I believe our next stage is to make recommendations to
the board for handling future "trolls". It is most important that we do
this without mentioning any individuals name, it is not about
individuals, it is about community. We must focus on identifying
acceptable behaviour and the process for dealing with people who move
outside of these guidelines.
In tackling this task, I again urge the community to consider a formal
voting system. The Apache Software Foundation has one that works well
and is used in a number of other community environments. Furthermore,
judging by the number of Apache style votes (+1, -1, +0, -0) in this
thread I would say plenty of people here already know how it works -
that has to be a good start. The strength of such a system is that we do
not have to identify all possible futures, we can deal with each
individual situation as it arises.
The idea is if an "argument" is underway and discussion has started
going around in circles then a vote is called. Once the community has
voted and a majority opinion becomes evident (which it usually does),
then that is it!
NO MORE ARGUMENT.
To continue along a line that has been voted against (without new input)
would be considered unacceptable behaviour.
Only the votes of board members are binding, but all members of the
community are able to express their preferences in order to assist the
board in making their decision.
So in this situation (ignoring everything that went before for brevity)
it would have gone something like:
- you guys don't use bugzilla correctly, here's what I have done
- no, you are mistaken, it is you who are not using it correctly, the
info you are trying to put in bugzilla is managed here
- I've just reopened all my bugs because I don't want it there I want it
in bugzilla
- That is not the way we do it here, unless you can give us good reason
to change then the bugs get marked as invalid. You are welcome to
provide patches to the documents we pointed to if you think they are
incomplete but please discuss them with the relevant community and, if
necessary call a vote on your proposals.
- Can't you see you are using bugzilla wrong
- no we're not, lets vote on your proposals for a change in usage
Now, assuming that the results of the vote were adhered to there would
be no need to ban anyone from anything, if the problem persists the next
vote can be for removal of a bugzilla account. No slanging matches, no
wasted time searching for "dirt" on the individual, no accusations of
tyranny or obfuscation.
(I'm still writing all this without having read up on how things are
done here, so if a similar system is already in place please point me at
wherever it is documented and lets start using it).
Ross
|
|
| |
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12205 is a reply to message #12204] |
Wed, 19 January 2005 02:28 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
and those same people wonder, much later, why the community starts reeking
like an overly ripe toilet bowl.
You have to start asking yourself whether this community is here for
everyone's entertainment or if it exists to provide a useful service.
A troll would ride a bike, while wearing a clown suit and juggling balls,
down the center isle of a church, during Sunday Mass. Even if it broke no
explicit laws or rules and regardless of how many laughs he got, it still
should be tossed out on its bum for inappropriate behavior. By the same
token, neither is a parishioner allowed to start arguing doctrine during the
sermon. It's called "disruptive behavior" and it generally doesn't require
community approval to suppress it.
"Steve Blass" <swb@aurora.phys.utk.edu> wrote in message
news:cskuh4$qp3$1@www.eclipse.org...
> +-0
>
> "People love the troll. Some come to gawk, some to ask the Troll
> questions, others to hang out and enjoy the interactions that happen
> with other visitors who come to see the Troll."
> -- www.arfarfarf.com/troll/
|
|
| | |
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12563 is a reply to message #11684] |
Wed, 19 January 2005 23:10 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
"Amnon I. Govrin" <amnon@netvision.net.il> wrote in message
news:csgee6$i0g$1@www.eclipse.org...
> I would ban people with the same reasoning as banning spammers -
> unrelated, repetitive postings.
I actually think that this could be a decisive point. In my mind, Ilias has
crossed this particular line.
I admit that my perspective may be different than others, because many of
his posts are addressed to me and to date I have felt duty-bound to respond
to them. I estimate that I have spent over 40-60 hours in the past couple of
months reading, researching and responding to various Ilias "issues".
IMHO, to date the only relevant issue he has brought forward is that when we
changed "Eclipse.org" to "the Eclipse Foundation" in the Privacy Policy
without informing the community as required. Mea culpa. He also reported a
bug in our news portal.
Since I am currently in a state of jetlag-induced insomnia, I just crawled
through all of the posts on eclipse.foundation. If you exclude this thread,
Ilias is personally responsible for over 40% of the posts on the group (his
posts, plus responses from various parties to his threads). If you include
this thread, it is over 50%.
Now if his posts were useful or realistic, I would be thrilled to have
someone as actively interested in Eclipse. But I honestly don't think that
Ilias qualifies. Many of the issues he has raised are perfectly valid. Our
website needs enormous improvements, and we do not have nearly as much
well-organized content as I wish we did. But asserting that he (or anyone
else) could fix our universe in a week or a month just destroys his
credibility. His criticisms have never really bothered me. His proposed
solutions are what make me wonder about his grip on reality.
Ilias has in numerous posts suggested creating projects to overcome his
perceived issues with the management and governance of Eclipse. He has also
requested that the Foundation --- in writing to me --- contract his personal
services to complete these projects. This is in particular regard to his
much referenced "[PROJECT] - Collaboration and Government Infrastructure
(CAGI)" project.
I personally find the idea of lambasting a community in public and then
asking for a contract in private distasteful.
And, I personally do not have a shred of hope that he could be made to
contribute relevant work to the community.
There is one last point that I would like to make. I have been very
impressed with the points that James D Carroll made. They were very
thoughtful. I for one believe that democracy does not mean that the rights
of individuals or minorities can be trampled by the fleeting wishes of the
majority. This was well captured in James' reference to "...(rule of law) or
the outrage of the masses (rule of mob)." If you do the numbers, the
majority's interests are pretty clear. By my addition there are 11 votes for
banning Ilias from the newsgroups versus 5 against. As far as I can tell,
people are unanimous with respect to banning him from Bugzilla.
But that doesn't matter, if banishing Ilias is counter to his rights as an
individual. No one wants Eclipse to be run by mob rule.
Unfortunately, banishing a troll at Eclipse hasn't happened yet to my
knowledge, and we do not have a written policy on the topic. So "statute
law" is not going to solve the problem for us either.
So let me say this. I believe that everyone who wants to come to our
community has the right to participate fully and to openly criticize what he
or she finds wrong with our Foundation, our infrastructure, our
communications, whatever. But I also believe that as a community we can
expect participants to invest effort into understanding how we operate and
what the rules and conventions are. It is the responsibility of the
individual to join the community, not the responsibility of the community to
materially alter its governance and operations based upon the whim of a
visitor. Especially a visitor who fails to operate under the rules of
meritocracy and who refuses to invest the time and effort to learn how to
contribute to the project using the rules of the project. (That is why it
was Ilias' refusal to follow the rules with respect to Bugzilla that caused
me to take action.)
My conclusion is that we do need to have sanctions for repeatedly
anti-social behavior. Where "anti-social" does not necessarily mean
pornographic or abusive. Anti-social can also mean a steadfast refusal to
participate under the social norms and mores of the community. As Amnon
points out, spamming the newsgroups could also qualify as anti-social
behaviour.
Anyways, that's enough for one night. I am not going to make any final
decisions at 4:00am. But what I promise everyone is that in the end the
decision is not going to be made in anger or frustration. It will be made
based upon what I believe is --- on balance --- in the best interests of
Eclipse.
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12584 is a reply to message #12563] |
Thu, 20 January 2005 01:24 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
This is very well thought out. However, I might suggest that you base troll
expulsions on "disruptive behavior" and very carefully fail to define it in
detail. It's those details where the modern troll will "Internet lawyer" you
into submission. There is no statute that the modern troll cannot work
around or subvert, to the detriment of the community.
http://slamlander.livejournal.com/44911.html
Hanlon's Razor:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by
stupidity.
Slamlander's corollary:
However, never assume that stupidity isn't malicious.
That's basically, the corner where many of the modern trolls operate.
Another favorite troll past-time is to make admins and group leaders jump
through their favorite hoops. A sufficiently large group will attract one or
more of these. It is inevitable. The trick is to identify and expel them
early, by their macro behavior patterns. The pattern that you have observed
is definitely troll-spoor, IMHO.
"Mike Milinkovich" <mike.milinkovich@eclipse.org> wrote in message
news:csnb0f$7fk$1@www.eclipse.org...
> "Amnon I. Govrin" <amnon@netvision.net.il> wrote in message
> news:csgee6$i0g$1@www.eclipse.org...
>
> > I would ban people with the same reasoning as banning spammers -
> > unrelated, repetitive postings.
>
> I actually think that this could be a decisive point. In my mind, Ilias
has
> crossed this particular line.
>
> I admit that my perspective may be different than others, because many of
> his posts are addressed to me and to date I have felt duty-bound to
respond
> to them. I estimate that I have spent over 40-60 hours in the past couple
of
> months reading, researching and responding to various Ilias "issues".
>
> IMHO, to date the only relevant issue he has brought forward is that when
we
> changed "Eclipse.org" to "the Eclipse Foundation" in the Privacy Policy
> without informing the community as required. Mea culpa. He also reported a
> bug in our news portal.
>
> Since I am currently in a state of jetlag-induced insomnia, I just crawled
> through all of the posts on eclipse.foundation. If you exclude this
thread,
> Ilias is personally responsible for over 40% of the posts on the group
(his
> posts, plus responses from various parties to his threads). If you include
> this thread, it is over 50%.
>
> Now if his posts were useful or realistic, I would be thrilled to have
> someone as actively interested in Eclipse. But I honestly don't think that
> Ilias qualifies. Many of the issues he has raised are perfectly valid. Our
> website needs enormous improvements, and we do not have nearly as much
> well-organized content as I wish we did. But asserting that he (or anyone
> else) could fix our universe in a week or a month just destroys his
> credibility. His criticisms have never really bothered me. His proposed
> solutions are what make me wonder about his grip on reality.
>
> Ilias has in numerous posts suggested creating projects to overcome his
> perceived issues with the management and governance of Eclipse. He has
also
> requested that the Foundation --- in writing to me --- contract his
personal
> services to complete these projects. This is in particular regard to his
> much referenced "[PROJECT] - Collaboration and Government Infrastructure
> (CAGI)" project.
>
> I personally find the idea of lambasting a community in public and then
> asking for a contract in private distasteful.
>
> And, I personally do not have a shred of hope that he could be made to
> contribute relevant work to the community.
>
> There is one last point that I would like to make. I have been very
> impressed with the points that James D Carroll made. They were very
> thoughtful. I for one believe that democracy does not mean that the rights
> of individuals or minorities can be trampled by the fleeting wishes of the
> majority. This was well captured in James' reference to "...(rule of law)
or
> the outrage of the masses (rule of mob)." If you do the numbers, the
> majority's interests are pretty clear. By my addition there are 11 votes
for
> banning Ilias from the newsgroups versus 5 against. As far as I can tell,
> people are unanimous with respect to banning him from Bugzilla.
>
> But that doesn't matter, if banishing Ilias is counter to his rights as an
> individual. No one wants Eclipse to be run by mob rule.
>
> Unfortunately, banishing a troll at Eclipse hasn't happened yet to my
> knowledge, and we do not have a written policy on the topic. So "statute
> law" is not going to solve the problem for us either.
>
> So let me say this. I believe that everyone who wants to come to our
> community has the right to participate fully and to openly criticize what
he
> or she finds wrong with our Foundation, our infrastructure, our
> communications, whatever. But I also believe that as a community we can
> expect participants to invest effort into understanding how we operate and
> what the rules and conventions are. It is the responsibility of the
> individual to join the community, not the responsibility of the community
to
> materially alter its governance and operations based upon the whim of a
> visitor. Especially a visitor who fails to operate under the rules of
> meritocracy and who refuses to invest the time and effort to learn how to
> contribute to the project using the rules of the project. (That is why it
> was Ilias' refusal to follow the rules with respect to Bugzilla that
caused
> me to take action.)
>
> My conclusion is that we do need to have sanctions for repeatedly
> anti-social behavior. Where "anti-social" does not necessarily mean
> pornographic or abusive. Anti-social can also mean a steadfast refusal to
> participate under the social norms and mores of the community. As Amnon
> points out, spamming the newsgroups could also qualify as anti-social
> behaviour.
>
> Anyways, that's enough for one night. I am not going to make any final
> decisions at 4:00am. But what I promise everyone is that in the end the
> decision is not going to be made in anger or frustration. It will be made
> based upon what I believe is --- on balance --- in the best interests of
> Eclipse.
>
>
>
>
|
|
| | | |
| Re: Requesting Community Feedback: Troll Banishment [message #12824 is a reply to message #12563] |
Thu, 20 January 2005 23:22 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: my_name_with.between_names.lombardisoftware.com
+1 - Handling of this has been good. I personally don't think the
foundation (whether its Mike, webmaster or a project leader) needs to
ask the community for "approval" to ban anti-social behavior, but I
understand people want to be heard.
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> "Amnon I. Govrin" <amnon@netvision.net.il> wrote in message
> news:csgee6$i0g$1@www.eclipse.org...
>
>
>>I would ban people with the same reasoning as banning spammers -
>>unrelated, repetitive postings.
>
>
> I actually think that this could be a decisive point. In my mind, Ilias has
> crossed this particular line.
>
> I admit that my perspective may be different than others, because many of
> his posts are addressed to me and to date I have felt duty-bound to respond
> to them. I estimate that I have spent over 40-60 hours in the past couple of
> months reading, researching and responding to various Ilias "issues".
>
> IMHO, to date the only relevant issue he has brought forward is that when we
> changed "Eclipse.org" to "the Eclipse Foundation" in the Privacy Policy
> without informing the community as required. Mea culpa. He also reported a
> bug in our news portal.
>
> Since I am currently in a state of jetlag-induced insomnia, I just crawled
> through all of the posts on eclipse.foundation. If you exclude this thread,
> Ilias is personally responsible for over 40% of the posts on the group (his
> posts, plus responses from various parties to his threads). If you include
> this thread, it is over 50%.
>
> Now if his posts were useful or realistic, I would be thrilled to have
> someone as actively interested in Eclipse. But I honestly don't think that
> Ilias qualifies. Many of the issues he has raised are perfectly valid. Our
> website needs enormous improvements, and we do not have nearly as much
> well-organized content as I wish we did. But asserting that he (or anyone
> else) could fix our universe in a week or a month just destroys his
> credibility. His criticisms have never really bothered me. His proposed
> solutions are what make me wonder about his grip on reality.
>
> Ilias has in numerous posts suggested creating projects to overcome his
> perceived issues with the management and governance of Eclipse. He has also
> requested that the Foundation --- in writing to me --- contract his personal
> services to complete these projects. This is in particular regard to his
> much referenced "[PROJECT] - Collaboration and Government Infrastructure
> (CAGI)" project.
>
> I personally find the idea of lambasting a community in public and then
> asking for a contract in private distasteful.
>
> And, I personally do not have a shred of hope that he could be made to
> contribute relevant work to the community.
>
> There is one last point that I would like to make. I have been very
> impressed with the points that James D Carroll made. They were very
> thoughtful. I for one believe that democracy does not mean that the rights
> of individuals or minorities can be trampled by the fleeting wishes of the
> majority. This was well captured in James' reference to "...(rule of law) or
> the outrage of the masses (rule of mob)." If you do the numbers, the
> majority's interests are pretty clear. By my addition there are 11 votes for
> banning Ilias from the newsgroups versus 5 against. As far as I can tell,
> people are unanimous with respect to banning him from Bugzilla.
>
> But that doesn't matter, if banishing Ilias is counter to his rights as an
> individual. No one wants Eclipse to be run by mob rule.
>
> Unfortunately, banishing a troll at Eclipse hasn't happened yet to my
> knowledge, and we do not have a written policy on the topic. So "statute
> law" is not going to solve the problem for us either.
>
> So let me say this. I believe that everyone who wants to come to our
> community has the right to participate fully and to openly criticize what he
> or she finds wrong with our Foundation, our infrastructure, our
> communications, whatever. But I also believe that as a community we can
> expect participants to invest effort into understanding how we operate and
> what the rules and conventions are. It is the responsibility of the
> individual to join the community, not the responsibility of the community to
> materially alter its governance and operations based upon the whim of a
> visitor. Especially a visitor who fails to operate under the rules of
> meritocracy and who refuses to invest the time and effort to learn how to
> contribute to the project using the rules of the project. (That is why it
> was Ilias' refusal to follow the rules with respect to Bugzilla that caused
> me to take action.)
>
> My conclusion is that we do need to have sanctions for repeatedly
> anti-social behavior. Where "anti-social" does not necessarily mean
> pornographic or abusive. Anti-social can also mean a steadfast refusal to
> participate under the social norms and mores of the community. As Amnon
> points out, spamming the newsgroups could also qualify as anti-social
> behaviour.
>
> Anyways, that's enough for one night. I am not going to make any final
> decisions at 4:00am. But what I promise everyone is that in the end the
> decision is not going to be made in anger or frustration. It will be made
> based upon what I believe is --- on balance --- in the best interests of
> Eclipse.
>
>
>
>
|
|
| | | |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 18 21:52:52 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.07236 seconds |
Home