[LA-Policies] Mailing list policy comments

[Tennessee Leeuwenburg]

Hi Glen,

Fantastic comments! I support everything you've said.

With point (6) in mind, do you mean that moderators should identify
themselves in emails to the list via (for example) their email signature?

On 28 October 2014 01:22, Glen Turner <gdt at gdt.id.au> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Read the policy. Here are some notes of varying degrees of triviality. In
> no particular order:
>
> 1)
> The Mailing List Policy doesn't anywhere list what is acceptable
> behaviour, let alone behaviours are to be encouraged.  Not sure what that
> says.
>
> 2)
> Consider re-wording (3)(d)(i) from
>
> > offensive verbal or written remarks related to ...
>
> to
>
> > offensive remarks; including, but not limited to, those related to ...
>
> as that would catch unlisted behaviours, such as offensive words
> concerning marital status or social class, whilst still giving clear
> guidance for the specifically-listed instances.
>
> It would also fix a small issue concerning the technology of making verbal
> remarks to a e-mail list.
>
> 3)
> Why aren't the moderators empowered to immediately remove the offensive
> remarks from the archive of the mailing list?
>
> 4)
> The Linux Australia Council should reserve to itself the ability to review
> and direct moderators' actions, irrespective of the lack of a referral to
> the Council under (4)(b)(v).
>
> 5)
> Why does a victim of offensive behaviour have less ability to refer
> moderator decisions to Council than a perpetrator of offensive behaviour?
> See (5)(a).
>
> 6)
> It should be made clear that moderators are list members when posting to
> the list.
>
> 7)
> Why does Council constrain its own powers in (5)(c) to just three actions?
> Option (5)(c)(i) is particularly limiting -- for example Council cannot
> uphold the actions of the Moderators *and* do another thing (eg, provide
> clearer guidance for future actions), as that is beyond what Council has
> permitted to itself.
>
> 8)
> It may not be advantageous to Council to conceed that list members are
> considered by it to be natural persons. The distinction between a natural
> person and a person acting as a agent of a corporation might well be
> something Linux Australia's legal representatives might choose to argue,
> and that decision should be left to them in light of the circumstances of
> a particular issue.
>
> -glen
>
> --
> Glen Turner <http://www.gdt.id.au/~gdt/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Policies mailing list
> Policies at lists.linux.org.au
> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/policies
>



-- 
--------------------------------------------------
Tennessee Leeuwenburg
http://myownhat.blogspot.com/
"Don't believe everything you think"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/policies/attachments/20141030/2a1acf81/attachment.htm