ADMIN: Rick Edwards & other things
Tue Apr 4 22:31:08 EDT 2000
FYI: I have sent an email to Rick to ask him if he was warned or contacted
before being set to NOPOST. He told me he only received one Email saying
why he was set to NOPOST and it was on Monday about midnite. He had
received no warning before being set to NOPOST in private email.
From: michael huggins <email@example.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: ADMIN: Rick Edwards & other things
>Has anyone specifically verified that RE was not warned in private mail,
>that we as list members are not privileged to view, PRIOR to his being set
>to NOPOST? I was just wondering........
>The Blues is ALRIGHT
>From: Rich Gonzalez <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>To: BLUES-L@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU <BLUES-L@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU>
>Date: Monday, April 03, 2000 6:31 PM
>Subject: Re: ADMIN: Rick Edwards & other things
>>Bob Page wrote:
>>> Personally, I think the AuP is being applied a bit too liberally with
>>> respect to Edwards. I'd think that one booted from the list, or even
>>> to NOPOST, would be diligent in holding the listowners accountable for
>>> applying the AUP in an uniform and equal fashion to all list-persons,
>>> I've already seen posts from others which could be construed in a
>>> fashion as what maxdog is citing from RE. On the other hand, if
>>> listowners are trigger happy with applying the disciplinary provisions
>>> the AUP, they're gonna end up clearing the room within a matter of
>>> months. Be careful of what you wish for.
>>Yes, a pattern of inconsistent enforcement is emerging. When one
>>trundles home at 3:30 AM, checks the list, decides to take
>>action--including failing to apply the AUP specified warning
>>before putting an offender on NOPOST and includes categorization
>>of an "attack on Dale", that apparently did not occur, as partial
>>justification for the action .... I'd be of the opinion that
>>"trigger happy" might be a description that would pop into the
>>mind of a neutral party.
>>Who was it that drafted that AUP anyway? It was "non-negotiable"
>>as I recall...
>>All of this in my opinion, of course.
>>No attack on any party intended. Just an opinion.
>>> > maxdog wrote:
>>> > > I have set Rick to NOPOST again. The reasons are his unprovoked
>>> > on PW
>>> > > Fenton and his attack on Dale for changing the subject line of a
>>> > thread.
More information about the Blues-l