Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B2FB0183E1 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 19:30:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 84374 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jun 2015 19:30:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 84280 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jun 2015 19:30:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 84269 invoked by uid 99); 30 Jun 2015 19:30:10 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 19:30:10 +0000 Received: from mail-oi0-f46.google.com (mail-oi0-f46.google.com [209.85.218.46]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id A1A061A0255 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 19:30:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by oiyy130 with SMTP id y130so15451254oiy.0 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:30:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.60.157.41 with SMTP id wj9mr20860331oeb.72.1435692608484; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:30:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.83.20 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:29:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Andrew Purtell Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:29:29 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] correcting abusive behavior on mailing lists was (Re: [DISCUSS] Multi-Cluster HBase Client) To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01182c6cef7dce0519c13b0b --089e01182c6cef7dce0519c13b0b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Vlad, We have not even considered bans of any kind prior to this day. Apache mail can be fickle sometimes. Please try resending if there's a discussion you would like to start. I'll watch for anything of yours that may turn up in the moderator queue for some reason. On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Vladimir Rodionov wrote: > Apologize for off-top, but jumping in with my question into other > discussion is the only way I can > ask the question (see below). > > Have I been banned recently from opening discussions on dev list :) ? I c= an > join any discussion, except my own ... For some reasons, Apache mail > server ignores me in this case. > > Or its just a bug? > > -Vlad > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Stack wrote: > > > I volunteer to help moderate. > > St.Ack > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Sean Busbey > wrote: > > > > > (I took the liberty of moving us off of Ted's feature discussion > thread) > > > > > > A three month ban sounds better than a permanent ban. But it still > seems > > > likely to just result in the ban-ee walking away from teh community o= r > > > escalating. > > > > > > Would we consider enforcing moderation on posts for the three month > > period > > > instead of an outright ban? > > > > > > It's more work for whomever has moderator rights on the mailing list, > but > > > it provides a better feedback cycle for improved behavior. Presuming > > that I > > > don't already have such access as a PMC member, I'd be willing to > > volunteer > > > to help take on part of the burden. > > > > > > -Sean > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Andrew Purtell > > > wrote: > > > > > > > It was suggested privately that we try a temporary ban first, to be > > clear > > > > that current behavior and communication is unacceptable and won't b= e > > > > tolerated further, yet allow for the possibility of a return to the > > > > community should the message be received. So let me amend my propos= al > > - a > > > > three month temporary ban. > > > > > > > > Also, the reason I am asking for public feedback before calling for= a > > > vote > > > > is this would be the first time in the history of the project we > would > > > take > > > > this very unfortunate step. It pains me personally but enough is > > enough, > > > in > > > > my opinion. However, if you are not comfortable with that then plea= se > > > speak > > > > up and I won't ask the PMC to vote on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Andrew Purtell < > apurtell@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I've had enough and would like to ask the user and dev communitie= s > if > > > > they > > > > > would mind if we vote on a permanent ban of Michael Segal - any a= nd > > all > > > > > email accounts he may choose to set up - from all HBase mailing > > lists. > > > > The > > > > > basic lack of courtesy and constant naysaying is corrosive. Nobod= y > > > trying > > > > > to volunteer their time here deserves his continuing abuse. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Michael Segel < > > > > michael_segel@hotmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Sean, > > > > >> > > > > >> You=E2=80=99re a developer, or just some higher level primate th= at pounds > > > code? > > > > >> > > > > >> I don=E2=80=99t want to embarrass you, but what do they teach in > engineering > > > > >> schools these days? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > - Andy > > > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > > Hein > > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sean > > > > > > --=20 Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White) --089e01182c6cef7dce0519c13b0b--