Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Manu Sporny]

Drew McLellan wrote:
> The simple fact is that the microformats community is *not* a lot of
> work, save for the disruption Andy has caused. That we even seen to
> spend effort having this conversation rather than working on
> microformats is further evidence of that disruption.

Drew,

We are spending effort having this conversation because governance is
vital to the health of this community. Talking about the method employed
to execute this ban is certainly not a waste of time. Talking about
contributions of community members is certainly not a waste of time, either.

If nobody had a problem with the admins' decision, you would have seen
my initial e-mail and silence thereafter. However, there have been a
number of people that have voiced a similar concern. To date, 10 people
have voiced concern about the length of Andy's ban and the methods used
to ban him. That is a clear indicator that there is a disconnect between
the admins and the community.

This isn't just about Andy - it is also about the methods employed by
the admins to come to this decision:

- Lack of a documented process for bans.
- Lack of proper documentation leading up to Andy's ban.
- A vote count for the admins (for and against).

At the very least, if we don't have a process in place, we should follow
Wikipedia's ban procedure[2].

To place the blame of this "disruption" squarely on Andy's shoulders is
to ignore the fact that the admins are the ones that brought about the
18 month ban. It also ignores the fact that proper due diligence was not
performed before the ban.

This would be happening if it were Andy, or anybody else on this list.
We are spending the effort to have this conversation because we don't
like what we're seeing.

Just to be clear, here's what the expectations are:

- The admins reply to each point in the initial e-mail that started this
  thread[1]
- The admins create a procedure for banning individuals from the
  Microformats community.
- The admins fully document Andy's ban, similar in scope to Wikipedia[2]

If you want to focus on making this community run smoother, focus on
those things and the next time something like this happens, we won't
have to re-hash this discussion.

-- manu

[1]http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2008-March/011713.html
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pigsonthewing

-- 
Manu Sporny
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: RDFa Basics (video)
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2008/01/07/rdfa-basics
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Scott Reynen]

On Mar 11, 2008, at 8:10 AM, Christopher St John wrote:


Sarcastic answers may be appropriate for individuals (or not) but
they certainly are not appropriate for people acting in an official
capacity on the list.



Drew can clarify whether he was being sarcastic, but I'd like to  
clarify another point: unless otherwise stated, all messages from  
anyone on the admin list are acting in a *personal*, not official  
capacity.  Also, many of those on the admin list are at a conference  
right now, so will be slow to respond in either capacity.


Peace,
Scott

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Christopher St John]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Drew McLellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> That we even seen to
>  spend effort having this conversation rather than working on
>  microformats is further evidence of that disruption.
>

Andy was acting as a stalking horse for many community issues.

It wasn't fair to let him do that. I think people who allowed him to
express their frustration risk-free are starting to feel a bit guilty. I
know I am.

-cks

-- 
Christopher St. John
http://artofsystems.blogspot.com
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Drew McLellan]

On 11 Mar 2008, at 13:10, Christopher St John wrote:

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Drew McLellan  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 11 Mar 2008, at 05:24, Christopher St John wrote:


Manu is currently one of the most active and productive contributors
(much more active recently than any of the admins) and the lead
editor on a complex and important microformat, yet his points have
gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little over the top to ignore
what Manu has to say?


Unanswered, yes. Ignored, no.



Sarcastic answers may be appropriate for individuals (or not) but
they certainly are not appropriate for people acting in an official
capacity on the list.


No sarcasm intended, just a statement of fact. Perhaps a little terse,  
so apologies if it sounded bad. I was simply saying that although  
Manu's message is presently unanswered, that doesn't mean it will not  
be answered or that it is being ignored.


Also not in an official capacity, just as me. 'Official' stuff is  
clearly flagged.





The admins have stated that it's a lot of work to administer a
large, active and growing community. I think those of us that
have helped out with similar things are not surprised, but fair
enough: it _is_ a lot of work, and as the community grows it
will just be more work. The most helpful and well-meaning people
in the world will still have conflicts that need resolving, and
misunderstandings that need working out.


The simple fact is that the microformats community is *not* a lot of  
work, save for the disruption Andy has caused. That we even seen to  
spend effort having this conversation rather than working on  
microformats is further evidence of that disruption.


drew.
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Jesse Rodgers]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Christopher St John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  So how about those among the current admins who are sick
>  of it step down and we have some elections? To be followed by
>  an open, documented, public discussion of how the community
>  wishes to be governed?

I believe that establishing governance of the Microformats community
would require that the Micformats community actually has some
centralized authority that has control over the use of Microformats. I
don't see why that is warranted... The Microformats themselves aren't
standards, they are patterns and I would consider them best practices
at the moment. The site could be deleted tomorrow and the web wouldn't
stop nor would the movement.

I agree some transparency would be nice. Emails, IRC, wiki edits, and
all other things that led to Andy's expulsion would be helpful to
understand what happened but to be honest, I don't care. What I do
care about is how people (and only a few) jump on the folks that try
to keep things focused.

Jesse
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Christopher St John]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Drew McLellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11 Mar 2008, at 05:24, Christopher St John wrote:
>
>  > Manu is currently one of the most active and productive contributors
>  > (much more active recently than any of the admins) and the lead
>  > editor on a complex and important microformat, yet his points have
>  > gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little over the top to ignore
>  > what Manu has to say?
>
>  Unanswered, yes. Ignored, no.
>

Sarcastic answers may be appropriate for individuals (or not) but
they certainly are not appropriate for people acting in an official
capacity on the list.

The admins have stated that it's a lot of work to administer a
large, active and growing community. I think those of us that
have helped out with similar things are not surprised, but fair
enough: it _is_ a lot of work, and as the community grows it
will just be more work. The most helpful and well-meaning people
in the world will still have conflicts that need resolving, and
misunderstandings that need working out.

So how about those among the current admins who are sick
of it step down and we have some elections? To be followed by
an open, documented, public discussion of how the community
wishes to be governed?


-cks


-- 
Christopher St. John
http://artofsystems.blogspot.com
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Drew McLellan]

On 11 Mar 2008, at 05:24, Christopher St John wrote:


Manu is currently one of the most active and productive contributors
(much more active recently than any of the admins) and the lead
editor on a complex and important microformat, yet his points have
gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little over the top to ignore
what Manu has to say?


Unanswered, yes. Ignored, no.

drew.
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Christopher St John]

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:40 AM, Drew McLellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  I appreciate how an 18 month ban seems harsh when read out of context.
>

It wasn't read out of context. Manu gave comprehensive context, but
your response ignored it.

Manu is currently one of the most active and productive contributors
(much more active recently than any of the admins) and the lead
editor on a complex and important microformat, yet his points have
gone completely unanswered. Isn't it a little over the top to ignore
what Manu has to say?

-cks

-- 
Christopher St. John
http://artofsystems.blogspot.com
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Jesse Rodgers]

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 5:40 AM, Drew McLellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  iirc (and I'll hunt back through and confirm) Andy's first ban was for
>  7 days. His second ban was for 30 days.

>From 30 days to 18 months seems high but I understand why the action
was taken. Although I haven't crossed paths with Andy (largely because
I lurk) I do think he was prone to bullying with words. As a lurker I
will guess that a barrier to participate for a lot of people are
overly aggressive and pedantic remarks that amount to people sitting
around saying "UR DOIN IT WRONG" instead of teaching.

99% of the time that is not the case with this community but I have a
feeling Andy, with that participation rate, was part of the 1% that
made some people afraid to participate. Do people need to toughen up?
Yes. But I wonder about an individual's motivations that constantly
accuse the 'administrators' of wrong doing and unfair practice yet
continuously come back for more.

Jesse
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Drew McLellan]

On 10 Mar 2008, at 04:54, Ernest Prabhakar wrote:

I don't know about "Unjust"  --- I sympathize with the amount of  
grief the Admins have had to go through because of Andy -- but I do  
feel that 18 months is a bit severe; especially given that the  
previous suspension was (if I remember correctly) only a week.


iirc (and I'll hunt back through and confirm) Andy's first ban was for  
7 days. His second ban was for 30 days.


I appreciate how an 18 month ban seems harsh when read out of context.  
When you look at all the rules and regulations we've had to put in  
place, and pretty much the fact that the group of admins exists at all  
(there's very little 'admin' work around microformats by design) all  
because of Andy, it's not so unreasonable.


Take into consideration those who have reported that they've been put  
off contributing because of Andy's behaviour, and I'm sure countless  
others who have just gone away for the same reason without letting us  
know. Take into consideration two separate bans of increasing length  
that resulted in no modification of behaviour.


Andy has made positive contributions over time, but those have vastly  
been outweighed by negative side-effects of his presence. Andy has  
demonstrated that he's not willing or capable of modifying his  
behaviour to reduce the negative impact on the community.  
Unfortunately at that point we've just had to take the bull by the  
horns and ban him for an extended period. We all need to focus energy  
and our limited resources on moving microformats forward, not on  
treading water.


The fact that Andy has also been banned for an extended period from  
Wikipedia is not related, but it is extremely telling.


drew.

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Ernest Prabhakar]

Hi all,

On Mar 8, 2008, at 2:22 PM, Toby A Inkster wrote:

Manu Sporny wrote:
I'd like to see the ban on Andy reduced to a month or lifted  
completely.


I shall be concise, because Manu has already gone into plenty of  
details, but...

+1


I don't know about "Unjust"  --- I sympathize with the amount of grief  
the Admins have had to go through because of Andy -- but I do feel  
that 18 months is a bit severe; especially given that the previous  
suspension was (if I remember correctly) only a week.


I think a suspension of 1-3 months -- along with Andy agreeing to a  
new code of conduct -- would be more than sufficient.


If after that Andy still refuses to admit than his behavior has been  
in any way problematic or difficult, then I can see grounds for  
extending the suspension further.


-- Ernie P.


___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

[uf-discuss] Re: Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

[Toby A Inkster]

Manu Sporny wrote:
I'd like to see the ban on Andy reduced to a month or lifted  
completely.


I shall be concise, because Manu has already gone into plenty of  
details, but...

+1

--
Toby A Inkster





___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss