From: Dylan Northrup <docx@...>
Date: 2010-04-15T05:15:54+09:00
Subject: Re: Who maintains ruby-talk?

A long time ago, (15.04.10), in a galaxy far, far away, Josh Cheek wrote:

:=But at this point, people calling for moderation haven't even qualified
:=their complaints.

Thunk is a jackass. His posts are about Ruids and ThunkGen do nothing to
improve the community or contribute to anyone's understanding of ruby, IMO.
If his posts and all responses that they generated (including this thread,
by the way) had not occurred, the ruby list would be no worse and, again
IMO, would be much better.

There, someone said it directly instead of talking around what everyone
who's been paying attention to the list already knows.

:=If you want moderation, please explicitly lay out examples of issues you
:=have, and why you think a moderator would resolve these.

Make Thunk's posts require moderation.  Someone has to approve his posts.
If they contribute something worthwhile, the post is forwarded on.  If
they're more of his inane "I'VE GOT AN AWESOME IDEA BUT I WON'T DISCUSS IT
WITH ANYONE UNLESS THEY SIGN AN NDA, BUT THEY REALLY NEED TO BECAUSE IT'S
AWESOME!@!!!" e-mails then they are sent to /dev/null.  Overall traffic on
the list goes down, signal to noise ratio goes up and we can get back to
talking about things far more interesting than e-mail list moderation 
policies.

-- 
Dylan Northrup - docx@io.com - http://www.io.com/~docx/
"Adversity is just change that we haven't adapted ourselves to yet."
    - Aimee Mullins