Active Topics
-
Porting apps to Leste (29)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 5 days, 20 hrs ago -
Install Fonts in N900 (68)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by teroyk - 6 days, 23 hrs ago - more...
|
2013-01-30
, 09:24
|
|
Moderator |
Posts: 6,215 |
Thanked: 6,400 times |
Joined on Nov 2011
|
#2
|
You wanted evidence against Estel_? I would say you followed almost 0 of the drama that was on-going before his ban to ask for such.
From what I read on mailing lists too, he didn't delete his posts but the mods deleted his extremely insulting and rude posts (along with one of mine and one from woody too which were posted as retorts to him).
His first ban if you followed it was just for a few days (3?) known as a cooling-off ban to calm him down after all the FUD he was spreading here.
However, instead of taking the ban and then coming back what he did was to create another account called letse and posted using it which is clearly against Forum Rules. He admitted to creating this account FYI. This extended his ban period from 3 days (I can't remember exact figure) to a month. After he was given this ban he claimed that he created this second account to speak to Board of Directors to complain against the mod/admin who banned him. Does it mean that just because he's an old member here and knew someone in the BoD he can circumvent his ban this way while the rest of us if banned should wait for the ban to expire? Even if you don't see anything wrong in his FUD surely his feeling of entitlement was wrong.
After this, another account was again created and seemed like Estel again at which point the mods did the necessary checks and banned the other account without increasing Estel's ban period again and he was told on the mailing list by several people not from Council to think what he was actually speaking about.
IMO, he should have been given infraction points much earlier but he was allowed to spread FUD for quite a long period of time before the mods felt he had gone over-board.
From what I read on mailing lists too, he didn't delete his posts but the mods deleted his extremely insulting and rude posts (along with one of mine and one from woody too which were posted as retorts to him).
His first ban if you followed it was just for a few days (3?) known as a cooling-off ban to calm him down after all the FUD he was spreading here.
However, instead of taking the ban and then coming back what he did was to create another account called letse and posted using it which is clearly against Forum Rules. He admitted to creating this account FYI. This extended his ban period from 3 days (I can't remember exact figure) to a month. After he was given this ban he claimed that he created this second account to speak to Board of Directors to complain against the mod/admin who banned him. Does it mean that just because he's an old member here and knew someone in the BoD he can circumvent his ban this way while the rest of us if banned should wait for the ban to expire? Even if you don't see anything wrong in his FUD surely his feeling of entitlement was wrong.
After this, another account was again created and seemed like Estel again at which point the mods did the necessary checks and banned the other account without increasing Estel's ban period again and he was told on the mailing list by several people not from Council to think what he was actually speaking about.
IMO, he should have been given infraction points much earlier but he was allowed to spread FUD for quite a long period of time before the mods felt he had gone over-board.
| The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to thedead1440 For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2013-01-30
, 10:17
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#3
|
Originally Posted by thedead1440
Funny, how much FUD, personal views (wron, BTW), and overall lack of having a clue about matters you're talking about; one can put into single post.
You wanted evidence against Estel_? I would say you followed almost 0 of the drama that was on-going before his ban to ask for such.
From what I read on mailing lists too, he didn't delete his posts but the mods deleted his extremely insulting and rude posts (along with one of mine and one from woody too which were posted as retorts to him).
His first ban if you followed it was just for a few days (3?) known as a cooling-off ban to calm him down after all the FUD he was spreading here.
However, instead of taking the ban and then coming back what he did was to create another account called letse and posted using it which is clearly against Forum Rules. He admitted to creating this account FYI. This extended his ban period from 3 days (I can't remember exact figure) to a month. After he was given this ban he claimed that he created this second account to speak to Board of Directors to complain against the mod/admin who banned him. Does it mean that just because he's an old member here and knew someone in the BoD he can circumvent his ban this way while the rest of us if banned should wait for the ban to expire? Even if you don't see anything wrong in his FUD surely his feeling of entitlement was wrong.
After this, another account was again created and seemed like Estel again at which point the mods did the necessary checks and banned the other account without increasing Estel's ban period again and he was told on the mailing list by several people not from Council to think what he was actually speaking about.
IMO, he should have been given infraction points much earlier but he was allowed to spread FUD for quite a long period of time before the mods felt he had gone over-board.
Generally, I don't have much to say about this matter - facts are, that two innocent people got banned *eternally*, due to living in same country as me (funny enough, they'ree still banned, while I'm here...). One of said people, got also all his contribution (all his posts) deleted too (posts from technical discussions about Maemo, mostly), despite having positive thanks ratio.
The latter, was due then-moderator - not administrator of Board - was too lazy to follow board rules . He used "one-touch ban&clean" - tool, that was meant to be used *only* against automatic spambots, *never* - users - which resulted in total annihilation of all content, ever posted by JCDenton.
Administration never had
After all, it's all politics, no different in our little FOSS project, that anywhere in real life - who would care about some random two users.
---
If anyone want to make own mind - instead of "buying" what I've just written, or fairy-tales sold by thedead or simillar "fans of current estabilishment" - everything is easily to be found in mailing list thread, starting from this letter:
http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/mae...er/005696.html
---
If anyone care, (I certainly don't!) as for my ban, "excuse" used by then-moderator, now administrator, was this exact post:
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...2&postcount=48
So much about freedom of speech in FOSS project - feel free to ban me again, for posts that I'm currently writing.
No much difference, as it's last I have to say about this matter - everything is in archived sourrces (mailing list), and it's enough, for everyone, to make own mind. Further discussions are for wanna-be politicians only, which I'm glad to *not* take part in.
/Estel
__________________
N900's aluminum backcover / body replacement
-
N900's HDMI-Out
-
Camera cover MOD
-
Measure battery's real capacity on-device
-
TrueCrypt 7.1 | ereswap | bnf
-
Hardware's mods research is costly. To support my work, please consider donating. Thank You!
N900's aluminum backcover / body replacement
-
N900's HDMI-Out
-
Camera cover MOD
-
Measure battery's real capacity on-device
-
TrueCrypt 7.1 | ereswap | bnf
-
Hardware's mods research is costly. To support my work, please consider donating. Thank You!
|
|
2013-01-30
, 10:26
|
|
Moderator |
Posts: 6,215 |
Thanked: 6,400 times |
Joined on Nov 2011
|
#4
|
HAHA!
Estel you say two members were banned and you only mention JCDenton?
Care to clarify who was letsee? It wasn't you? Didn't you say you wanted to speak to BoD due to your ban?
To the OP, you are considered a wanna-be politician using Estel's logic for starting this thread in the first place.
Oh and since Estel still won't speak about the removed posts then this is the post by the mod who removed the posts and you can see his reasoning for removing them too... That last page of the thread shows all those people Estel calls "wanna-be politicians" asking for his ban outright...
Last edited by thedead1440; 2013-01-30 at 10:33.
Estel you say two members were banned and you only mention JCDenton?
Care to clarify who was letsee? It wasn't you? Didn't you say you wanted to speak to BoD due to your ban?
To the OP, you are considered a wanna-be politician using Estel's logic for starting this thread in the first place.
Oh and since Estel still won't speak about the removed posts then this is the post by the mod who removed the posts and you can see his reasoning for removing them too... That last page of the thread shows all those people Estel calls "wanna-be politicians" asking for his ban outright...
Last edited by thedead1440; 2013-01-30 at 10:33.
 |
|
2013-01-30
, 11:07
|
|
Posts: 694 |
Thanked: 619 times |
Joined on Nov 2011
|
#5
|
Why was Arie banned? He seemed well-behaved...
__________________
Still learning on geeky knowledge
N9 *stolen* → N900 *died* → N900 *on hiatus* → OnePlus X
Still learning on geeky knowledge
N9 *stolen* → N900 *died* → N900 *on hiatus* → OnePlus X
| The Following User Says Thank You to Akkumaru For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2013-01-30
, 11:10
|
|
Posts: 107 |
Thanked: 173 times |
Joined on Feb 2011
|
#6
|
Will this be another flaming thread about Estel ? then both of you, please go play somewhere else !
How about looking forward as Marmistrz suggested in starting this thread ?
the question is not about Estel or about what has been done, but about how moderation rules could be improved to avoid such a mess in the future.
I'm not an active member of this board, or the so called community, but more a N900 enthusiastic lurker, therefore I don't feel entitled to anything, and even less lecturing any of you two who are deeply involved in helping people on this board. But please, we have people involving their own time and money to keep this device alive, so stop acting like children and rather act the Marmistrz way.
back to lurking ...
How about looking forward as Marmistrz suggested in starting this thread ?
the question is not about Estel or about what has been done, but about how moderation rules could be improved to avoid such a mess in the future.
I'm not an active member of this board, or the so called community, but more a N900 enthusiastic lurker, therefore I don't feel entitled to anything, and even less lecturing any of you two who are deeply involved in helping people on this board. But please, we have people involving their own time and money to keep this device alive, so stop acting like children and rather act the Marmistrz way.
back to lurking ...
| The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to pierrem For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2013-01-30
, 11:39
|
|
Posts: 2,222 |
Thanked: 12,651 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ SOL 3
|
#7
|
I'm inclined to suggest a forum rule addendum, declaring any post following the above exposed scheme of
as a sufficient reason for a ban.
>:-(
/j
PS: maybe those who stated more than once that they are fed up with this forum and never will come back, actually shouldn't be allowed to come back. In their own interest ;-)
Last edited by joerg_rw; 2013-01-30 at 12:01.
all/some previous posters are liars and talking BS.
I don't care about this topic at all, but I'm the one who knows what's been the correct facts, just I won't elaborate on it.
All those who dare to answer to this post are idiots either, I declare the thread closed.
>:-(
/j
PS: maybe those who stated more than once that they are fed up with this forum and never will come back, actually shouldn't be allowed to come back. In their own interest ;-)
Last edited by joerg_rw; 2013-01-30 at 12:01.
| The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to joerg_rw For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2013-01-30
, 12:24
|
|
Posts: 3,328 |
Thanked: 4,476 times |
Joined on May 2011
@ Poland
|
#8
|
Originally Posted by thedead1440
This thread is not to judge whether estel did wrong or not. But if people were banned by IP, I could've been banned as well.
You wanted evidence against Estel_? I would say you followed almost 0 of the drama that was on-going before his ban to ask for such.
From what I read on mailing lists too, he didn't delete his posts but the mods deleted his extremely insulting and rude posts (along with one of mine and one from woody too which were posted as retorts to him).
His first ban if you followed it was just for a few days (3?) known as a cooling-off ban to calm him down after all the FUD he was spreading here.
However, instead of taking the ban and then coming back what he did was to create another account called letse and posted using it which is clearly against Forum Rules. He admitted to creating this account FYI. This extended his ban period from 3 days (I can't remember exact figure) to a month. After he was given this ban he claimed that he created this second account to speak to Board of Directors to complain against the mod/admin who banned him. Does it mean that just because he's an old member here and knew someone in the BoD he can circumvent his ban this way while the rest of us if banned should wait for the ban to expire? Even if you don't see anything wrong in his FUD surely his feeling of entitlement was wrong.
After this, another account was again created and seemed like Estel again at which point the mods did the necessary checks and banned the other account without increasing Estel's ban period again and he was told on the mailing list by several people not from Council to think what he was actually speaking about.
IMO, he should have been given infraction points much earlier but he was allowed to spread FUD for quite a long period of time before the mods felt he had gone over-board.
Nevertheless, you should have a possibility of appeal about the ban. There should be a procedure how to contact the 'ruling class'.
Originally Posted by joerg_rw
And maybe: has negative opinion on what a mod/councilor/director said?
I'm inclined to suggest a forum rule addendum, declaring any post following the above exposed scheme of
as a sufficient reason for a ban.all/some previous posters are liars and talking BS.
I don't care about this topic at all, but I'm the one who knows what's been the correct facts, just I won't elaborate on it.
All those who dare to answer to this post are idiots either, I declare the thread closed.
>:-(
/j
I don't think that the rules are to become stricter, just to change it so no one is a "victim" of someone else's deeds.
| The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to marmistrz For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2013-01-30
, 15:04
|
|
Posts: 1,048 |
Thanked: 1,127 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Amsterdam
|
#9
|
I have no clue what the fight is about, but there are a couple of things I'd like to comment on:
1. This is a private forum. Anyone wishing to be a member agrees to the Terms of Use before signing up. There is no such thing as illegitimacy in the sense that you are using it here.
If Estel did indeed remove his posts from the forum, than he is responsible for that. I used to be administrator of a big forum. Removing posts after a (temporary) ban would be enough for me to ban for life.
3. There is a possibility: Write the moderators. Make an argument. Give arguments.
1. This is a private forum. Anyone wishing to be a member agrees to the Terms of Use before signing up. There is no such thing as illegitimacy in the sense that you are using it here.
If Estel did indeed remove his posts from the forum, than he is responsible for that. I used to be administrator of a big forum. Removing posts after a (temporary) ban would be enough for me to ban for life.
3. There is a possibility: Write the moderators. Make an argument. Give arguments.
__________________
download free linux books
online linux guides
download n900: service manual level 1-4
download free linux books
online linux guides
download n900: service manual level 1-4
|
|
2013-01-30
, 15:45
|
|
Posts: 3,328 |
Thanked: 4,476 times |
Joined on May 2011
@ Poland
|
#10
|
Originally Posted by anthonie
This is indeed a private forum... But maemo.org aspires to be quasi-democratic. So any ban should have it's own evidence. If there's a warn or anything else punished, this should be kept, so that others won't have doubts about the legitimacy of the punishment
I have no clue what the fight is about, but there are a couple of things I'd like to comment on:
1. This is a private forum. Anyone wishing to be a member agrees to the Terms of Use before signing up. There is no such thing as illegitimacy in the sense that you are using it here.
 |
| Tags |
| banning, infractions, moderating |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:53.
Having seen the storm that has been on tmo (esp. mailing list) about Estel aka Piotr Jawidzyk, I think it's time for the things to change. What really concerns me
1. No evidence stored. - I think that banning Estel was against the law - when I asked for concrete examples of rules being broken by Estel, I received a vague claim: "Look at any of his posts". Later, the council people claimed that Estel is said to have deleted the posts. Nevertheless, the evidence should be stored. Either the post should be frozen, not to be deleted or screenshot. Without evidence being stored you can really ban anyone..
2. Banning because of IP. One maemo.org member has been banned because he had similar IP to Estel's. Similarly, people living in Poland cannot use turbobit as it has oversensitive more-than-one-download-at-a-time checks - even though they don't download anything, they are denied the download
3. There should be a way to appeal about the ban - if one thinks he's not guilty.
These "bugs" may lead to abuses in the future.
If you want to support my work, you can donate by PayPal or Flattr
Projects no longer actively developed: here
Last edited by marmistrz; 2013-01-30 at 12:25.