On Nov 29, 2013, at 11:38 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
BTW: Rather than actually ban Anatoly from the various mailing lists, I think setting his moderation flag would be a better approach. He'd get a note that his emails are being held for moderation and the moderators could then screen the emails for possibly problems.
Remember that new python-dev members automatically get their moderation flag turned on. A moderator has to take an explicit action to unset a member's flag so that they can post to the list unhindered. By default, members with a set moderation flag have their postings held for approval.
A member's moderation flag can easily be turned back on if necessary, and the normal moderation procedure can be to accept, reject (with a message), discard (throw it away), or defer for later. Python mailing lists are governed by the Code of Conduct, so if a member is violating that code, it seems like a measured, reasonable response would be to re-moderate their postings until their conduct complies again.
The question of course is: who gets to decide? So far, we've operated pretty well on rough consensus, and I think we could probably do the same here, with the python-dev moderators having ultimate say. Other communities have democratically elected councils with set terms, to which such decisions can be referred. Perhaps it's time for Python to have such a community council?
This would likely mean more work for the moderators and thus we'd need more moderators. Should be a fixable, though.
python-dev has 2 owners and 5 moderators, with varying degrees of active participation. More help would surely be accepted.
Cheers, -Barry