On 8/18/21 9:18 PM, Jonathan Goble wrote:

I am mostly a lurker, but I am also considering unsubscribing if someone doesn't step in and stop the mess

+1

Various variations on:

... I am also considering unsubscribing if someone doesn't step in and stop the mess going on between Brett and Marco. ...

Overall, "me too!" pile-ons _are_ "the [bulk of the] mess" to most list subscribers. It will die out on its own in time. Dr. Brett should know by now that he'll never get the "last word" with Dr. Marco, And everyone should know by now that Dr. Marco won't let anyone else get the last word either ;-) So stop feeding it. That's the practical thing to do. Like almost everything else in CPython-land, list moderation is a volunteer thing. I've been the most active (by far) list moderator here essentially forever, but I see my only _legitimate_ job as stopping spam. I might step in to block blatantly illegal posts too, but that hasn't yet come up. If you want more active moderation, volunteer for the job. I'd happily give it up, and acknowledge that my laissez-faire moderation approach is out of style. Else suit yourself: unsubscribe if you like, and come back whenever you like. It's all self-serve, and you're welcome here whenever "here" is welcome to you. As a matter of courtesy, though, it's less disruptive to the list membership if you just unsubscribe rather than announce to the 3,585 list members that you're considering unsubscribing ;-)

In re: Requests for Censorship :-( Luciano Ramalho writes:

Instead of going silently, I wanted to call on the adult supervision to do something about the adult.

I'm sympathetic, because I value your participation in this list. But I'm also sympathetic to the moderators, because usually the kind of behavior being exhibited is a one-off: it's *temporary* loss of control, often only one or two posts. To all: If you are considering leaving the list because of one or two individuals, please consider a *local* "author or recipient" filter, instead of asking for a list-post ban, or a hold for moderation (which is a lot of emotional work for the moderators). If you are considering leaving because of the thread, many MUAs have an "ignore thread" function. If not, filtering on subject, which Gmail can do (I believe that if you select a whole conversation it will either filter the thread or filter the subject -- I always configure by hand because "AI" stands for "Abominable Idiosyncracy"). If you are considering *replying* to such an individual, in the case of a technical contribution, *remove* the CC to the individual address. This not only allows others to recognize an interesting discussion and participate if they choose, but also helps to rehabilitate the bad relationships as we recognize contributions. If you *must* reply to insults, etc (really this only should apply to moderators who may need to show publicly that they're "doing something", but we're all human :-), include the individual address. This policy will make such local filters more effective, and it's something we can all do *together* to reduce the stress of these occasional conflicts. Regards, Steve

On Wed, 18 Aug 2021 21:14:22 -0500 Tim Peters wrote:

Various variations on:

...

... I am also considering unsubscribing if someone doesn't step in and stop the mess going on between Brett and Marco. ...

Overall, "me too!" pile-ons _are_ "the [bulk of the] mess" to most list subscribers.

It will die out on its own in time. Dr. Brett should know by now that he'll never get the "last word" with Dr. Marco, And everyone should know by now that Dr. Marco won't let anyone else get the last word either ;-)

The whole thing is ridiculous enough to read like a Monty Python skit by now, but the trout-slapping ending is still missing.

As a matter of courtesy, though, it's less disruptive to the list membership if you just unsubscribe rather than announce to the 3,585 list members that you're considering unsubscribing ;-)

Ok, let me announce that I don't consider unsubscribing because someone made a mess of themselves in public. ;-) Regards Antoine.

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:36:00PM -0400, Jonathan Goble wrote:

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:22 PM Terry Reedy wrote:

...

On 8/18/2021 9:37 PM, Edwin Zimmerman wrote:

...

On 8/18/21 9:18 PM, Jonathan Goble wrote:

...

I am mostly a lurker, but I am also considering unsubscribing if someone doesn't step in and stop the mess

+1

Both the email and newsreader parts of Thunderbird have an option called Ignore Thread. Do your readers have such?

I consume my email from a variety of disparate devices, including a Debian laptop, a Windows desktop, a Chromebook, an Android phone, and various university-managed computer labs. As such, and as I rely heavily on Gmail's filtering and labeling system to manage my email, I rely solely on Google's standard web interface and Android app for Gmail for the sake of a consistent experience across devices. I don't know if Google offers such an option. It takes me about three seconds to click a thread, see the arguing, and click Archive, but I'm getting tired of doing that repeatedly.

https://gsuitetips.com/tips/gmail/how-to-mute-and-find-email-conversations/

...

...

To mute an email thread, simply: - Within Gmail: - Open the email conversation you want to mute - Click more and in the drop down menu select mute [...]

When a conversation is muted, any new message will bypass your inbox so that the conversation stays archived. Muted conversations will reappear in your inbox if a new message in the conversation is addressed to you and no one else, or if you're added to the "To" or "Cc" line in a new message.

Does that fix your problem? Martin

[me]

If you want more active moderation, volunteer for the job. I'd happily give it up, and acknowledge that my laissez-faire moderation approach is out of style.

But, please, don't tell _me_ off-list that you volunteer. I want no say in who would become a new moderator - I'm already doing the job as I believe it's _best_ done. "Hands off" as much as possible. So if the community disagrees, they need to work out among themselves "the rules" for what should be suppressed, and pick moderators they believe will enforce those rules. I'm old, and cut my online discussion teeth via Usenet. It was total chaos, and I came to appreciate that deeply. Nobody was silenced by a central authority, but then again nobody could insist on being heard either. News readers quickly grew rather sophisticated notions of "killfiles", which allowed a user to quickly render posters they found useless, and/or toxic threads, and/or ... (anything that could be identified by a web of user-supplied regular expressions) completely invisible to them. The unsolvable problem I see with trying to ask a moderator to do that for everyone at once is that, to stop complaints about over-permissive moderation, the moderator would have to emulate the union of all list members' killfiles (had they ability to make their own), not their intersection. And then essentially no messages would be approved. You think I'm joking, but, e.g., back in the day I knew someone who killefiled every poster who had a surname that "sounded Armenian". And you better believe that _some_ people today would insist that _this_ message be suppressed because "killfile" evokes violence. Me, I'd consider suppressing it only because I generally find very little value in meta-posts, which this post _about_ python-dev moderation is ;-)

On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 4:15 AM Tim Peters wrote:

If you want more active moderation, volunteer for the job. I'd happily give it up, and acknowledge that my laissez-faire moderation approach is out of style.

I, for one, welcome your laissez-faire moderation approach. :D