On 20 March 2010 00:17, Ken G. Brown <kbrown at mac.com> wrote:
> At 2:33 PM -0700 3/19/10, Josh Gargus apparently wrote:
>>On Mar 19, 2010, at 12:46 PM, Ken G. Brown wrote:
>>
>>> It is not clear to me who on the board has the authority to ask me to take it down?
>>> All 7 perhaps unanimously like you mentioned was the signing requirement for the SOB? Or a majority 4/7? A designated member in charge of communications? It is unclear to me who even can speak on behalf of the SOB.
>>
>>
>>I don't understand that the point of this "experiment" is.  I'll take a guess: are you trying to demonstrate that if the SOB doesn't have a set of explicit rules about how to act in such situations, then some asshole can undermine the SOB's leadership and generally disrupt the community?  Maybe that's true, but there are two things that you're missing:
>>
>>1) It's not clear whether it's even possible to create a set of rules that would be 100% asshole-resistant.  Certainly nobody has proposed any.
>>
>>2) Over the 12 years I've been in this community, we haven't had problems with assholes trying to break the community for the sheer hell of it.
>>
>>Maybe I've totally missed the point of your "experiment".  If so, please enlighten us.  What is your hypothesis?  What data are you gathering, and how will it confirm or deny your hypothesis?  Why do you think you're being helpful?
>>
>>In the meantime, I add myself to the growing list of people asking you to take the blog down.  Please.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Josh
>
> The experiment was to provide the SOB with an easy way to post some pertinent FAQ items that the community in general would find helpful.
> Hypothesis was 'Perhaps if it were really easy, the SOB would put some FAQ type items up"
>
> Data gathered to date:
> "4 out of 7 SOB members are opposed to the blog as presented" (one spoke on #squeak)
> 1  responded in a somewhat ambiguous way, perhaps opposed.
>
> Other data: the responses speak for themselves.
>
> Interesting how when people do not agree with something, they immediately resort to overt or subliminal personal attacks, then profanity, then who knows what comes next.
>
> It is gone.
>
No, i think an experiment was, how quick you can get banned when
taking a disruptive actions.

> Ken G. Brown
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.