Should @tonymorris / dibblego be unbanned?

[SomeoneWeird]

So, this is the issue I spoke about in #18. If you want, you can comment ban/unban. Feel free to express other opinions about it here, too.

The poll will end at midnight Thursday 2nd April AEDT.

Edit: Also, if people want to vote 'ban' but don't want their decision on public record, message me on IRC and we can try work something out.

[mipearson]

-1/+1 is potentially confusing. I say 'unban'.

[sporto]

unban

[kvanbere]

unban

[lukebakker000]

unban

[SomeoneWeird]

changed OP to ban/unban.

[DamonOehlman]

unban

[zachgoldstein]

unban

[mwotton]

unban

[davidmason]

I will refrain from voting for now. I do not have enough information to be anything but agnostic on the issue.

Everyone has been told that

it has been based over weeks rather than days

and it seems like the following accusations are the basis for the ban:

• he has often come into channel wanting to begin a fight
• he has continually derided programmers who use languages that don't match his preference
• I see dibblego's behaviour as antithetical to [a polyglot community]
• I find dibblego's behaviour to be extreme and very subjective.
• he is promoting a contempt for other languages
• he has insulted people in the channel
• (not stated as an accusation, but seems implied) derogatory remarks about other people in channel, especially insinuating they are "dumb" or "incompetent" because the don't agree with x, or don't use y
• Dibblego's behaviour was antisocial and damaging to friendly discussion about a range of programming languages
• he would (a) flood the channel with his talk and (b) would insult people a lot of the time as he did it

but I only saw the interactions immediately preceding the ban, so I can only guess at what else was considered. @radar has helpfully pointed out that chat logs are recorded, but should everyone be expected to dig through logs to assess the validity of a ban?

It would not be difficult to grab 2 or 3 representative examples from the past several weeks that illustrate these accusations. I think that is part of due diligence for any non-obvious ban. Ops should be looking at the logs anyway, to make sure they are looking at what was said objectively - we are only human, with malleable memories that are twisted over time by our emotions.

In general I am not in support of a ban that is based on a standard of behaviour that is not being clearly communicated. If I were just going on my experience of Tony's character I would say unban.

[joshwnj]

I'm going to echo @davidmason here and say I don't have enough info to cast a vote at this point. I personally haven't witnessed any of the mentioned antisocial behaviour, but at the same time I respect the opinions of the people who have brought it up.

Seems like there is some good thought going into how to respond to these situations in future.

[SomeoneWeird]

Also, if people want to vote 'ban' but don't want their decision on public record, message me on IRC and we can try work something out.

[tonymorris]

I think if any[^1] of the things that @davidmason has mentioned can in any way be justified and I was a proponent of voting (I'm not, but put that aside), I vote for ban.

I want a reasonable and mature forum for critique of tools without unfortunate personal issues. I think we are all capable of that and I would be disappointed to lose that opportunity.

PS: I don't even know it means for someone to have gained exclusive and intimate knowledge of "what another person wants [to begin a fight]." So weird and mysterious.

[^1]: Except for having contempt for programming languages. I think harbouring justifiable contempt for anything believed to be of a poor standard is very important to healthy critique.

[SomeoneWeird]

Unbanned.