Re: OT: Thunderbirds are go commercial

[»Q« <boxcars@xxxxxxx>]

In <news:iv-dnUQSt7A-cbfVnZ2dnUVZ_h_inZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Terry R." <Terry.F1ComNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The date and time was 5/13/2008 7:21 PM, and on a whim, »Q« pounded
> out on the keyboard:
> 
> > In <news:D_ednUX_rZQm27fVnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > "Terry R." <Terry.F1ComNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >   
> >> The date and time was 5/13/2008 5:41 PM, and on a whim, »Q« pounded
> >> out on the keyboard:
> >>  
> >>> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <moz.champion@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>  
> >>>> Terry R. wrote:
> >>>>  
> >>>>> While not "banned", a poster was removed even from this thread.
> >>>>> Was it any more OT than any other post?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> follow-up set to mozilla.general  
> >>>> Again, I am not the monitor so I cannot say.  
> >>> Removal of OT posts doesn't depend on a post being "more OT" or
> >>> "less OT" than another post.  As the policy makes clear, once
> >>> someone has gotten to the point where his posts can be removed,
> >>> any OT post from him will be cancelled.  
> >> That's as clear as mud.  "gotten to the point" is about as
> >> arbitrary as it gets.  
> > 
> > How one gets to that point is laid out clearly at the link you
> > snipped, <<http://www.mozilla.org/community/cancellation.html>.  
> > 
> > If by "arbitrary", you mean "decided by arbiters", I agree with you.
> > If you mean its more common sense of "capricious or unreasonable",
> > then no.
> >   
> >> So who thought Reg had "gotten to the point"?  You?  Chris?
> >> Nir?    
> > 
> > Nir and Chris were making those calls at the time.  I joined the
> > team a bit later.
> 
> His post was removed just a couple days ago.  You "joined" the team 
> quite a long time ago.

Yes.

-- 
»Q«
     Kleeneness is next to Gödelness.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general