Dear infra, the following motion was passed by comrel on 27/May/2017 (5 yes votes, 1 no vote, 1 abstention of 8+1 team members): -- William L. Thomson Jr., in any e-mail address or handle applicable, is to be banned from * all Gentoo mailing lists * all other Gentoo communication channels under supervision from comrel for a duration of 1 year. After that time comrel is to revisit the decision and decide how to go on. -- Since things were very quiet when the motion was passed, it wasn't enacted at that time. That, however, has changed, so we should implement it now. Best, Andreas
Was he informed already and/or should we sync?
I've blocked both his domains on all mailing lists.
Mail sent (deliberately from a non-gentoo address so it has a chance of arriving): From: "Andreas K. Huettel" <mail@akhuettel.de> To: "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> Reply-To: comrel@gentoo.org Cc: comrel@gentoo.org Subject: Your participation in Gentoo communication channels Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 02:51:29 +0100 Message-ID: <6361730.5xjLH9LX7G@pinacolada> Dear William, independent of whether you have unsubscribed from any mailing lists or not, I'm informing you that we are not willing to put up with your rants, monologues, and offtopic repetitions anymore. The following motion was passed by comrel on 27/May/2017 (5 yes votes, 1 no vote, 1 abstention of 8+1 team members): -- William L. Thomson Jr., in any e-mail address or handle applicable, is to be banned from * all Gentoo mailing lists * all other Gentoo communication channels under supervision from comrel for a duration of 1 year. After that time comrel is to revisit the decision and decide how to go on. -- Since things were very quiet when the motion was passed, it wasn't enacted at that time. That, however, has changed, so it is implemented now. For the team, Andreas
Using a vote from moths before. With no record of what infraction took place at that time. To enact a ban months later. That makes a lot of sense... Funny how this has not helped with list noise... Really funny!!! https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/e98d2ef0c3916f6f1f020e8197b7535f What exactly is the violation here? What policy justifies a 1 year ban? Has this ever been done before? No to mention stating, they ban maybe longer than 1 year, at comrel's discretion.... Just making up the rules as you go....
He is evading the ban: https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/4b8721167b86cf034572f282cb70c008 The message is signed with OpenPGP key 3EB0A13FCCD92F26 and has a Received header from mail.obsidian-studios.com [173.230.135.215], so seems to be authentic.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #5) > He is evading the ban: > https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/ > 4b8721167b86cf034572f282cb70c008 > The message is signed with OpenPGP key 3EB0A13FCCD92F26 and has a Received > header from mail.obsidian-studios.com [173.230.135.215], so seems to be > authentic. I've extended the ACLs to include the domain he used.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #6) > (In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #5) > > He is evading the ban: > > https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/ > > 4b8721167b86cf034572f282cb70c008 > > The message is signed with OpenPGP key 3EB0A13FCCD92F26 and has a Received > > header from mail.obsidian-studios.com [173.230.135.215], so seems to be > > authentic. > > I've extended the ACLs to include the domain he used. Infra doesn't take unilateral action here, so if Comrel wants to extend the ban they should hold a vote and update this bug. -A
(In reply to Alec Warner from comment #7) > > > I've extended the ACLs to include the domain he used. > > Infra doesn't take unilateral action here, so if Comrel wants to extend the > ban they should hold a vote and update this bug. > Please stop the sillyness and read comment #0. "William L. Thomson Jr., in any e-mail address or handle applicable, is to be banned ..." Comrel didn't request to ban a specific e-mail address or a specific domain. The precise filter is an implementation detail, has been handled by infra, can be handled by infra in the future as well, and should be adapted by infra as well if/when the current implementation becomes ineffective.
William is now attacking Gentoo on Bugzilla: https://bugs.gentoo.org/648816#c16
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #5) > He is evading the ban: > https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/ > 4b8721167b86cf034572f282cb70c008 > The message is signed with OpenPGP key 3EB0A13FCCD92F26 and has a Received > header from mail.obsidian-studios.com [173.230.135.215], so seems to be > authentic. It is an unjust ban, I will be making into a larger issue... You are restricting free speech... For a public non profit that operates around a free operating system based on open source software. The free part relates to Free Speech... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition Furthermore council and comrel are in breach of New Mexico laws... Thus the ban is unlawful... "New Mexico Statutes 53-8-98. Unauthorized assumption of corporate powers All persons who assume to act as a corporation without authority so to do shall be jointly and severally liable for all debts and liabilities incurred or arising as a result thereof." https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/new-mexico/nm-statutes/new_mexico_statutes_53-8-98 http://www.sos.state.nm.us/uploads/files/Corporations/ch53Art8.pdf Really not smart to go against a past Trustee... You all are doing exactly what Trustees are supposed to protect the community. Really making a solid case to have the State of New Mexico dissolve the foundation and seek to liquidate and redistribute its assets... Revocation of certificate of incorporation https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/new-mexico/nm-statutes/new_mexico_statutes_53-8-53 Jurisdiction of court to liquidate assets and affairs of corporation https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/new-mexico/nm-statutes/new_mexico_statutes_53-8-55
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #9) > William is now attacking Gentoo on Bugzilla: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/648816#c16 That is called FREE SPEECH!!! I am allowed to my opinion. None of you all own Gentoo. A non profit is owned by no one. It serves the general public... Gentoo is not a group or a club... It is not a non profit intended to serve only its members...
Communication ban is still upheld, as discussed at the last ComRel meeting, so we would like to see this closed.
