Discuss mailing list

[Verax <verax AT 8chan.co>]

I've seen a lot of silly things on mailing lists in my time, but this is 
definitely in the top 10.

You get completely asshurt over your name being used while _your_ 
proposal is called misleading, which is a perfectly fair criticism to be 
made, regardless of whether it is true or not.  You then proceed to call 
Jonah's behaviour (by name no less) "borderline illegal" and slanderous, 
despite not having the court ruling on hand that your proposal would 
require to make those statements.

To make matters stupider, this is your proposal being discussed.  Of 
course you are going to be mentioned in the discussion, as the 
proposal's author.

You do a fair degree of misleading in your latest email, where you 
paraphrase "sane recount" as "Daniel Q....sane...", making it appear 
that it is your sanity being questioned, rather than the sanity of a 
hypothetical recount.  You also do a lot of personal attacks and even 
call Jonah by name.  Please look in the mirror before calling someone black.

Regarding the proposal itself, I believe it is a poor idea as it would 
cause additional barriers to the organization of OpenNIC, and allow 
proposals to be blocked on criteria other than the actions and policy 
changes therein.  I consider this to be undesirable.  OpenNIC is not a 
hugbox, nor should it be.  Proposals, policies, actions, and anything 
else must be subjectable to any and all criticism.  It's up to the 
community to decide from there.

Love,
Verax

(replying to the list this time, whoops)

Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
> I have no objection to cancelling the other vote, in fact I even want it at 
> this point. What I am objecting to is the fact that the new proposal of Jonah 
> contains a paragraph which intends to be a mass condemnation and personal 
> attack, along with slanderous allegations of potentially illegal behavior.
>
> "...Daniel Q....sane...should be considered misleading"
>
> This language is trolling, personal attacks, and slanderous accusations of potentially illegal 
> behavior under the guise of a "proposal". Each vote is an act of putting me on a stool 
> and having each member make slanderous accusations and attack me. I don't care about invalidating 
> the ongoing proposal, or repealing it when the last round ends. I care about 
> "proposals" design to personally attack people.
>
> --
>
> -Dan Q
>
>
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 18:17:19 +0000, Philipp Schafft <lion AT lion.leolix.org> 
> wrote:
>
> > Good evening,
> >
> > On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 12:09 -0400, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
> > > OpenNIC proposals should not be used to target specific members and
> > > give opinions about their character or actions. Jonah's upcoming
> > > proposal to invalidate the ongoing vote (which I have no control over,
> > > and would stop if I could) makes references to "Daniel Q." along with
> > > the phrase "sane recount" and accusations of myself engaging in
> > > "misleading" behavior.
> > >
> > > These defamatory "troll votes" have no place in OpenNIC and if that
> > > first paragraph is included as is, the whole purpose of the vote
> > > becomes a personal attack on me and accusation of me engaging in
> > > fraudulent, potentially illegal activity.
> >
> > So you decided to do exactly what he did as counter attack?
> > Writing a "PROPOSAL" that is a direct reaction to his "PROPOSAL"
> > attacking him, trying to render his "PROPOSAL" invalid and/or void?
> >
> > Good job.
> >
> > > This is my proposal, yea/nay, which will be put up to vote on
> > > 8/7/2018:
> > >
> > > OpenNIC proposals shall not contain, in full or in part, language
> > > which:
> > >
> > > * Praises an OpenNIC member on basis of their character or actions,
> > > * Condemns an OpenNIC member on basis of their character or actions,
> > > * Makes allegations of unethical or illegal activity by an OpenNIC
> > > member, unless confirmed by a court of law, and/or
> >
> > Ah, there is the "unethical" and "illegal" again I have talked about so
> > many times.... Why do people still love them so much?
> >
> >
> > > * Criticizes or comments on a proposal or vote, past or present, valid
> > > or invalid, in which an OpenNIC member is criticized on basis of their
> > > character or actions.
> > >
> > > The proposal shall take effect immediately after passing.
> >
> > "or actions". So, for example if someone writes an "PROPOSAL" for a new
> > TLD it may no longer be considered if that person can actually run the
> > TLD (ref: the working registration system requirement that was discussed
> > very lengthy).
> >
> >
> > With best regards,
> >
> > --
> > Philipp.
> >   (Rah of PH2)
>
>
>
>
>
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org