From arj@nvg.org Mon Oct 23 04:58:26 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Mon, 23 Oct 2006 04:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GbyRd-00056h-7z for llg-board@lojban.org; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 04:58:22 -0700 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no [129.241.210.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 293CA947AC for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 13:58:04 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 13:58:04 +0200 (CEST) From: Arnt Richard Johansen X-X-Sender: arj@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: Unfair In-Reply-To: <20061023014705.GD20034@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Message-ID: References: <1161567170.453c1bc274863@webmail.pdx.edu> <20061023014300.GC20034@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20061023014705.GD20034@chain.digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-NVG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-NVG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: arj@nvg.org X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 188 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > I bcc-d this so other board members could second-guess my > response/politeness. You'll need to have caught up to Ryan's posts > to the main list for this to make sense. There are two issues here. One is mr. Keppel posting rude messages to the list, and harrassing Lojbanists off-line (not that I don't know what he sent to clsn). The other is his unorthodox way of trying to get other people to donate money to LLG. I'll take this points in order. As for the first point, I think you are entirely within your right as list owner to reprimand such rude behaviour. As for the second point, unlike Bob, I don't think the Board needs to get involved. His donating is unlikely to dissuade others from donating. Also, I've seen enough net kooks to know that if you try to correct their behaviour, they just try harder. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.