Mark Levison wrote:
> Rather than continue the current Appropriate Postings debate I thought it
> would be useful if we created a set of rules as a community and agree to
> revisit them in 6 months time to see if they're still relevant
I have a different proposal. First, I think that no matter what we
decide as a community, advertisements, answers as blog posts and other
things are going to slip in. Part of that is people are going to forget
the rules. Part of that is simply that people are continuously joining,
and will have missed the conversation.
Here's what I'd like to see. What are the ban rules? What would cause us
as a community to decide we would not like to see someone post here
anymore? Do we want to miss out on the good tidbits of information, just
because someone makes an announcement or disagrees with us?
So here's my proposal. If you contribute to the community, then you know
what people would find valuable. For announcements where you are doing
something (i.e. someone in the community who is announcing that they,
themselves, are teaching a class), tag it with ANN. If you answer with a
blog post, put at least a summary in the email (for those of us who read
on planes). If your organization wants to post lean/agile/scrum courses,
try to use agile-announce, but if it is really relevant here, and is
infrequent, than post with ANN, and perhaps clear it with the mods.
People who only post announcements, or who spam the group are warned
once by the mods, then banned. Banning is announced to the group through
a post with MOD. The banned poster has a clear understanding of who to
appeal to to get unbanned.
I don't use heavy handed tactics with my teams, and I'd hate to see that
here. And if the community feels the need to have someone walk the
plank, they can bring it to the attention of the mods with a MOD post.