> What would you propose as an alternative to people who just… constantly fill mailing lists with attacks on people or the like? As far as I am aware there are

> What would you propose as an alternative to people who just… constantly fill mailing lists with attacks on people or the like? As far as I am aware there are two models for community moderation: 1. The strict democratic process with councils, elections, laws and what not; 2. bdfl. Problems arise when attempts are made to reconcile both models. In the former case you make sure that the community itself self-governs. In the latter case you have bdfl who tells someone to just fuck off out of the community. What happens when certain people with actual power (like ability to disable accounts) try to impose their own view and speak for the community? You get a shit show. There are "laws" one has to abide with and then there are certain high-ranking members who can ban users on a bad day - laws and unwritten by-laws. This leads directly to echo chambers. So, you either strictly follow the process you yourslef instantiated, be dictatorship or become a hegemony. And don't forget we are talking about some random individual spamming mailing lists. As far as I understand this was already high-ranking, possibly valued member of the community.