5 ms·

Isn’t it good to see that no one is "above the law", even if they’re a benevolent dictator?

riknos314 2y ago
"the law" is always subject to interpretation in a given context. The entire concept of case law is that "the law" has been interpreted in a certain way in a similar context before.
rdtsc 2y ago
The question is always who enforces the law and if and how they choose to enforce it.
- II2II 2y ago
  If the comment was the reference to a banned member, was the action actually inappropriate? If the banning of the member alluded to was inappropriate, there is a time, place, and tact to address that. If the process does not allow for that, then you work towards changing the process. If the governing body doesn't allow for that, then why the heck would you make a comment that could derail a discussion regarding how that governing body is elected?
  - rdtsc 2y ago
    > If the comment was the reference to a banned member, was the action actually inappropriate? Yes > why the heck would you make a comment that could derail a discussion. Banning the poster derailed the discussion even more. So much so, it made it to front page of HN. I am not arguing they shouldn't have banned Guido because of who he is; I am arguing banning anyone should have a pretty high threshold, and when it happens it should be done with extreme transparency. Asking to wait for a member to join the discussion later about a relevant topic shouldn't come anywhere near that threshold.
OhMeadhbh 2y ago
I agree. But didn't he give up the Benevolent Dictator for Life moniker? Sounds like a King Lear situation... Since now we will divest us both of moderation authority, Interest of ban-hammering, cares of tweets,-- Which of you shall we say doth love us most? That we our highest privilege in the comments forum may extend Where nature doth with merit challenge. Tim, Our eldest-born, speak first.
gedy 2y ago
Sure if he was being hurtful, hateful, etc. But is comment hardly seems wrong in light of the community guidelines: https://discuss.python.org/guidelines https://discuss.python.org/guidelines More seems it's just embarrassing to the committee so they banned it.
- __d 2y ago
  You could read Guide's message (assuming the first comment is quoting it accurately) as being sarcastic about Tim Peters' banning. The mods probably feel like this is undermining their authoritah, and dropped the banhammer.
  - kadoban 2y ago
    It reads to me as kind of petty sniping that's unlikely to really contribute anything useful to the conversation. But not something that really seems worth hiding either...
  - __d 2y ago
    I guess it could be considered to breach the Code of Conduct, disrespecting the decision to ban Tim? Being respectful. We're respectful of others, their positions, their skills, their commitments, and their efforts.
    - dm270 2y ago
      This seems to be the perfect pretense to justify any sort of banning an organized majority would want.
breck 2y ago
Just because it is a well known quote, doesn't mean it's a good idea. No one is above god's law (aka physics). No one is above the _spirit_ of [man's] laws.
bsder 2y ago
When two of the most important people to a project get banned, who is more likely incorrect? The bannors or the bannees?

"the law" is always subject to interpretation in a given context. The entire concept of case law is that "the law" has been interpreted in a certain way in a similar context before.

rdtsc 2y ago

The question is always who enforces the law and if and how they choose to enforce it.

II2II 2y ago
If the comment was the reference to a banned member, was the action actually inappropriate? If the banning of the member alluded to was inappropriate, there is a time, place, and tact to address that. If the process does not allow for that, then you work towards changing the process. If the governing body doesn't allow for that, then why the heck would you make a comment that could derail a discussion regarding how that governing body is elected?
- rdtsc 2y ago
  > If the comment was the reference to a banned member, was the action actually inappropriate? Yes > why the heck would you make a comment that could derail a discussion. Banning the poster derailed the discussion even more. So much so, it made it to front page of HN. I am not arguing they shouldn't have banned Guido because of who he is; I am arguing banning anyone should have a pretty high threshold, and when it happens it should be done with extreme transparency. Asking to wait for a member to join the discussion later about a relevant topic shouldn't come anywhere near that threshold.

OhMeadhbh 2y ago

I agree. But didn't he give up the Benevolent Dictator for Life moniker? Sounds like a King Lear situation... Since now we will divest us both of moderation authority, Interest of ban-hammering, cares of tweets,-- Which of you shall we say doth love us most? That we our highest privilege in the comments forum may extend Where nature doth with merit challenge. Tim, Our eldest-born, speak first.

gedy 2y ago

Sure if he was being hurtful, hateful, etc. But is comment hardly seems wrong in light of the community guidelines: https://discuss.python.org/guidelines https://discuss.python.org/guidelines More seems it's just embarrassing to the committee so they banned it.

__d 2y ago
You could read Guide's message (assuming the first comment is quoting it accurately) as being sarcastic about Tim Peters' banning. The mods probably feel like this is undermining their authoritah, and dropped the banhammer.
- kadoban 2y ago
  It reads to me as kind of petty sniping that's unlikely to really contribute anything useful to the conversation. But not something that really seems worth hiding either...
- __d 2y ago
  I guess it could be considered to breach the Code of Conduct, disrespecting the decision to ban Tim? Being respectful. We're respectful of others, their positions, their skills, their commitments, and their efforts.
  - dm270 2y ago
    This seems to be the perfect pretense to justify any sort of banning an organized majority would want.

breck 2y ago

Just because it is a well known quote, doesn't mean it's a good idea. No one is above god's law (aka physics). No one is above the _spirit_ of [man's] laws.

bsder 2y ago

When two of the most important people to a project get banned, who is more likely incorrect? The bannors or the bannees?