From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Hw1Ry-0001LZ-Pt for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:45:47 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l56JhYOY023093; Wed, 6 Jun 2007 19:43:34 GMT Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.174]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l56Jbor9013528 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2007 19:37:50 GMT Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id u2so565381uge for ; Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:37:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=KJ/BQnOQyOVhPg4fsGSC1rpNByOW/FmGkh8RuJm3xISCX53ABX8UEgG4eoyzfF4UwwExVeorv00+b/L8WKpBIrCmF80DphZxRWBNzl7XExpdtKd9tHZ7lFFBRPnGuAZyUcYj8Fu5rVudXoV5mlyulZ0OOmQE8ojQ69z+JVKkx+Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=JAfvjV3x/yXlrwMWT/T0tLjzd/UYYIGIvwHtJYNXgguFmsJMD1EVbVPRobGX+2QZzPD8WOyQalC3g6B7flBsK3MRqSSqtpGsyNIVj15d24GUYsr4sm+z7Lj7ZAeKHqQz/hBJWWjeTQyiNl+o9+Q6269qY8Ibi8D2FZOgPbyREAM= Received: by 10.82.100.1 with SMTP id x1mr1658366bub.1181158293127; Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:31:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.36? ( [84.67.21.35]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z37sm6791963ikz.2007.06.06.12.31.29; Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:31:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <46670B8F.1040906@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 20:31:27 +0100 From: George Prowse User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070403) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proctors - improve the concept or discard it? References: <1181074192.12669.16.camel@antares.hausnetz> <1181080828.17690.132.camel@workbox.quova.com> <20070606152947.GH26971@feynman.corp.halliburton.com> <200706061810.50562.philantrop@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200706061810.50562.philantrop@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 07834caa-d982-49d0-9f4c-a62e76c7696b X-Archives-Hash: ea4983e1d82b5944e30cf9b65b31908f Wulf C. Krueger wrote: > On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 05:29:47 PM Grant Goodyear wrote: > [Proctor system] >> a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked entirely, as >> has been suggested? > > Personally, I think we simply don't need the proctors. Nor do I. Every thread that has gone bad in the last 2 years has been because of the same people. Ban them from -dev and there is no need for the proctors. If they weren't banned from the forums as well then they could have been directed there. It just goes to show how positive their influence on Gentoo is. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list