[WikiEN-l] Not a lynch mob

Mon Jun 7 15:40:56 UTC 2004

Ed Poor wrote:

> But those who are stolidly REFUSING to
take unilateral action against him have the right to register their
objection to such a characterization.

>Clear now?

Stolidly refusing to take unilateral action against 172: that would be every
admin who is not banning him (around 240).  Have a right to register an
objection to being characterised as a lynch mob: yes, no collective action
means no mob.  Would enough positive replies to 'can we ban 172/VV'  have
justified any banning action, though?

I think Abe has it wrong: 'kangaroo court' is the apt phrase, rather than
what he said.  Ed, I think you would probably prefer to have this presented
as some sort of mediation by list debate.  For myself, it looks more like an
attempt to 'run him out of town'.

Charles