Secret Changes to Blog Entry

It has come to my attention that AJ has made some updates. He says,

Of course, the two responses above are fundamentally contradictory: if Clint's right a ban (or similar) would've been appropriate, in spite of Joerg's claim. On the other hand, Google's sole definition of "snarky" seems to be "A colloquialism meaning short-tempered or snappish." which doesn't seem terribly applicable here -- however short tempered anyone was, anon left before anyone had a chance to lose theirs. Sadly, the rest of Clint's epithet assumes you've got some idea what the problem is in the first place.

Apparently I've been too cryptic, so I will attempt to rectify that slightly.

The episode begins, I believe, with Anthony invoking a reference to “secret changes”. Ryan perpetuates the joking. Matt acknowledges the Sneakers reference, though it could have been interpreted as approval of the discourteous and disrespectful banter. “anon” expresses his confusion about this apparent disparity between the charter of the channel and what is occurring in practice. Ryan implies by inquiry that no such discrepancy exists. “anon”, clearly frustrated, storms off in a huff. Anthony cites this occurrence in his blog. As far as I am aware, none of the channel moderators listed on the Charter have made their opinions known publicly.

In other examples, we see Anthony wielding the Charter as a threatening weapon. In this case, we see a failure to self-censor. It does not surprise me at all that someone would not want to put up with this.

So I am not saying that either AJ or Ryan or Matt should have been banned for this; that would seem rather extreme and unproductive. I am saying that I have little faith in the #debian-tech team to enforce things fairly.