Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:125015
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Time-out Posting to PHP Internals List
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <2edef424-b749-55de-516d-7e4313e45405@php.net>
 <CAKOpQSzHsra0aSWy56ZuLS95WitqRtnRW=6gAif0S6UrFAercQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <ace73500-fc53-4fb8-aec7-b265713b2720@app.fastmail.com>
 <385df0cb-6493-4ab4-a0b8-219da446e99e@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <66BFF33A.5010003@adviesenzo.nl>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 02:47:54 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.7.0
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <385df0cb-6493-4ab4-a0b8-219da446e99e@gmx.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------030501050607010105010606"
From: php-internals_nospam@adviesenzo.nl (Juliette Reinders Folmer)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030501050607010105010606
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 17-8-2024 0:50, Christoph M. Becker wrote:
> On 17.08.2024 at 00:36, Rob Landers wrote:
>
>> But otherwise, I think it is healthy for it to be public. Voices 
>> silently silenced, even for a good reason, are never a good thing. 
>> Also, it gives people a chance to advocate for the banned or object 
>> to the banning, if they so choose. 
> Spot on!
>

Indeed and I very much appreciate the transparency.  It was painful to 
read the insults being hurled around, and though it saddens me that it's 
needed, I support action having been taken.

I do feel for Derick though, as he (most likely) will now end up getting 
tirades as a reply to the temp-ban email... (if history is anything to 
go by)

--------------030501050607010105010606
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 17-8-2024 0:50, Christoph M. Becker
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote cite="mid:385df0cb-6493-4ab4-a0b8-219da446e99e@gmx.de"
      type="cite">
      <pre wrap="">On 17.08.2024 at 00:36, Rob Landers wrote:

</pre>
      <blockquote type="cite">But otherwise, I think it is healthy for
        it to be public. Voices silently silenced, even for a good
        reason, are never a good thing. Also, it gives people a chance
        to advocate for the banned or object to the banning, if they so
        choose.
      </blockquote>
      <pre wrap="">
Spot on!

</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Indeed and I very much appreciate the transparency.  It was painful
    to read the insults being hurled around, and though it saddens me
    that it's needed, I support action having been taken.<br>
    <br>
    I do feel for Derick though, as he (most likely) will now end up
    getting tirades as a reply to the temp-ban email... (if history is
    anything to go by)<br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------030501050607010105010606--