"trouble maker"

[James Seng]

I agree the line are hard to draw.

Forget about my suggestion. Honestly, I dont even know what can we do 
reasonably without overdoing or risk of abuse. (One of the reasons to 
touch the "solution" of the problem :-P)

Regardless, I certainly feel the problem should be captured, in whatever 
appropriate form. I am waiting for a counterproposal.

-James Seng

Keith Moore wrote:
>>Bottomline, there are trouble makers and they could do 101 things to 
>>make life difficult for you, all within whatever rules you can set.
>>What we need is a specific process we can use when and *IF* we can
>>identify them. All we have right now is to revoke posting rights for a
>>period of time and that is not sufficient.
> 
> 
> this is a really disturbing suggestion.  it's one thing if a
> "troublemaker" is being personally abusive to other participants or
> insists on repeatedly bringing up topics that aren't within the scope of
> the group.  in those cases I can imagine that it is sometimes
> appropriate to revoke posting rights for that individual.  but when the
> individual is citing technical objections to a WG proposal this is not
> even something that should be considered.  
> 
>