> I've recused
> myself from moderating them.
How noble of you.

> one swooping spammer.
That is just the problem. Like I said, the deal was antisex spam,
but all the rules were: the antiReda rules.
The spam you were morally engaged to stop was sex spam, and just sex
spam. My postings only qualified as spam in your mind. Depending on
who's definition, I have alsays been well beneith the spam
qualifier.

About your affiliation with an antispam company, you are not stating
everything about that company.

> My duties as IASI's webmaster have nothing to do with the policies
> and guidelines adopted
> by the group and the moderators of the Structural_Integration nor
> does my lack of interest
> in your personal projects.
No nothing to do: you are the owner of the group no less. One of the
2 owners, not including Jim Pascucci, unlike what you claim.
Oo deception and lies. A standard statement cannot mask pure
eloquent logic:

My database project can very well be seen as competition to ANY
paying membership association. There is nothing you personally can
do about it. If you work for them your under their impersonal
influences. They are not people. They are not human, and you are
under the influence of the IASI's logic.

Now you are not answering the core of the issue. How can you justify
to be able to ban a member, who would then not be able to answer
posts related to him/her. Who are you to threaten to ban me and then
feel free to say stupid things about my projects?
> the group are under review by the other moderators because they
>involve me. I've recused
> myself from moderating them.
And who moderates you when you talk about me? Who will when I am
banned? Notice I do not have the priviledge to recuse myself, after
for example having banned liars from the group moderation team.

> I don't regret declining your invitation
> to work with you and see it was the right decision.
Yes thank you for having clarified that apparent impossibility. I
would not want a developper who refuses to learn about
the 'robots.txt' internet standard.

> personal attacks (like the above) are no acceptable. That what
> got you moderated last
> time. Content not related to SI is less welcome.
Like it is not related to SI. Like your 'personal' person isn't
affiliated with any SI organization. Like you do not have
conflicting interests. Like when you speak about my database, you
are not being personally lying, based on a personal judgement you
had before you even enrolled in this group.

Like personally priviledging form over content, not answering the
content, doesn't affect me personally. Like this tactic doesn't
force personal clashes against the persons in charge of blocking
content.

Go right ahead, play with the form, leave content out.
How could it ever get close to your grey cells anyway.

Reda



--- In Structure_Integrator@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Vilain"
<vilain@s...> wrote:
>
> --- In Structure_Integrator@yahoogroups.com, "redaelandaloussi"
> <redaelandaloussi@y...> wrote:
> > Interestingly, I have contacted privately the one web and
> > computer `expert' of the IASI Michael Vilain, who is also now co-
> > owner of the Yahoo public group Structural Integration. Michael
> > Vilain is one person responsible of censorship and banning on
this
> > group. I contacted him to see if he could help with
idaprolf.org's
> > practitioners database project. Michael did not spend much time
> > exploring the concept, yet he is publically making
> > mischaracterizations about the project, and he is making such
claims
> > on a forum where he has the technical ability to censor
> > idaprolf.org's spokesperson. Not only does he seem to think that
the
> > project involves not educating anyone about the source of the
data
> > presented to users, he also demonstrated a technical inability to
> > understand that such an indexing tool could very well be
compatible
> > with Internet Ethics. Considering that he one who participated in
> > changing the moral contract between the forum users and its new
> > management, Michael has demonstrated to me his disqualification
in
> > Ethics altogether, and especially Internet ethics. Funny, for
> > someone who has been known to have an e-mail address @spamcop.org
> > (or so). Michael Vilain has yet a lot to learn about ethics; I
guess
> > he finds the uniform attractive. Now that he is both judge and
> > executioner on the Structural Integration discussion forum at
Yahoo,
> > Michael Vilain and IASI officials must be having an ongoing group
> > ecstasy of some weird kind.
> >
>
> I'm not alone in moderating the "other" Yahoo group
Structural_Integration. There are
> 3 other moderators. Since you took your marbles and when away
last year, the
> moderators had no work to do at all except for one swooping
spammer. It's been really
> nice and quiet and the discussions have been interesting and
thankfully "Reda-less".
>
> The guidelines we published which everyone who joins gets a copy
clearly state that
> personal attacks (like the above) are no acceptable. That what
got you moderated last
> time. Content not related to SI is less welcome. The posts
you've attempted to submit to
> the group are under review by the other moderators because they
involve me. I've recused
> myself from moderating them.
>
> My duties as IASI's webmaster have nothing to do with the policies
and guidelines adopted
> by the group and the moderators of the Structural_Integration nor
does my lack of interest
> in your personal projects.
>
> I fail to see why using a spam filter company for email has to do
with my ethics. Rather,
> it's been great filtering out the 100+ spam I get from various
sources. If that's unethical,
> I fail to see any connection.
>
> I don't regret declining your invitation to work with you and see
it was the right decision.