In an effort to combat this “information asymmetry”, Tim has posted an article detailing the events from his side.
I am not a discuss moderator, but I am, and have been, a moderator of other Python spaces (python-list, python-dev, etc.). I see nothing in the way of CoC issues in his article.
Tim.
Our community is much larger. More regimented. Our policers need to be held accountable and be seen to stand up to scrutiny.
The account by Tim Peters directly contradicts earlier assurances that the process involved fair two-way communication with a realistic opportunity to avoid being banned.
I don’t think it contradicts that post at all, which Tim links to directly and confirms in part.
The one piece of information not presented is the email exchange between the SC and Tim, because he did not ask for or get permission to share it[1]. It does sound like the conversation was surprisingly short, but I guess the SC didn’t like what they heard?
I just hope we’re not still discussing this right up to the point where the ban is lifted–which is in a month! It’s 2/3 over already!
and he did not share his response because it involved too many quotes ↩︎
AFAIK, it will only be lifted if Tim admits wrongdoing and promises to not do the same thing again in the future - based on the blog post, I am not confident that will happen.
The problem won’t just “go away” when the three months are up. I hope that this sees much more visibility and discussion, and an official response from the people concerned.
No idea. I expect that decision is between Tim and the SC, and hopefully they are able to meet somewhere for the good of the Python community
I was gonna write a long paragraph about how I neither showed support for this rule nor is this rule that different from “western” countries’ legal systems, but the fact that you are categorizing “communist” and “dictatorship” as approximately the same thing indicates to me that you are not the kind of person I am going to convince of anything in this topic.
Instead of speculating, we can read Tim’s response here. (Again, no CoC issues in the post.)
That page wasn’t there when I posted earlier, as it appears to be a response to this very thread[1].
but not, as far as I can tell, a response to my post ↩︎
My apologies – I am no expert with forum software. I was originally replying to your post, then went away and came back and posted something different in the “replying to your post” box. 
(Then, of course, made it worse by trying to fix it. :sigh:)
And you are correct.
I do feel that this situation has been very damaging to public perceptions of PSF, although not Python as a language. When the news of Tims ban broke out the reaction in comments on Register and such was what even I would call … excessive.
That being said, I agree with some of the push back.
I do not dispute need for moderation, nor do I think that it’s an easy job. After all, humans have been dealing with the question of what is polite, proper or honorable for all of our recorded history. So it’s not an easy thing. Not something we can solve here, and certainly not something a single post will ever be able to conclude.
But I do think that in this case the situation wasn’t handled properly and that it sends a very concerning message. It certainly doesn’t make me very convinced about the fairness of the guidelines, nor their enforcement.
We may have to accept that any solution will either offend or curtail someone. But that doesn’t make me feel any better about this.
Edit:
In my opinion, this point by Tim is one of the most problematic:
However, Aug 8 is also the last time I heard from the SC. They haven’t replied to anything I sent to them since. I’m apparently ghosted for the duration.
This topic is temporarily closed for at least 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.
This topic was automatically opened after 4 hours.
3 posts were split to a new topic: Automated moderation due to community flag volume