This is more than a plea to stop: as a representative of the Julia Stewards, I’m asking everyone to tone it down, and @ScottPJones to specifically apologize for his statements here and in the thread on “postpone 1.0” that insinuate motive based on employment. That is a clear violation of our standards, as it constitutes a veiled threat (“I’ll report you to your granting agencies!”) as a means of trying to exert leverage over others.
Second, matters regarding “bans” and other interactions involving the Julia Stewards are confidential matters. Please do not discuss them in forums. Since @ScottPJones himself brought the issue up in a way that casts himself as a victim, I will clarify one point: if you read the procedures that govern actions of the Stewards, you’ll see that lifting a ban requires that the recipient submit an application to have that ban lifted. @ScottPJones has never submitted such an application, and as a consequence his ban remains in force. But the ball is, and has been, in his court.
I recognize that many of the people contributing on all sides of this discussion want Julia to succeed, but I ask people to spend a little more time asking themselves whether these discussions contribute to that goal.