Logging of Ubuntu LoCo Teams core channels

[Zach Gibbens]

On 10/08/2010 08:26 AM, David wrote:
> On 10/07/2010 07:22 PM, David wrote:
>> On 10/06/2010 07:27 PM, Zach Gibbens wrote:
>>> I know Tennessee had some opinions on it (at the time I thought it was
>>> loco or irc council policy for some time, I was just a regional contact
>>> back then) I'm going to add it to our teams agenda for our meeting
>>> tomorrow. I know personally it's earned it's weight, but others didn't
>>> like how widely indexed it was online via the big search engines.
>>>
>>> I do like what ubuntu-nl did, creating an off topic channel&  seeing
>>> that two channels work, without trading one for the other.
>>> However, we're unfocused until there is a need for a focused channel,
>>> for meetings, greeting&  helping members new&  old, then it becomes an
>>> unfocused channel again, there has allways been respect, something of an
>>> unwritten rule. be polite, don't fight.
>>>
>>> If logging were an issue, with a two channel system one logged&  one
>>> not, what's to prevent an issue from being moved to offtopic, to avoid
>>> the logging, or make it a client to client message for that matter. on
>>> the other end, if logging wasn't made known, who's to say that the
>>> client your using isn't logging it?
>>>
>>> It's hard to have an opinion on this one way or another, I see that both
>>> sides have some merit, I'm not sure which way I'd lean. Why not leave it
>>> to the LoCo's (with some strong encouragement, listing where it's
>>> beneficial to have it) we have op's in our channel all the time (not
>>> displaying op status, no need for any ops) nor have we needed it in my
>>> almost 3 years as a member, our channel is active most of the day,
>>> nearly every day. what issues we had were a long time ago&  via our
>>> mailing list, not on IRC (outside of logged meetings) it's been over a
>>> year&  a half since that happened.
>>>
>>> I've not been on this list long&  I suppose I don't fully understand the
>>> desire for requiring logging outside of meetings. I do see why logging
>>> is valuable&  also unwanted, depending on your opinions on the matter,
>>> why make it policy for every loco to log their channels 24/7, instead of
>>> leaving that up to the loco's, which some loco's choose to log their
>>> channels? I ask with my mind fully open, just trying to have an
>>> understanding on that part of this issue.
>>>
>>> Signed,
>>> Zach Gibbens
>>> Tennessee PoC (ubuntu-us-tn)
>>>
>>> P.S I didn't mean for this to be as long winded as it became, my apologies.
>>>
>>
>> 	To start with ther are not enough regional teams! At one time I was
>> interested in starting one but couldn't get any support,ie:Code of
>> concudct signing etc. I live In a small town near Cookeville TN. and
>> wish to start a team here I have personally gotten 15 people to use
>> Ubuntu and installed it as an only OS on thier computers still I cannot
>> get assistance.
>> 	David
>> 	in TN
>>
>
> 	What did you just say? You sound kinda lika a government empolyee with
> an eraser on both ends of his/her pencil.Can we just speak plain english
> wich everyone can understand?
> 	I will still support Ubuntu and continue installing when I can. Your
> decision makes little difference to me however others may be swayed by
> your comments.
>
I'm sorry if my last email was unclear, I'll try summing it up in a 
bullet list here.

* Why is there a desire to make it policy for every loco to log their 
channels, opposed to allowing it to be their choice?

* What's to stop a team from using another channel, an offtopic one, & 
just use their regular channel for meetings

* What's to stop Disagreeing members from making a private message, one 
that is not logged by anything

* If the channel isn't logged, what's to stop members from logging it 
themselves

* Transparency is nice, we log in #ubuntu-us-tn, however, I don't know 
if I like just how public it is, search engine indexed & anyone that 
knows my nickname can find it in a second. same for others.

I myself can see both sides of logging, good & bad. I'm not sure which 
side I'm on.
I write this trying to understand
why this is an issue for the council,
why this is expected to help solve problems (if it logs an issue, then 
there is documentation on the issue, but that assumes it's logged still)

I hope this email adds some clarity.