IRC Council, Appeal resolution (logs)

Jan Vancura jenda at
Sun Dec 17 23:14:58 UTC 2006

Hash: SHA1

I was asked to post these logs as well. This makes sense, as the channel
isn't publically logged. Uncensored, unclipped. Might be missing a lot
of action from other relevant channels, though.

* maxamillion
(n=max at has joined
<maxamillion> Seveas: why did bigfuzzyjesus get banned from #ubuntu and
<Seveas> maxamillion, read #xubuntu
<maxamillion> Seveas: yeah, i just noticed ... sorry
<Seveas> maxamillion, anything else we can do for you?
<somerville32> Yes
<somerville32> Please voice maxamillion
<ompaul> ehh we can all read his comments
* ChanServ gives channel operator status to Seveas
* Seveas gives voice to maxamillion
<somerville32> And please add him to the access list
<somerville32> Thanks
<Seveas> done :)
<ompaul> so he is endearing himself elsewhere
<ompaul> lovely
<maxamillion> Seveas: he asks you a question so you ban him?
<somerville32> Seveas, ompaul: He denies trying to evade the ban. Can
you please unban him from this channel so that he can come and appeal.
<Seveas> maxamillion, he keeps on whining and keeps on asking a question
that has been answered several times
<ompaul> simple situation in irc
<ompaul> if you get banned accept it
<maxamillion> Seveas: oh ok, i assume i lack alot of background on the
situation so i will just trust your judgement and leave it to the
parties involved in the situation from the beginning
<ompaul> if it was a warning it would have been a remove with a note
<ompaul> but (A) suggesting someone has aids and (B) they (person (A))
would give it to someone else is not good
<LjL> is that LISP?
<somerville32> "bigfuzzyjesus> maxamillion, i wasnt upset when i told
him that, i was kidding, and considering he had just *stabbed* someone i
figured it would be ok but aparently there is a double standard"
<ompaul> a language
<somerville32> Exactly what I suspected.
<ompaul> stabbing by a "bot" is the clown suit
<ompaul> the other is just vicious
<somerville32> I didn't take it that way
<maxamillion> LjL: an interpreted programming language
<LjL> err i know... it was just a pun on ompaul's use of parentheses :P
<ompaul> somerville32, you have to be creative to come up with that
<ompaul> somerville32, and a nasty bag of goodies also
<somerville32> The only objection I have right now is the ban from here
<Seveas> oh ffs
<Seveas> somerville32, we've told you why that ban is there several times
<somerville32> Seveas: And I disagree with it.
<Seveas> without *any* reasoning
<Seveas> that's just trolling
<somerville32> Ok
<somerville32> Seveas: It is just that we've set a precedent
<Seveas> somerville32, we have not
<Seveas> this is rather standard procedure
<Seveas> you just haven't seen it yet, rookie ;)
<somerville32> Seveas: I don't want to be a thorn in the side
<somerville32> But I really want to discuss this
<Seveas> somerville32, it's 23:00 here and my alarm goes off at 5:00
<Seveas> so no discussion right now
<somerville32> It is obvisous that everyone is still "heated"
<ompaul> no I am ice cold
<somerville32> Maybe the ban is a good thing - to allow us to calm down
before we deal with things
<ompaul> somerville32, DROP IT PLEASE
<somerville32> ompaul: No.
<Hawkwind> Ughhhhh
<Seveas> sigh
<Seveas> nalioth, ping
<somerville32> Actually,
<somerville32> You're right
<somerville32> I'm angry too
<Hawkwind> Seriously, it's not going to be changed.  When the time is
right and others want to discuss it they will.  Until then, it's over with
* somerville32 nods at Hawkwind.
* jenda thinks you should _always_ give infractors a place to appeal to,
and tell them where that is.
* Seveas has quit ("cat /dev/urandom > /dev/brain")
<Hawkwind> You'll learn that as an op you might not always agree with
your fellow ops on things such as certain bans.  It's human nature, we
all go through it.  It's just good practice to not question the op(s)
when they say the ban needs to stay
<somerville32> Jenda: Exactly my feelings
<jenda> The really trollish ones won't try, because they know they have
no chance to succeed - and if they try, they'll just be swept off the table.
* somerville32 nods.
<jenda> Hawkwind: however, even the op team may be mistaken.
* somerville32 nods.
<DBO> jenda, no we used to have one that was proxy surfing just to bug
us in here
<Hawkwind> jenda: Absolutely true
<maxamillion> yeah ... i'm outta here, i don't know enough about it
<DBO> jenda, so to a limited extent thats not ALWAYS true
* maxamillion has quit ("leaving")
<somerville32> Trollers/Spammers are a give-in
<jenda> DBO: that's fun.
<jenda> I propose you have a mailing list where people can send complaints.
<somerville32> However, I don't think that we should ever be told that
we can not question a questionable action.
<somerville32> jenda: Good id ea.
<jenda> The forum staff has a very effective resolution center.
<jenda> (Effective until someone insults a mod, that is - but still)
<jenda> Freenode has staff at where you can email complaints
against staff members.
* somerville32 nods.
<jenda> Forums mods tell everyone they act against that if he/she has a
problem with their decision, they can write about it in the res center,
where other mods and admins can review it.
<Hawkwind> Really though, this would go in front of the IRC council and
those 3 members would/should decide after reading the logs.
* ompaul has a pain with the general direction of this conversation so
do as you need - without me I think I can say that I have put in over 3k
hours into this community and really have had enough for this evening at
least if not more - feel free to do what you will with my bans
<jenda> Hawkwind: yes, that's the way it should be done.
* ompaul (n=ompaul at gnewsense/friend/ompaul) has left #ubuntu-ops ("the
/part command has its uses")
<Hawkwind> With that said, Seveas and ompaul are both on that council,
so what they say would stand
<Hawkwind> Atleast in this instance
<somerville32> Yes
<somerville32> Exactly
<jenda> Hawkwind: there is still the Community Council to appeal to, if
the person insists.
<jenda> And they do have full right to.
<jenda> although they are not likely to succeed in an argument against
the entire council.
<Hawkwind> But when people like ompaul get upset and just leave, then
it's non effective IMO.  That's not the proper way for an op to handle
things either
<jenda> leaving is often the best thing to do, if there's someone else
to take over
<jenda> we even have that in freenode staff guidelines ;)
<Hawkwind> True, but since he is the one who set the ban in this case,
he should be involved til the end
<jenda> true
<somerville32> I think it would be fairer to have the IRC council
consist of the four contacts for Ubuntu, Edbubuntu, Kubuntu, and Xubuntu
* jenda has no opinion on that.
<Hawkwind> I disagree with that in nearly every way possible
<Hawkwind> I think it was done correctly by them being voted on as to
who all of us prefer to take things to
* somerville32 shrugs.
<somerville32> Yeah, I guess so
<somerville32> I guess I'm just peved that I'm being told to shutup and
get in line when I whole heartily feel what has happened is wrong
* jenda writes to mailing list
<Hawkwind> I mean, if we did it how you say, then you walked right into
the IRC council with little to no previous experience as an op of any
*Ubuntu channel
* LjL sets mode +m on #ubuntu-ops
<jenda> *ubuntu*
<LjL> ah wait we're all voiced ;-\
<somerville32> lol
<Hawkwind> somerville32: I understand what you're saying, but to be
honest, the way you went about it was entirely incorrect especially
after more than one person had told you it wasn't going to change
<jenda> LjL: I was wondering why that wasn't set, with all the voice :)
<somerville32> Hawkwind: Who should I appeal to then?
<LjL> jenda: the voicing is for something else (namely being able to
tell who's an op and who isn't)
<Hawkwind> somerville32: You should talk about it when others want to.
Don't force it upon them, that only makes things worse
<jenda> LjL: k
<somerville32> Hawkwind: I just see it as _imperative_ that people don't
get banned from here because they were banned else where for an incident.
<somerville32> This is suppose to be a place of appeal
<jenda> And I see it as imperative that there is a better place of
appeal, instead ;)
<LjL> look, all issues aside, there really is no appeal when you dodge a ban
<Hawkwind> Currently it is, but when all parties are upset/angry/mad,
then it's not the best of times
<jenda> LjL: agreed.
<LjL> whatever reason the ban was issued for, you don't dodge it
<Hawkwind> LjL: I disagree
<somerville32> I agree
<somerville32> but this is a special case
<jenda> LjL: although when the ban issued denies you appeal, you have no
<Hawkwind> He dodged it because in all reality, he felt he was banned
unfairly in the first place and got no chance to talk about it
<jenda> LjL: in fact, taht is plain op abuse.
* somerville32 nods.
<Hawkwind> jenda: By freenode policy, there is a lot of op abuse that
happens in #Ubuntu channels, as with any other large channel unfortunately
<jenda> Hawkwind: what has freenode policy got to do with it? :)
<somerville32> The thing is, is that Seveas had just banned Ompaul jokingly
<somerville32> bigfuzzyjesus makes a joke, and gets banned
<somerville32> He must have thought they were joking
<somerville32> And besides, I don't even see where he tried to evade the
ban and he denies it
<jenda> >Seveas had just banned Ompaul jokingly<
<Hawkwind> jenda: Because as ops we set standards, and we should set
them not only for the channel we represent, but for the entire network
<jenda> I don't see freenode staff randomly /killing each other... :/
<jenda> Hawkwind: indeed.
<somerville32> Then Seveas banned him in #ubuntu
<somerville32> How is that fair? He didn't do anything in #ubuntu
<Hawkwind> Because I'm a staff member on OFTC, means that I have to
conduct myself in staff like manners on all IRC networks because too
many people know me and can and will report back to the higher OFTC
staff and it will only cause me problems in the long run
<Hawkwind> jenda: Which is the same for you and all staff members here
on Freenode.  It goes for ops of any large channel as well IMO
* somerville32 nods.
<jenda> Hawkwind: of course.
<PuMpErNiCkEl> Hawkwind++
* somerville32 nods.
<jenda> Hawkwind: for example, this works much more in cases where you
wear a badge, such as a cloak.
<jenda> Hawkwind: but often, a name is badge enough, of course.
<Hawkwind> jenda: Yep, that is very true as well as you represent that
<somerville32> Ok, I can't find prove of bigfuzzyjesus trying to evade
the ban.
<somerville32> Can someone point it out to me>
<somerville32> *?
<Hawkwind> I thought as an op of #Mandrake/#Mandriva for 3+ years that
we were overly tough on our users.  I've come to realize that we aren't
as tough as it is in #Ubuntu mainly.   That can be taken as either
negative or positive, just stating facts as to what really goes on and
others see and report
* DBO has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
<Hawkwind> somerville32: I can't because I don't go into #Ubuntu at all
<PuMpErNiCkEl> Do the bots keep logs?
<LjL> thing is... the name "bigfuzzyjesus" rings a dozen of bells to me,
especially in -offtopic. i guess it does too for Seveas and ompaul.
however, going to grep all the logs and find the trolling would be a
<Hawkwind> somerville32: My impression of the ban evasion was he got
banned in another channel, joined here to appeal, and ompaul felt that
was a way of him evading a ban or trying to evade a ban, and banned him
* DBO (n=DBO at unaffiliated/dbo) has joined #ubuntu-ops
* ChanServ gives voice to DBO
<LjL> i, for one, tend to make bans short, and avoid banning on
relatively trivial things. but that often results in *complete* trolls
never getting banned, because they never say one big enough things i
feel i can ban for
<LjL> so mine's not necessarily a good way of handling it, either
<somerville32> Ljl: He is a regular in #xubuntu - he is no troll
<LjL> he's a regular in #ubuntu-offtopic as well for that matter, but i
wouldn't swear on his not being a troll
<somerville32> Well
* somerville32 nods.
<Hawkwind> Unfortunately there is no 100% correct way of banning users.
 It's always personal opinion but what happened in here with
bigfuzzyjesus was inappropriate from what was seen in here and told to
us that he had done.  If there was more to it, then that should have
been stated
<jenda> PuMpErNiCkEl: ubuntulog and the LoCoBot keep logs.
<jenda> !ubuntulog
<ubotu> ubuntulog is a logging bot run on various Ubuntu channels. You
can read the logs at
<PuMpErNiCkEl> That's good.
<Hawkwind> The word troll is also largely misdefined by all of us.  What
one of us considers a troll another one of us simply see it as someone
that doesn't understand how IRC works and is just learning
<somerville32> Considering the two other bans for #ubuntu-ops, I think
we've set a precedent that we don't just ban people in #ubuntu-ops
<Hawkwind> There are many many ways to define 'troll'
* somerville32 nods.
<somerville32> Well... except for the other ban set by ompaul on Amaranth
* somerville32 shrugs.
<somerville32> This is just crazy
<somerville32> I find it sad that I have to fear retribution for
standing up for something I think is wrong. : (
<Hawkwind> somerville32: You don't need to fear anything.  If you feel
it's wrong then simply stand up for it
<somerville32> It doesn't take much imagination to figure out why Seveas
pinged Nalioth : (
<LjL> look anyway, now i won't reread my logs of the last six months,
however, bigfuzzyjesus has been here at least since August
<LjL> i've banned him from #ubuntu in *November* because of this:
2006-11-30T01:38:46 <bigfuzzyjesus> how do you change your default file
manager?  2006-11-30T01:38:47 <bigfuzzyjesus> how do you change your
default file manager?  2006-11-30T01:38:48 <bigfuzzyjesus> how do you
change your default file manager?
<LjL> now it's December. he should have learned what the channel
expectations are, in my opinion
<nalioth> somerville32: perhaps you'd care to enlighten me
<somerville32> ok
<somerville32> Here or in PM?
<nalioth> where do you think it best? and can it be summed up with one word?
<Hawkwind> LjL: And that really doesn't need a ban IMO.  He should have
been +q'd for a few minutes at the very worst
<Hawkwind> I think it would be best here, so all other ops that are here
can speak about it as well and voice their opinions
* somerville32 nods.
<LjL> Hawkwind: well, it was a ban - it was removed 5 minutes later however
<somerville32> LJL: I'm not saying that he didn't do something wrong.
<somerville32> Ok, I'm going to recap for nalioth.
<somerville32> Everyone was joking around in #ubuntu-offtopic - lots of
larts, ops kicking and banning each other, etc. and then Bigfuzzyjesus
emoted that he wished Seveas would get AIDS. Immediately ompaul banned
bigfuzzyjesus then Seveas kick-banned him from #ubuntu. Bigfuzzyjesus
complained to me in #xubuntu (I had saw the whole thing anyhow), and I
told him to visit #ubuntu-ops to appeal.
<somerville32> When he visited #ubuntu-ops, the following occurred:
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:25:49 *       bigfuzzyjesus
(n=paul at has joined #ubuntu-ops
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:06 <bigfuzzyjesus> Seveas, are you ever
going to drop the ban on me?
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:26 <ompaul>        ohh
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:32 <Seveas>        bigfuzzyjesus, yes, next
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:46 <ompaul>        you trying to get around
my ban - you justgot a longer one come back in the ne$
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:49 <Seveas>        people who can't behave
should rethink how they communicate
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:54 *       ChanServ gives channel operator
status to ompaul
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:54 *       bigfuzzyjesus
(n=paul at has left #ubuntu-ops (requested by ompaul: "bahhhh$
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:54 *       ompaul sets ban on *!*@
<somerville32> Dec 17 17:26:54 *       ChanServ removes channel operator
status from ompaul
<somerville32> To summarize, bigfuzzyjesus came to apologize and to
appeal his ban - he was only joking around.
<Hawkwind> LjL: Removed in 5 minutes makes it much better.  As long as
it wasn't a 24 hour ban for that being his only offense at the time of
course.  But again, as ops we all have our own way of doing things, be
them right or wrong in others eyes
<somerville32> Now, I got upset because they had banned him from #ubuntu-ops
<somerville32> 3 bans for one small incident? didn't seem fair to me and
it was my understanding that #ubuntu-ops would only ban disruptive
individuals since this was the place to appeal
<LjL> Hawkwind, however what i often noted is that bans made by others
look "wrong" to me more often than they look "right" - and that the same
goes for my own bans in the eyes of others. whatever this means, i think
it means something
<Hawkwind> I think one of the most important points to all of that
is......ops should *never* ban other ops in a joking matter.  If a
fellow op is to be banned, it should be with good reason such as not
being an op anymore immediately afterwards
* somerville32 nods.
<somerville32> So, I tried to persuade Ompaul and Seveas that we should
_atleast_ unban him from #ubuntu-ops
<Hawkwind> LjL: That's very true.  I see it that way too.  I don't agree
with a lot of bans, but a lot of them I also don't know both sides of
the story nor do I know paste offenses that the person being banned has
committed either
* nalioth removes ban on *!*@
<somerville32> This is a place for appeal not only for those two
channels but a whole bunch (including #xubuntu-*)
<LjL> Hawkwind, are you sure that "joke" ban had anything to do with all
this? if bigfuzzyjesus' is to be taken as a joke, then it was a joke on
the @lart and the following "* DBO bleeds", not on the ban i think
* nalioth removes ban on *!*@unaffiliated/amaranth
* nalioth sets ban on *!*@unaffiliated/amaranth!#ubuntu
<somerville32> And then Ompaul started yelling at me to drop it
<nalioth> somerville32: it is done. thanks for the recap.
<somerville32> It felt like he was telling me to shutup and get in line
<Hawkwind> LjL: I honestly don't know.  I didn't witness any of it first
hand, only what was told/pasted here.  My point is that bigfuzzyjesus
shouldn't have been banned from here by ompaul as if he was trying to
ban evade
<somerville32> Nalioth; The thing I'm worried about is that Seveas is
going to ask you to reset the password on #xubuntu because I disagreed
with him
<Hawkwind> He simply joined here to protest the ban because he felt it
was done unjustly, and just wanted to *discuss* things.  He was given
absolutely no snow balls chance in hell to explain himself or state his case
<nalioth> que serra, serra
<Hawkwind> Personally, I think bigfuzzyjesus should be invited here so
he can state his case.  Whether his ban gets removed or not is of course
to be determined by his attitude when he pleads his case IMO
* jenda peeks in
<nalioth> he is unbanned from here.  i suspect his return will lead to
either a quiet or a /remove as nothing is gonna be done for at least
another 23 hours
<Hawkwind> However, Seveas and ompaul neither one are here for him to
plead his case to, so the ban probably wouldn't get removed until one of
them removed it personally
<jenda> I wrote an email to the mailing list summing up my thoughts on
the subject.
<jenda> "Summing", figuratively speaking - it's abotu three pages ;)
<somerville32> lol
<LjL> oh my
<PuMpErNiCkEl> hehe
<jenda> <Hawkwind> I think one of the most important points to all of
that is......ops should *never* ban other ops in a joking matter.  If a
fellow op is to be banned, it should be with good reason such as not
being an op anymore immediately afterwards
* jenda considers that very important.
<LjL> well it wasn't really that long in the end
<somerville32> What is the name of the ml?
<LjL> i suppose that would go for kicks as well?
<LjL> somerville32: ubuntu-irc
<nalioth> which op got banned ?
<LjL> nalioth: ompaul, by seveas, on offtopic
<jenda> somerville32: ubuntu-irc
<jenda> meh ;)
<jenda> nalioth: I get banned every now and then ;)
<Hawkwind> LjL: Ops should not ban/kick/mute fellow ops for any reason
other than the op being totally out of hand, breaking the rules, and/or
has been removed as an op of a channel and refuses to leave or whateever
the case may be
<jenda> I don't think joke-bans are OK, though.
<jenda> It makes people more aware of "I CAN" and "YOU CAN'T"
<Hawkwind> When an op bans another op as a joke, then the rest of the
users in the channel see it and feel that basically anything goes in a
lot of ways
* somerville32 nods.
<PuMpErNiCkEl> ++
<LjL> of course, then, that would also concern joke-kicks and joke-bans
issued on *non* ops
<Hawkwind> And in the case with bigfuzzyjesus, this is exactly what
happened.  He felt he could join in on the joke with a single comment,
and it cost him being banned from several channels for 24 hours
<somerville32> hawkwind: They said perma
<Hawkwind> LjL: IMO, there is no such thing as a *joke* ban/kick/mute.
It just shouldn't happen to anyone, period
<nalioth> Hawkwind: his comment was very untoward
<Hawkwind> Unless it's in a private channel/pm
<somerville32> nalioth: We all agree that his comment was inappropriate
<somerville32> I, and I think others too, feel that how it was handled
was also inappropriate.
<Hawkwind> nalioth: I don't disagree, but he felt that he could join in
with the joking, and that's what he did.  It was a joke in his own way
and it wasn't taken as that, at all
<somerville32> Thats why ops should maintain a level of professionalism
at all times
<Hawkwind> nalioth: In fact, I'm ok with the ban from the *other*
channel.  It was the instant ban by ompaul from here that was 100%
incorrectly handled
<somerville32> Hawkwind: But what did he do in #ubuntu?
<Hawkwind> The guy joined here to appeal/speak/state his case, and never
got a chance.  He was ousted on his ass in split seconds
<LjL> at any rate, for nalioth and others who didn't follow the part
that happened in #ubuntu-offtopic, here's the part of the log that i
think is relevant, with lines involving ompaul, seveas, bigfuzzyjesus
and DBO marked (i.e. almost all) -
<Hawkwind> somerville32: Again I don't know, and that's besides the
point.  What happens in *one* channel should never carry over to another
channel.  If you're banned from #ABC by johndoe and join #DEF and
johndoe is there, you don't get banned unless you break the rules in #DEF
<somerville32> I agree.
* maxamillion
(n=max at has joined
* ChanServ gives voice to maxamillion
<Hawkwind> [22:23:08] <ompaul> I give warnings when annoyed
<maxamillion> did the bigfuzzyjesus issue get fixed?
<Hawkwind> That is a complete lie if you read what happened here
immediately afterwards
<somerville32> The ban in #ubuntu, #ubuntu-ops, and #xubuntu were
uncalled for
<LjL> Hawkwind: are you sure "never" isn't too strong anyway? some
people join #ubuntu, and start spamming very hard. you ban them, they
join #kubuntu, you ban them, etc... this actually happens. is it so
unreasonable to ban in advance when you know for certain that there's
spam coming?
<Hawkwind> ompaul gave him no warning whatsoever when he joined here.
He just banned him without saying a word
* maxamillion notes that it hasn't
<somerville32> Yes... Seveas came over to #xubuntu to ban bigfuzzyjesus too
<Hawkwind> LjL: If they get banned from #Ubuntu and then join #Kubuntu
you should not ban them until they break the rules in #Kubuntu
* somerville32 nods.
<Hawkwind> LjL: You can't assume they are going to break the rules there
too.  Chances are they will, chances are they won't.  You assume and it
does nothing but cause bigger issues
<somerville32> Exactly. Only takes a second to ban someone anyhow
<Hawkwind> Assuming is what gets ops and everyone else into these situations
<Hawkwind> What happens when someone spams #Ubuntu repeatedly, gets
banned, then joins #Kubuntu to apologize, or any other channel for that
matter.  Just because they joined another channel doesn't mean they are
guilty there too
<LjL> Hawkwind: i disagree. if someone is using exploits, or attacking
the channel in various other ways (paste-floods of vulgarity, botclone
attacks, etc), i don't think that's the best route to take. this is a
side issue right now, anyway
<somerville32> Exactly. There was no need to ban bigfuzzyjesus at all
let alone banned in #ubuntu-ops, #ubuntu, and #xubuntu for something
minor that ticked off an op in #ubuntu-offtopic
<Hawkwind> LjL: Disagree if you want.  But what happens in channel A
shouldn't carry over to channel B.  You can only assume, and if you've
never heard it, assuming only makes an ass out of you and me.  Let them
break the rules one time before you ban them.  But give them a chance.
Overly hasty ops is worse than a lot of other things
<Hawkwind> Personally, if I were bigfuzzyjesus, I'd contact the CC
immediately and have a feeling in my gut that I'd win this one.  What
ompaul did was 100% incorrect.  He gave the guy absolutely no chance to
speak to see what it was he wanted
<jenda> wow, stuff's been happening here.
<nalioth> somerville32: you can unban him from #xubuntu if you wish
<nalioth> is bigfuzzyjesus around?
<somerville32> He went for dinner a few minutes ago
<maxamillion> jenda: you don't wanna know ... i didn't, now i do ...
wish i don't
<LjL> he is in #ubuntu-troll :)
<nalioth> <sigh> lovely
<Hawkwind> If you *think* that user A who just spammed channel A is
going to do the same in channel B, that's fine and it's good to be on
gaurd and ready.  But don't wait for user A to join channel B so you can
shove your ops down his throat before he breaks a rule in channel B
<somerville32> Hawkwind: I agree. I've SEEN people get banned from
#ubuntu/#kubuntu and come over to #xubuntu and be able to contribute
<Hawkwind> somerville32: It happens all of the time in fact
* somerville32 nods.
* jenda mumbles something about the mailing list
<nalioth> bigfuzzyjesus is unbanned from #ubuntu and here, and i suggest
whoever is speaking with him to let him know that appealing one channels
bans in another channel is not courteous
<Hawkwind> Of course there are users who that won't happen with, and
those deserve to be banned for several hours/days/weeks or whatever it takes
<somerville32> Nalioth: He wasn't trying to appeal in #ubuntu
<nalioth> somerville32: i understand that.
<somerville32> He was _already_ in #ubuntu
<Hawkwind> nalioth: He came here to appeal, but was jacked up within
split seconds
<nalioth> Hawkwind: i understand that
<nalioth> as far as i'm concerned, he can be unbanned in #xubuntu, too
* somerville32 nods.
<somerville32> He has been unbanned from #xubuntu
<nalioth> but, please pass on the above
<Hawkwind> He wants his voice heard, and that was taken from him by some
pissed off op that shouldn't have done what he did in the situation
<Hawkwind> Not saying it's right to do it in #Ubuntu or whereever, just
he's upset and IMO has a right to be
<nalioth> Hawkwind: understood.  the -offtopic ban stays at least until
1500 our time tomorrow
* somerville32 nods.
<Hawkwind> nalioth: Fair enough.  I agree with that 100%
<Hawkwind> jenda: Maybe these logs should be posted/pasted to the
mailing list.  Would be a great idea
<Hawkwind> So that every op can see exactly what this turned into and
what all has been said and done
* somerville32 nods.
* LjL sighs
<somerville32> I'm still thinking that the Community Council should get
<nalioth> i think seveas and ompaul were both not in good frames of mind
for whatever reason (it happens to all of us)
* somerville32 nods.
* alindeman has quit ("/quit")
<Hawkwind> I say the logs from the point where Seveas and ompaul left
should be posted to the list
<Hawkwind> nalioth: Good point.  And unfortunately it went a bit too far
and let to some further problems :(
<Hawkwind> It does happen to all of us, and will happen to all of us
again.  We just need to try to keep such times from turning into
something like this in the future
<LjL> well, it's apparently problems that were waiting to be addressed
sooner or later, anyway
<Hawkwind> LjL: What do you mean ?
<nalioth> i suspect that on any given day, only one of 'em is at wits
end :P, today just was a bad combination.  They've both realized they've
not handled it correctly (i assume) and have left
* alindeman (i=adml at freenode/staff/alindeman) has joined #ubuntu-ops
* ChanServ gives voice to alindeman
<Hawkwind> As in a problem with bigfuzzyjesus and he was on his way to a
ban you think ?
<jenda> Hawkwind: ok, working on it.
- --
Jenda Vančura <jenda at>
GnuPG: 519D056A
Jabber me at jendavancura at
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


More information about the Ubuntu-irc mailing list