IRC Council, Appeal resolution

Anthony Vickers anthony at
Mon Dec 18 15:13:50 UTC 2006

Hi everyone,

Perhaps what is needed here is an arbitration system comprised of 
several non-ops with no perceivable conflict of interest. A 
practitioners' council if you will. I'm sure there are many non-ops who 
are regular and well behaved channel users that would be suitable for 
the role and I consider myself included. I though would probably need to 
relinquish my op status in #ubuntu-trivia, even though it's not an 
official channel but that isn't a problem.

The purpose of the practioners' council would be to arbitrate in dispute 
resolution and to perhaps help in reviewing policy. As members of the 
practioners' council it gives also a level of responsibility to some to 
help in policing the channels even though they don't have the  powers to 
kick/ban. I think in many situations this would be preferable to a 
threat of a kick/ban approach that could easily, and rightly or wrongly, 
be interpreted as a mere flexing of IRC muscle. As you all know kicking 
and banning should be a last resort, many even only witnessing such 
action will get a fight or flight response to it. I thus agree totally 
with tonyyarusso's point that the practice of ops jokingly kicking each 
other needs review. I have mentioned this myself before now, though not 
here, where I should have. Sorry about that.

If I'm considered by anyone as unsuitable for the role, I don't mind. I 
really think the practioners' council might be a good idea and suitable 
for your thought and discussion. I consider it's going nowhere without 
first your approval. If you consider it viable, it should be comprised 
of non-ops and who have no real desire to be one. I think it should be 
clear from the outset that the practioners' council is not a 
stepping-stone to op status.

Best Regards,


More information about the Ubuntu-irc mailing list