IRC Issues [From Stepping Down]

[Lorenzo J. Lucchini]

On Friday 02 October 2009 18:49:31 Michael Lustfield wrote:
> [snip]
>
> One interesting thing I learned from my segway into Gentoo (which was
> really fun) is how they handle bad language. They define bad language
> as ${EXPLETIVE}. This includes "hell" as well as other words that are
> generally considered acceptable unless overused. They follow a pretty
> specific policy. If it falls into this category, there's warn, ban, ban
> long time. They don't draw a grey line. It either is, or it isn't. This
> is a policy that I feel we should adopt. Perhaps not at the 'long time'
> length they hand out however.
>
> [snip]

I strongly disagree with this approach. Human ops exist to make human 
decisions. If we wanted to have an IRC team made of bots that recognize 
swearwords, we'd have done so long ago. We haven't because I believe that, 
historically, the IRC team has always considered that sort of approach 
foreign to their mentality.

If there are disagreements about "soft lines", then turning the soft line into 
a hard line is certainly an easy option, but far from necessarily the best 
one.

by LjL
ljl at ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-irc/attachments/20091002/353bbe8a/attachment.pgp>