IRC Issues [From Stepping Down]

[Paul O'Malley - gnu's not unix -]

Sarah Hobbs wrote:
>>> In my understanding we already have such a thing - its called the ban
>>> tracker. Unfortunately its not scalable enough right now to ope to the
>>> public, but you can add to the blueprint on LP (Bantracker two).
>> I wasn't aware this was ever going to be opened. I was under the
>> impression it was intended for the ops team only. If this included
>> resolutions to any appeals, I'd consider this about the same.
> 
> I'm fairly sure that if this is going to be made public, there's going 
> to need to be some stripping (read: diplomising) of some comments. 
> While they don't disobey the CoC, they're probably not suitable for 
> public viewing either.
+1 if memory serves me right

I would point out that this stuff would feed the beast who lives under 
the bridge as it shows off what patterns were seen and to be watched for 
  - hardly a good idea - why - you don't want the overhead of your 
trolls seeing where your pressure points are and walking around them 
until you loose the rest of your ops.
>>>>>> 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.
> 
> Interesting.  This is obviously one hard line option, and the Ubuntu ops 
> tend to take the other.  Can anyone think of any other alternatives?
Accept that on a case by case basis these things can be judged or else 
you have the LjL alternative get bots to issue word based warnings and 
have them remove people.
> 
> The fact that this seems to be an issue that keeps coming up (what's 
> appropriate and what's not) indicates that the Ubuntu Op team could 
> likely come up with a better solution here - and saying "I don't like 
> your idea" isn't helpful - say that, then suggest another possible 
> solution to the problem, if you can think of one.  If you can't, think 
> harder - I'm sure there are more than 2 solutions to this.
> 
I surprises me that some people forget that people come from different 
places. In some places the idea of a person walking around semi naked is 
offensive in others it is culturally acceptable.
The bottom line is that the community is diverse and is human based it 
is not standards based.
So what you have to accept is that if something is excessive it needs to 
be toned down, or stopped.
In some cases it is justifiable to ban outright from the off (where 
history exists), in other cases a polite word with the party in question 
  needs to be had. I will however say that anyone who tells you they are 
logging a conversation or you are on a power trip should get swift order 
of +q.
Public taunting of the person who is good enough to give of their time 
on IRC to help things flow is not allowable imo. But what would I know, 
only having been on IRC since 1993, on lots of different networks, these 
days avoiding Freenode for non political reaasons.

So my message is do what you will, protect those who work with you, 
remember you don't know what is going on behind the person at the other 
keyboard.

Lastly do it while it is fun, when it stops being fun question why.

P.