#ubuntu-ops policy discussion

[idleone]

On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 16:16 +0200, Juha Siltala wrote:
> Greetings fellow IRCers,
> 
> In yesterday's IRC Council meeting[1], we discussed the item of
> #ubuntu-ops policies including 'no-idling' and +v. The no-idle policy
> generated a lengthly discussion and we decided to postpone the item
> until the next meeting and ask for community feedback.
> 
> According to the current policy, we allow no idling on the channel by
> non-operators. Users should only visit the channel when they have
> outstanding issues that require operator assistance. The purpose of
> this policy is to ensure that ops and users can work out any issues
> without spectators or intrusions by those not directly involved. It
> also allows ops to quickly recognize anyone in need of assistance by
> noticing that they are not voiced. Transparency is achieved by having
> channel logs[2] publicly available.
> 
> Some discussants were not happy with the current level of
> transparency, and offered suggestions as to how to handle an open
> channel:
>       * allow open discussion on the channel, handle distractions on a
>         case-by-case basis
>       * allow anyone to join and idle, moderate the channel and figure
>         out a way to voice those needing voice
>       * allow interested parties or monitors to join under strict
>         moderation
>       * two channels: issue management channel and a general
>         discussion channel
>       * two channels: the current -ops channel, and an open, moderated
>         mirror channel where all discussion on -ops is relayed
> Naturally, one option is to keep the current policy, which continues
> to stand for the time being. The Council would like some feedback on
> potential benefits of opening up the channel more, and on how to
> achieve it in practice.
> 
> For a full picture, please review the meeting log. The issue is the
> first item of the meeting.
> 
> [1] http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/01/31/%23ubuntu-meeting.html
> [2] http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/
> 
> Thanks for any feedback and advice,
> -- 
> Juha Siltala

My two cents,

I prefer *allow interested parties or monitors to join under strict
moderation. I think this would be the best solution.

As for what can a person learn from lurking/idling in -ops? The lurker
would benefit from watching the ops deal with problem users ( How to
Catalyse! )

 Let's not forget the users who join -ops are usually there because they
have been banned for unacceptable behavior in the first place. They were
not "shy" or "embarrassed" when they spammed or flooded etc. in #*buntu
so why should they get the benefit of privacy when challenging a
decision made by the op?

The users who join because they have a legitimate question about the
rules and need clarification in my opinion would not feel any
embarrassment 

Just my two cents,

John Chiazzese
IdleOne