#ubuntu-ops policy discussion

[Chris Oattes]

On Tue, February 2, 2010 14:00, Joseph Price wrote:

>
> Just reading up today's logs... and two more great examples where I
> don't think anything productive was gained...
>
> http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/02/02/%23ubuntu-ops.html
>
> Both of these are initiated by ikonia.
>
>
> With the mkanyicy77, note Pici joining in the discussion. Then elky.
> THIS is -ops ganging up against users. Its not needed, it didn't need
> to be in -ops. Ikonia should have dealt with the guy in a better way,
> outside the channel and then reported the result into -ops to let
> people know what was going on. Perhaps he should have even tried to
> engage the person first & reported in -ops before the kick.
>
>  Unfortunately I don't see the end of that conversation.

The conversation ended a couple of seconds after I called the !ops trigger
in the channel. There needs to be a distinction applied; Not everyone can
be helped to become a nice conforming member of a happy community - not
everyone *wants* to be helped.

*Newsflash* - Trolls live on the internet. They get a kick out of annoying
people. They get an even bigger kick out of wasting the time of authority
figures.  It was painfully obvious to me that after 30 mins or so of the
discussion in -ops, mkanyicy77 wasn't interested in actually resolving
anything, just going round and round in circles. That sort of discussion
is a waste of time, and other ops should jump in to stop it when it gets
to that stage.

There are certainly conflicts in the new sets of rules.

i) We need more transparency, yet more discussions with users should take
place in Query, where everything boils down to one users word against the
other and there is no clear record of what went on.

ii) -ops is scary because of the large number of ops there and needs to be
made less so, but now *every* core op is required to be there - how does
that solve the problem?

It seems like the aims of -ops are getting more and more aligned with
-offtopic; It is becoming a channel for anyone to join to engage in
chit-chat, with no discussion of users behaviour allowed. Freenode don't
need a #freenode-ops channel because they have #freenode - they support
the network, it essentially *is* their #freenode-ops

Ubuntu is a linux distro, so the main support channel is for that distro
not  for the IRC network. We still need an #ubuntu-ops channel and I
believe it should be used as such.

Chris Oattes. (Seeker`)