Shell policy approved

[John Chiazzese]

On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 20:42 +0000, Chris Oattes wrote:
> Surely the time to object is during the 2 month period when it existed as a draft on the wiki. Ikonia has been campaigning for this for far longer, and it has been on several IRCC agendas before it was put up for a draft. 
> 
> Seeker
> 

+1
I agree with Seeker on this. Little late now to object, there was more
then enough time to attend meetings and state your concerns.

I don't see anywhere in the policy that states the ops team is going to
be actively seeking out shell providers to be banned. IF there is a
noticeable and constant abuse from users of the shell provider then
measures will be taken.

IdleOne




> On 25 Jan 2011, at 10:18, Martin Meredith <mez at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 23/01/11 18:50, Juha Siltala wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> The IRCC met quickly today to approve the shell policy draft. Thanks
> >> to all who helped with their input in drafting the document!
> >> 
> >> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/ShellPolicy .
> >> 
> >> Thanks to all who helped with their input in drafting the document!
> > Woah...
> > 
> > I object to this policy.  In it's current form, it would allow any op to blanket ban me from Ubuntu Core channels due to the fact that I connect via my own, personal VPS, and I do not have public contact details for that host.
> > 
> > In my opinion, this document needs to state that it is not ok to ban a host purely for not meeting those requirements.  It needs to state that those requirements are needed to LIFT a ban, and lack of those requirements will not be used as the sole basis to place a ban (and there should be a documented history of abuse before that is placed)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Ubuntu-irc mailing list
> > Ubuntu-irc at lists.ubuntu.com
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-irc
>