RFC: #ubuntu op misuse or not?

Sat May 17 02:19:17 UTC 2014

As an impartial observer (not in OPs) I get the feeling that at this stage
this conversation should be over now:

 Rohan has evidently given some thought to how he should approach the
situation given another incident, and the result should be a better one or
avoided completely.
There has been some valuable discussion on how OPs should approach bans and
try to de-escalate situations.
Just like the referee in a game, the decision should not be argued with the
person involved and any further discussion should be moved and should not
involve Rohan (sorry man, its the way it has to be but thanks for bringing
that up).

Thanks for trying to discuss the issue civilly and thanks to CP for some
good advice.

-Matthew Lye

 Leadership is responsibility, not privilege, Action, not position,
Guidance, not knowledge, and outcome, not disposition.

"Speech is conveniently located midway between thought and action, where it
often substitutes for both." - John Andrew Holmes

On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Rohan Dhruva <rohandhruva at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thank you for the kind response, Charles.
>
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Charles Profitt
> <indigo196 at rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> > Rohan:
> >
> > Thanks for taking time to write about this to the IRC list. I want to
> offer some advice that was given to me a long time ago that I found
> valuable.
> >
> > advice: When involved in an emotional discussion it is best to step
> away, regain emotional balance and refocus on the issue in a positive frame
> of mind.
> >
> > Specifically:
> > Reflect on your actions, words and emotions in this situation.
>
> Yes, I did reflect a lot on this before writing the email.
>
> >      - When re-reading the logs do you feel your involvement helped to
> move the situation forward in a positive manner?
>
> Yes and no -- as I previously conceded, I definitely could have done
> better on the channel. However, I do believe that the issues I brought
> up bear some thought without the bias against me for what I said in
> IRC. I understand the latter is difficult.
>
> >      - How do you feel the people you were talking too felt?
>
> No less bad than I did talking to them. Hopefully no more. Then again,
> if it was only talking this was limited to, I would have had no
> concerns with how this played out.
> This is mainly about what I feel is misuse of ops by someone.
>
> Thanks again -- your advice on self-reflection is very useful, and I
> appreciate it.
>
> >
> > I am sure that we would all like to have a happy, friendly and inviting
> IRC and I believe this is your concern as well.
> >
> > Charles
> >
> > ---- Rohan Dhruva <rohandhruva at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi ubuntu-irc,
> >>
> >> I hang on out #ubuntu as "rohan", generally a lurker -- once in a while
> I
> >> ask questions and answer things I know.
> >>
> >> Today, I encountered something I found disturbing. There was a
> >> misunderstanding between two users, and an op decided to silence one of
> >> them. The discussion was civil (no swearing or flooding), but also
> >> off-topic. I feel silencing a user in this case is overreaching and
> rude --
> >> especially a user who might have been new to the IRC community (and
> maybe
> >> new to Ubuntu itself).
> >>
> >> On complaining about this in the channel, I was directed to to talk in
> >> #ubuntu-ops, which I joined and then stopped talking on #ubuntu. On the
> >> -ops channel (which is logged), I had a few heated words exchanged with
> the
> >> op who originally took the wrong action (in my opinion). Eventually, it
> >> boils down to whether words like "blitzkrieg" and "dictator" are
> offensive
> >> or not.
> >>
> >> Since the logs are public[1][2], I'll cut a long story short: the op
> chose
> >> to ban me from #ubuntu for a week. This was without me talking in
> #ubuntu
> >> or provoking drama in the main channel at all. The reason given was
> that I
> >> was likely to misbehave in #ubuntu, without there having been any
> evidence
> >> of having done so. As the logs will show, I tried to make my point in
> >> various ways, sometimes being drawn out. In interest of list readers'
> time,
> >> I can summarise the ensuing discussion as unfruitful and borderline
> hostile
> >> -- in (large) part due to my own insistence of remaining in the
> channel. I
> >> was unequivocally told to leave the channel at multiple times, with
> various
> >> people suggesting I get a life, or my insistent complaining as pathetic.
> >>
> >> I apologise for an already long email (but as people in the channel will
> >> tell you, it's much shorter than reading the whole scrollback!).. but
> here
> >> are the things I wanted to request members' views and comments on:
> >>
> >> * Is it ok to stifle discussion by silencing one person when an argument
> >> seems to be happening in the channel, under the pretext of avoiding
> drama?
> >> ** This is also against the guidelines of when to ban/kick a person --
> >> there was no flooding, nor were there any swear words or unappealing
> >> language.
> >>
> >> * Is it ok for an op to ban someone in the main #ubuntu channel for
> >> discussion happening in a completely separate channel?
> >> ** Especially when the discussion was exactly about the op overreaching:
> >> this seems like an obvious conflict of interest. Also, should an op's
> >> personal bias towards words like blitzkrieg and dictator be allowed to
> >> affect a user's ability to enter a channel?
> >>
> >> * What can be done to make #ubuntu-ops a more friendly place? The
> >> discussion was very obviously hostile, and I was penalised for speaking
> up
> >> against the very two ops I had a problem with, and in general the
> channel's
> >> attitude was "write an email and gtfo, you're just repeating the same
> >> things over and over". I don't understand the insistence to leave the
> >> channel, nor the very obvious ganging up of the "ops vs. users" -- at
> least
> >> I felt that way from the get-go. After I left the channel, the logs show
> >> people suggesting each other to skip reading the scrollback and offer
> >> sympathies for people who actually wanted to read it. If that can be
> >> written off as humour, I would like to ask why the same kind of humour
> >> leads to a ban in #ubuntu.
> >> ** This is especially important, because #ubuntu-ops is the first forum
> in
> >> the appeals flow, and the experience there was extremely elitist and
> >> hostile.
> >>
> >> * Why is it so bad to suggest an op be penalised? Why does doing that
> >> instantly evoke allegations of being childish and immature (as opposed
> to
> >> people claiming they themselves are intelligent adults)? If an op can
> ban
> >> someone for a week in a completely unrelated channel for discussion in
> >> another channel, why is it sacrilege that there should be at least some
> >> kind of disciplinary action?
> >>
> >> * Continuing from the previous question, the general feeling I got is
> that
> >> the accountability of ops in general is not up to the usual Ubuntu
> >> standards. Whereas packages in the repo are vetted in several different
> >> ways, there seems to be no similar vetting for the whole ops flow.
> People
> >> claiming that "puppies don't die" if an op makes mistakes shows that the
> >> general feeling of responsibility seems low. Another way of thinking
> about
> >> this is if that puppies are not going to die anyway, why go out of your
> way
> >> to ban someone for a joke here and there?
> >>
> >> * Turning the tables onto myself, was I annoying? In short, yes. Could I
> >> have done things differently? Yes. Feedback on my behaviour is as much
> >> appreciated as the discussion on the above bullet points.
> >>
> >> If you actually made it this far -- thank you! I am looking forward to
> >> hearing other points of view, and as someone on IRC suggested, I will
> try
> >> my best to ensure that this goes better than the discussion on IRC was
> :)
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Rohan
> >>
> >> [1]: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2014/05/15/%23ubuntu-ops.html
> >> [2]: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2014/05/16/%23ubuntu-ops.html
> >>
> >> --
> >> Rohan Dhruva
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rohan Dhruva
>
> --
> Ubuntu-irc mailing list
> Ubuntu-irc at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-irc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-irc/attachments/20140517/10203fa2/attachment.html>