#ubuntu-ops and the IRC team culture

[Terence Simpson]

Hello everyone.

As promised; the second half of the email response to the issues Rohan
raised, with my personal opinions.
I want to broaden the discussion a little and then get back to what
actually happened.

So the first thing I want to say is that I'm a little concerned with
the tone of the replies to Rohan's original email. They seem to be
kind of dismissive and tend to read as 'It was your fault for arguing
with ops'. I think we should all try be less defensive and open to
criticism, even if you don't agree with the points made just
understand where they're coming from.

Now to the cause of the email...
So skimming the logs and ban tracker I'm a little disturbed about what
seems to have happened in #ubuntu.

>From what I can tell, it seems that there was an argument between two
people in #ubuntu and it is right that operators do something about
that. I, however, do feel that it could and should have been handle
both differently and "better" (for some definition of "better").

I'm really not sure what the point of the original quiet was. I see it
was apparently a "15min calm down mute" but that's not something I
think was appropriate. First, the user who was quieted
(adamcunnington) didn't initiate the argument, they were provoked.
Understanding that would have been an good place to start.

Next off, they seemed to indicate they were willing to stop the
argument before the quiet was issued. I think it better to avoid
taking action if possible, especially if the situation seems to have
calmed down.

I may be missing some context where there was a private discussion,
but the part I really disagree with is the principle of the "15min
calm down mute". I think it would be acceptable to quiet someone
*while* you talk to them in private/#ubuntu-ops, it's a good way of
protecting the channel from more disruption while working with the
"problem user".

I dislike the concept of arbitrary length quiet/bans, I also dislike
the concept of "you're banned for X hours/days/whatever" and "come
back in X hours/days/whatever". I understand the rational behind it,
when you feel the situation isn't going to be resolved or when
emotions are high things seem to be going around in circles. But the
operators aren't there to administer punishments, and extend those
punishments because people get frustrated or rude.
Bans/quiets are there to *protect* the channel, nothing is gained by
the power play of 'I control how long this ban lasts, and I can extend
the length of the ban'. It's something that has crept into the culture
of the IRC team and it's something I'd like to see addressed.

Just a last comment on what happened in #ubuntu-ops when
adamcunnington joined. Well, it was just very poor. It's certainly
possible that Rohan joining actually exacerbated the situation, but
things were handled badly from the moment adamcunnington joined. It
was clearly a hostel atmosphere and it's not reasonable to expect a
good resolution out of that. It should be our intention to deal with
the issue in a way that allows the user to (re)join the channel and
continue to contribute. This doesn't come across to me in the logs
I've looked at recently.

> * What can be done to make #ubuntu-ops a more friendly place?
At least I'm not the only person asking this question. :)

Right, that's probably enough noise from me now.
I ask everyone to have a think about the culture around the IRC team
and especially try and think about it from the perspective of someone
who joins #ubuntu-ops. Please do reply with your own thoughts and
opinions.

Thanks for reading another of my rambles.

--
Terence Simpson (tsimpson)