<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.28.1"> </HEAD> <BODY> On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 15:42 -0700, Robert Wall wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> Plenty of ops (and the bantracker itself, in some cases) have logs of the core channels. I can't think of a time that there's been a dispute over whether an op was lying about what a user said. Since there are at least two IRC Council members in #ubuntu-offtopic (for example) right now, I don't think such an argument would get very far :) </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> Whether or not IRCC members should be operators on channels might be a good subject for another discussion, although it is not relevant for this one. I have not had problems with it, and I suppose as long as the Council is big enough, a member that is involved in a dispute can abstain from dealing with such an issue. IRCC members currently have the option to drop operator duties while they are serving on the Council, and I think it is enough. Matters of bias are also taken seriously: you're not going to catalyse a flamewar you're an active participant in. We should be able to trust that Council members can manage their own conduct, or there is a larger problem, and if not, the the other Council members will notify them. :) Juha </BODY> </HTML>