[00:00] <gnomefreak> PriceChild: for the most part
[00:37] <Bodsda> hi, i help with the #ubuntuforums-beginners team and during our meeting the issue of security was brought up, and also the lack of knowledgge of security in #ubuntu -- i was wondering if i could get a !security factoid with this link in it plz -- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=510812 -- what do you think?
[00:38] <LjL> !security
[00:38] <LjL> forum threads in bot links should be avoided IMHO, if at all possible
[00:38] <LjL> relevant information should rather be added to the wiki
[00:39] <LjL> that's the actual documentation, after all
[00:39] <Bodsda> LjL, -- ok, il get a link added to the wiki from those links ty
[00:42] <LjL> goodnight everyone, reach me by email if you need me, i'm still unlikely to be on irc often right now
[00:42] <gnomefreak> night LjL 
[00:42] <ikonia> *sigh*
[00:42] <Myrtti> nightey luv
[01:03] <PriceChild> There wasn't any discussion on irseek on the Ml was there, just the decision on it?
[01:04] <PriceChild> I'm going through the irclogs. for the discussions we had on it
[01:10] <gnomefreak> PriceChild: i thought i read something about it when i got home after leave
[01:10] <gnomefreak> or i was away when i saw it
[01:11] <PriceChild> the main discussion is at http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2007/12/20/%23ubuntu-ops.html
[01:12] <PriceChild> I think there was some before that, and a lot in PM.
[01:12]  * gnomefreak not even sure who, why, what, and how IRSeek came about and what interest does a commercial company have in our logs?
[01:14] <mneptok> seeing that any company anywhere on the planet can recursively wget the logs from our own logging bots, what's the problem with IRSeek, anyway?
[01:14] <gnomefreak> my main concern on it is what interest is it for company i dont really see any need to have a company log our channels
[01:15] <gnomefreak> different to grep search logs than log it for whatever reason
[01:15] <gnomefreak> damn that was fast
[01:16] <PriceChild> I'm writing a page for the wiki, you can add viewpoints i miss in a minute
[01:16] <stdin> afaik irseek are just like a google for IRC
[01:17]  * mneptok tootles off for dinnah
[02:02] <stdin> bazhang: best to just let staff deal with it, not much we cab do
[02:02] <bazhang> stdin, okay thanks--could not enter them as users at any rate (no tab complete)
[02:06] <Seeker`> bazhang: what client do you use?
[02:07] <bazhang> xchat Seeker` 
[02:07] <Seeker`> any decent client should have tab complete
[02:07]  * mneptok makes the obligatory "CLI clients are superior" unhelpful comment
[02:08] <bazhang> not for those bots Seeker` 
[02:08] <Seeker`> mneptok: irssi ftw
[02:08] <PriceChild> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcTeam/IRSeekDiscussion
[02:08] <PriceChild> please add points
[02:09] <mneptok> Seeker`: i'm so irssi biased i use a GUI client with a "make it look like irssi" script :)
[02:09] <mneptok> (when i use a GUI client)
[02:09] <stdin> bazhang: bots are just uses too, they were probably k-lined before you could tab them
[02:09]  * Seeker` notes the irony of the "No discussion" comment just below the huge title saying "IRSeekDiscussion"
[02:10] <bazhang> stdin, that is what I had suspected thanks :)
[02:13] <PriceChild> meh
[02:14] <PriceChild> I'll reword it... I know what I want to write, I just don't know how to write it.
[02:14] <nalioth> bazhang: staff is sometimes quicker than the bots ( on very rare occasions )
[02:15] <bazhang> thanks nalioth  :)
[02:20] <Seeker`> PriceChild: "This page is for the summary of any IRSeek discussion" or something similar
[02:22] <Seeker`> sleep time
[02:31] <mneptok> PriceChild: could you just name it "man wget?" :P
[03:15] <stdin> 03:15, time to stop working on the bot and sleep probably
[03:16] <nalioth> sleeep.
[03:16] <stdin> btw, a bzr branch with my changes is at https://code.launchpad.net/~tsimpson/ubuntu-bots/tweak if you like them grab them ;)
[03:17] <jdong> bot-grabbing in public is illegal in some countries you know ;-)
[03:18] <stdin> I live in a freedom loving country, we can grab all the bots we want :p
[03:19] <jdong> stdin: well I can too but my lawyer says I should shut up
[03:19] <jdong> stdin: it's the pushing and merging that'll get you into trouble though.
[04:11] <mneptok> jdong: who will protect you when the metal ones come for *you*? and they will ...
[04:12] <mneptok> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1435090770451224720
[04:30] <Amaranth> mneptok: you're going to be in prague?
[05:41] <mneptok> Amaranth: eye yam
[05:41] <mneptok> (sorry, commute-lag)
[05:42]  * Amaranth cancels flight
[05:50] <mneptok> Amaranth: Prague polar bear Internet surveillance whores some night?
[05:50] <mneptok> http://www.boingboing.net/2008/04/30/big-brothel-internet.html
[05:50] <Amaranth> whoa
[05:50]  * Amaranth uncancels flight
[05:50] <Amaranth> ;)
[05:51] <mneptok> you can't make a phrase like "Prague polar bear Internet surveillance whores" up.
[07:21] <Myrtti> so
[07:21] <Myrtti> good morning
[07:28] <mynetdude> anybody in here interested in some action?
[07:28] <mynetdude> well if you are head over to ##windows
[07:29] <tonyyarusso> mynetdude: why are you bring up other parts of the network here?
[07:29] <Myrtti> /me yawns
[07:29] <mynetdude> lolz... they've been feeding a troll for nearly 4hrs now
[07:29] <Myrtti> "have fun"
[07:29] <mynetdude> I've only been there for the last 20 mins
[07:30] <mynetdude> yeah I know it :D
[07:30] <mynetdude> dang lots of plusses here
[07:30] <tonyyarusso> mynetdude: but what does that have to do with the Ubuntu channels?
[07:30] <ompaul> !idle | mynetdude 
[07:31] <ompaul> mynetdude, so how can we help you?
[07:31] <mynetdude> tonyyarusso, cpudan80 told me to come here if help from an op was needed
[07:31] <mynetdude> ah ok well he didn't tell me that either
[07:31] <ompaul> mynetdude, for ubuntu channel 
[07:31] <mynetdude> ##windows
[07:31] <tonyyarusso> Ubuntu ops, oddly enough, do not op for Windows.
[07:31] <ompaul> wrong place head on over to #freenode and look for a staffer
[07:31] <Myrtti> that's not an ubuntu channel
[07:31] <ompaul> have a nice day
[07:31] <mynetdude> well I understand that, obviously no ircops here either?
[07:32] <mynetdude> alright if thats how you want to shoulder it... peace
[07:32] <ompaul> for this channel everyone with a voice
[07:32] <Myrtti> maybe, maybe not
[07:32] <tonyyarusso> how odd...
[07:32] <ompaul> na - someone having fun
[07:32] <Myrtti> cpudan has some misunderstanding about the governance of the network
[07:33] <ompaul> wow
[07:33] <tonyyarusso> buh?
[07:33] <Myrtti> hmm?
[07:33] <ompaul> there is no cpudan
[07:33] <ompaul> wanted to invite to prevent further misconceptions
[07:33] <Myrtti> /wii cpudan80
[07:33] <ompaul> ack
[07:34] <tonyyarusso> /wii golf
[07:34] <ompaul> so I just cleared out my mailq of spammerz
[07:34] <tonyyarusso> closely followed by some /wii tennis
[07:34]  * ompaul goes to work 
[07:34] <ompaul> cheers
[07:46] <Myrtti> !repomirror
[08:17] <Myrtti> is everyone having a "after meeting" hangover?
[08:19] <mneptok> Myrtti: yes, the rope is hanging over the rafter.
[08:19] <Myrtti> how did it go?
[08:19] <jussi01> Morning all
[08:20] <Myrtti> I just started to cry after the first 20 minutes and had to leave
[08:20] <jussi01> what happened at the meeting?
[08:20] <Myrtti> I started to think that I'm not emotionally cabable of handling such ... slander is the first word that comes to mind
[08:21] <Myrtti> and once again considered resigning as an op
[08:21] <Myrtti> it's my weak point
[08:21] <mneptok> steady on, dear.
[08:21] <nalioth> Myrtti: you should have stayed, it got more circular
[08:21] <nalioth> Myrtti: you could have left there dizzy
[08:22] <Myrtti> I felt seasick already
[08:22]  * mneptok twirls nalioth lightly around the floor
[08:22] <Myrtti> getting more dizzy would not have helped
[08:22]  * nalioth pirouttes mneptok off the side of the ship   
[08:23] <mneptok> *thud* dinghy
[08:23]  * jussi01 throws mneptok a rope
[08:23] <nalioth> be more kind to yourself, mneptok, you're not dinghy ( no matter what anyone says )
[08:24] <mneptok> i think the term jono likes is "fucking batshit"
[08:24] <Myrtti> /me sighs
[08:25] <Myrtti> talking of jono
[08:25] <nalioth> mneptok: haven't we spoken about taht before?
[08:25] <mneptok> nalioth: hmm wha'?
[08:25] <Myrtti> has the language in lug radio cleaned up at all?
[08:25] <nalioth> mneptok: let us watch our language  :|
[08:26] <mneptok> nalioth: this channel is now "family friendly" at all times?
[08:26] <Myrtti> yes
[08:26] <Myrtti> it was one of the things discussed yesterday before I left, I believe
[08:27] <mneptok> really? when did that take effect?
[08:27] <Myrtti> I've cussed here only once
[08:27] <Myrtti> after S left
[08:27] <mneptok> i saw references to not using epithets in reference to others.
[08:58] <Myrtti> *sigh*
[09:01] <Hobbsee> mneptok: after the CC meeting.
[09:03]  * Hobbsee ponders if emma really will reform, after being told to stop by sabdfl, and will actually behave like a good ubuntu user.
[09:03] <tonyyarusso> perhaps
[09:08]  * Daviey wonders if certain ubuntu ops will reform, after being told by sabdfl to stop
[09:09] <Hobbsee> probably
[09:09] <Hobbsee> as it is, a lot of the comments have been apologised for.
[09:09] <Hobbsee> and i've not seen them again.
[09:09] <Hobbsee> i think there's useful stuff that will come of the further discussions, including about channels that allow suboptimal things, like personal attacks and stalking.
[11:06] <ikonia> kuahara in #ubuntu ops trolling about installing XP SP2 to random people. Asked multiple times to stop
[11:13] <Myrtti> /me observes
[11:14] <ikonia> ahh your awake
[11:52] <Mez> !search angry
[11:52] <Mez> !search feed
[11:53]  * Mez gets killed
[11:53] <Mez> !search ops
[11:53] <Mez> thats the one
[11:53] <Myrtti> kerry?
[11:53] <Myrtti> !kerry
[11:53] <Mez> !opabuse.
[11:53] <Mez> was what I was looking for... 
[11:53] <Mez> but it isnt the same old factoid
[11:54] <Myrtti> !exploit
[11:54] <Myrtti> oh
[12:05] <elkbuntu> Daviey, there is no #*ubuntu* ban on miss E. if there was she would not be in -uk, -meeting and all the other #*ubuntu* channels she's in. In the future, please be factual and avoid twisting things to vilify us
[12:06] <Daviey> "us"
[12:06] <Daviey> ?
[12:13] <Myrtti> elkbuntu: I got the impression there was a #*ubuntu* ban on her
[12:17] <Daviey> -!- emma [n=emma@unaffiliated/emma] has left #ubuntu-bugs [requested by Hobbsee: " you are not welcome here, nor in any other #*ubuntu* channel."]
[12:18] <Daviey> I think the fact that the -uk ops were also questioned if they were going to ban emma agrees with my statement.
[12:19] <Daviey> but hey, if i'm wrong - elkbuntu, are you suggesting each ban on emma stands on it's own merit for incidents that have happend within tjose chabbels?
[12:19] <elkbuntu> Daviey, the -uk ops have been asked due to concerns expressed by one of your longer-term users.
[12:19] <Daviey> *spell
[12:19] <Daviey> nooo, it was asked way before that
[12:19] <elkbuntu> the -us ops to my knowledge have not been approached.
[12:19] <elkbuntu> meanwhile, saying one is not welcome does not constitute a ban
[12:20] <Daviey> semantics
[12:20] <gnomefreak> anyone running intrepid in here yet? chroot or system?
[12:20] <elkbuntu> Daviey, the user's issue has been around as long as she's been in -uk
[12:21] <Daviey> I can't see where you point is going, but if you want to continue it - i'll be free later
[12:21] <gnomefreak> .win 13
[12:22] <elkbuntu> Daviey, i think you're refusing to see, as you've refused to help your fellow loco'er
[12:24] <Daviey> elkbuntu: can you define who "us" is, please?
[12:25] <elkbuntu> Daviey, err... you mean where i said -us? as in -US as in the United States version of -uk aka -UK?
[12:25] <Daviey> no
[12:25] <Daviey> please be factual and avoid  twisting things to vilify us
[12:25] <Daviey> ^ that "us"
[12:26] <elkbuntu> Daviey, the main channel ops.
[12:26] <Daviey> i don't think i was.
[12:27] <elkbuntu> then why were you petitioning in the meeting?
[12:28] <popey> elkbuntu: i note that neither you nor anyone else on the irc ops team approached me about emma being in -uk
[12:28] <Daviey> because the fact remains, she is banned from most of the #*ubuntu* channels.. if she enters another one - such as #ubuntu-bugs, she is banned very quickly
[12:29] <elkbuntu> popey, i was informed that you were approached.
[12:29] <popey> by Hobbsee 
[12:29] <popey> who AIUI isn't on the irc council
[12:29] <elkbuntu> i was informed that pricechild had too
[12:29] <popey> sorry, i said irc ops team, meant irc council
[12:30] <popey> at no point was I approached by anyone _saying_ that this had been escalated to the irc council
[12:30] <elkbuntu> popey, one has to be on the council to bring an issue to you? you're close to 'choosing who to respect' here
[12:30] <popey> no
[12:30] <popey> I didn't say that
[12:30] <elkbuntu> why should it have to be escalated before something gets done?
[12:30] <popey> because the irc ops are involved in the issue
[12:30] <popey> AIUI if the irc ops are involved in the issue it should be escaled higher
[12:30] <elkbuntu> how are the irc ops involved in one user stalking another?
[12:30] <popey> irc council being one step
[12:30] <popey> cc the next
[12:31] <elkbuntu> which irc op is involved?
[12:31] <popey> the conflict has been between emma and the irc ops IMO
[12:31] <popey> maybe I'm wrong on that
[12:31] <popey> that's my interpretation
[12:31] <elkbuntu> um... the person who is being stalked is not an op.
[12:31] <elkbuntu> emma is not an op.
[12:31] <Daviey> elkbuntu: If you stalk a user, especially cross network - how can you be deemed suitable to deal with it?
[12:31] <popey> i didn't say she was
[12:31] <elkbuntu> where does 'the ops are involved' fit into one non-op stalking another non-op?
[12:31] <popey> i said the irc ops are _involved_
[12:31] <elkbuntu> i asked _how_
[12:32] <popey> thats yet _another_ issue
[12:32] <popey> i see two issues here, 1) between emma and the irc ops, 2) between one non-op and another non-op
[12:32] <popey> the fact that Hobbsee came to talk to me about issue 2) is related to issue 1) of course
[12:33] <elkbuntu> Daviey, who is stalking who now?
[12:33] <Daviey> elkbuntu: Did you join another network where emma was on to call her a Liar and make accusations?
[12:33] <elkbuntu> Daviey, she is showing up on servers hobbsee and i have been on for over a year
[12:34] <Daviey> That statement is irrelevant
[12:35] <elkbuntu> that statement is not irrelevent. i did not join anything to do anything to her
[12:35] <Daviey> so you happend to fall into a channel where only she and another user were talking?
[12:36] <elkbuntu> i followed up a report
[12:36] <ikonia> all, allow me to clear up something, just so elkbuntu isn't referencing something 3rd hand that may get her into difficulty
[12:37] <ikonia> I've had incidents in multiple channels where some of my peers on other projects have been "queried" about me, the projects I work on and some personal information (nothing of any warrent)
[12:37] <ikonia> Some of that information has been referenced against me in public ubuntu channels
[12:37] <ikonia> (against is the wrong word)
[12:37] <ikonia> this information is dropped into conversations by emma at random times
[12:38] <ikonia> I have made a complaint to the -uk staff about this topic
[12:38] <ikonia> the issue was delt with in house as I'm told, so I've not progressed it any futher
[12:38] <popey> who did you complain to?
[12:38] <Daviey> ikonia: I never recieved this complaint from you
[12:39] <ikonia> well, I complained to Seeker` directly, and then progressed it futher to popey that I wasn't happy with the outcome
[12:39] <ikonia> Daviey: I've not complained to you direclty that I can remember
[12:39] <Daviey> ok
[12:40] <popey> ikonia: _I_ approached _you_ about the spat with emma
[12:40] <ikonia> popey: no
[12:40] <ikonia> popey: you never responded
[12:40] <popey> I did, on april 18th at 11:18
[12:40] <popey> ditto :)
[12:40] <ikonia> have you got a log of that conversation (not pulling on logs) I remember prompting you 2 - 3 times about it
[12:40] <popey> yes, looking at it now
[12:41] <ikonia> I also spoke to Hobbsee about it as she was the only available op around at the time and I believe she also took it up
[12:41] <ikonia> took it up with you, I should say 
[12:41] <popey> she did, she approached me directly
[12:41] <popey> and based on reading a few lines of one day of logs of -uk
[12:41] <popey> she pretty much said I was unfit to op
[12:41] <ikonia> thats not the issue I raised
[12:42] <popey> i would make the log public if Hobbsee gives her permission
[12:42] <Daviey> popey: Join the witchhunt, and all this will go away.
[12:42] <ikonia> Daviey: I'm not doing a witch hunt, I'm just making it clear so that someone referencing third hand doesn't get things wrong/blamed
[12:42] <ikonia> actually blamed is a wrong word, my mistake
[12:43] <ikonia> does get any issue for getting a fact wrong
[12:44] <popey> thats appreciated ikonia 
[12:45] <ikonia> popey: however the fact that a complaint is called a witchhunt, because the bigger and on going issues are not seen or aware is why I took it futher
[12:45] <ikonia> Daviey: sorry to use your moment phrase as an example  it is an EXAMPLE only
[12:46] <ikonia> that was not a complaint/moan about Daviey's comment, just an easy example as it was on screen at this moment
[12:46] <popey> i feel it's a witchhunt, yes, because in the same way Hobbsee thinks I'm reacting differently because the issue was with emma in -uk, I believe the ops are acting differently as a result of the people involved
[12:47] <popey> however, this is all going over well trodden ground
[12:48] <elkbuntu> Many of the op team are scared to do something about wrongdoings such as someone being stalked, because we'll be accused of harrassment, vendettas and witchhunts not just by the wrongdoers, but by people who argue someone's case for the sake of arguing to feel big.
[12:50] <popey> is that aimed at me?
[12:51] <Pici> I've had it with the mud-slinging in here, on both sides.  
[12:58]  * Hobbsee has no great problem with the log being given to those who are in here and talking, but does if it gets published somewhere for an eternity.
[12:59] <Hobbsee> Last i checked, it was not required that i be on the IRC council to take up something that had been brought up with me, but not another member of the IRC council, as they were not at their computer screens.
[13:00] <Hobbsee> If that is a requirement, I would ask that I be pointed to wherever all these rules and protocols are listed.
[13:01] <popey> again, i didn't say that
[13:01] <Daviey> well this is another timesink.  Thanks elkbuntu for raising this.
[13:02] <Daviey> At least we clarified that emma isn't banned #*ubuntu* channels.. I think we've all learn't something there
[13:03] <Daviey> Hobbsee: can you explain why she was banned from #ubuntu-bugs as an example?
[13:04] <Hobbsee> Daviey: because it's an #ubuntu-wide, non-loco channel (as we do not circumvent you guys) channel ban.
[13:04] <Hobbsee> obviously, she needed to stay allowed in -meeting, with the CC stuff.
[13:04] <Daviey> hmm.. that is inverse to what wlkhas stated.. or have i missunderstood
[13:04] <Hobbsee> and she's only been allowed here again recently.
[13:04] <Daviey> s/wlkhas/elkbuntu/
[13:04] <elkbuntu> um... Daviey how does a main channel-wide ban equal an #*ubuntu* ban?
[13:05] <elkbuntu> since there are #*buntu* channels that are not main
[13:05] <Daviey> Well considering Hobbsee made reference to it in a ban/remove, i think it's wholly equal
[13:06] <elkbuntu> Daviey, "not welcome" does not equate "banned from"
[13:06] <Hobbsee> it's unfeasible to ban her in every loco channel, particularly as we are not the ops there.  That much, is up to you people.  I believe she's also in #ubuntuforums for the same reason.
[13:06] <Pici> Daviey: I think you're reading too much into it.
[13:06] <Daviey> it does, when it's the remove statement.
[13:06] <elkbuntu> Daviey, no, it does not.
[13:06] <Daviey> our opinions differ
[13:07] <elkbuntu> invariably.
[13:07] <Hobbsee> however, an #*ubuntu*-wide channel ban for all channels that have the ubuntuirccouncil as the contact is probably more correct.
[13:07] <Hobbsee> which, last i checked, should include -bugs, unless it hasn't changed over.
[13:07] <gnomefreak> it seeems i took leave at a great time that way i didnt have to deal with her pms and whatever else happened
[13:07] <Daviey> So my statement to the CC last night was justified.
[13:07] <Pici> gnomefreak: I envy you 
[13:08] <Daviey> Anyway, i honestly don't have time right now if you wish to carry on with this.. I'll be avaliable later if you so wish :/
[13:08] <gnomefreak> :) im sure ill end up in something simular at some point again
[13:12] <elkbuntu> Daviey, asking once was fine, asking repeatedly was rude, especially since the answer was given.
[13:15]  * Hobbsee is starting to suspect that Daviey has a personal vendetta against her.
[13:16] <Hobbsee> it's bad enough that emma does, and is attempting to harass me in multiple networks and channels which have no relation to ubuntu, but Daviey is an op, so should be above such things.
[13:17]  * Hobbsee also is starting to suspect that a subset of the -uk ops are on a witchhunt over a small subset of the ubuntu ops group, too.
[13:18] <elkbuntu> Hobbsee, according to sabdfl, yes, as an op he should not have a vendetta on you.
[13:18] <Hobbsee> asking [18:42] <Daviey> Hobbsee: why can't you just stop it? 8 minutes after anyone had last said anything, seems to just be wanting to incite trouble.
[13:18] <Hobbsee> and the things in this log...very revealing.
[13:25] <popey> not true Hobbsee 
[14:37]  * Mez sighs
[14:53] <PriceChild> odd scorllback
[14:55] <Mez> PriceChild, My thoughts too
[15:06] <PriceChild> Mez: I fear the day we think the same.
[15:06] <Mez> PriceChild, ?
[15:07]  * jussi01 hugs PriceChild...
[15:07] <PriceChild> nuthin :P
[15:07] <jussi01> hehe
[15:07] <Mez> PriceChild, that wasn't very nice :(
[15:07] <bazhang> haha
[15:08] <bazhang> xcell :(
[15:17]  * PriceChild huggles Mez 
[15:17] <PriceChild> I will save my sarcasm for lrl :P
[15:26] <jdavies> PriceChild: you kill him and the floodbot1...
[15:27] <PriceChild> jdavies: hmm?
[15:27] <jdavies> PriceChild: lrl == ljl?
[15:27] <jdavies> oh, wait, come back (bot2)
[15:27] <jdavies> -1*
[15:31] <jdavies> wb LjL 
[15:34] <PriceChild> jdavies: I meant lugradio live
[15:35] <jdavies> aaah, right
[15:59] <ikonia> AlphaOmega in #ubuntu going to be a pain
[16:00] <jdavies> ikonia: watching
[16:00] <ikonia> thank you
[16:01] <jdavies> and the desktop effects got stucked on zoom, thus, very closly
[16:01] <ikonia> ha
[16:01] <ikonia> he's gone all quiet, no problem. thank you
[16:02] <jdavies> no problem
[16:05] <Amaranth> eep there is a CC meeting scheduled during UDS
[16:05] <Myrtti> gr8
[16:05] <Amaranth> Also, why didn't anyone mention the bit about emma PM'ing people we ban?
[16:06] <stdin> didn't seem there was a point
[16:07] <PriceChild> You guys around atm, add points to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcTeam/IRSeekDiscussion !! :)
[16:07] <Amaranth> PriceChild: I have no opinion either way
[16:08] <Amaranth> Let it me, get rid of it, whatever
[16:08] <Amaranth> s/me/be/
[16:08] <gnomefreak> PriceChild: you got mine in there but im sure i can think of more if i try hard enough
[16:09] <gnomefreak> btw ubuntulog is still around so why would we need to replace it? i thought the point of it was to replace ubuntulog cause it was gone
[16:10] <gnomefreak> i did like thte interface to IRSeek logs
[16:10] <PriceChild> i think the main decision in allowing irseek in my mind is... "yeah it doesn't add much, but it doesn't hinder us and it seems petty to stop"
[16:10] <Hobbsee> Amaranth: probably because most people weren't there, and it suited the -uk guys not to say stuff like that, to shake more dirt on us.
[16:10] <Amaranth> I didn't even know about the meeting :/
[16:10] <Amaranth> That was, what, 14 hours ago?
[16:11] <Hobbsee> was at 7am local time.  it's 1am nwo.
[16:11] <Hobbsee> so, 18, iirc
[16:11] <Amaranth> So I was around
[16:11] <gnomefreak> the 7 years bothers me asa to why so long but its petty at this time since they had already stated they wont change that 
[16:12] <Hobbsee> i spoke to ariel more about that, with christel.  They were talking about changing it to 2-3 years.
[16:12] <gnomefreak> well atleast from the reply to emmas email
[16:12] <Hobbsee> Of course, I didn't bother to tell emma to that, because i didn't want to start a few hours worth of query.
[16:13] <Hobbsee> and of course, anywhere new that she is, where i turn up, she then starts defaming me
[16:13] <Hobbsee> so i figured she could just live in ignorance.
[16:13] <stdin> honestly, I don't get the opposition. there most likely are unknown log-bots in #ubuntu anyway so what's so bad about letting the one we *do* know about log?
[16:13] <gnomefreak> after the way she went at you in -party when i got home i didnt expect you to say much of anything to her
[16:13] <Hobbsee> stdin: because it's israeli.
[16:13] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: i don't remeber the -party stuff, for some reason.
[16:13] <bazhang> military
[16:14] <Myrtti> yeah, put on your tin foil hats
[16:14] <Hobbsee> i remember her being annoyed at her getting banned for telling us how to do our jobs, and expressing her distaste at the other guy not being banned before she was.
[16:14] <gnomefreak> my problem is because only bots ran by staff/ops in official channels the bots were official and no other bots now we are letting a non official bot in others will want to bring thier bots in
[16:14] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: there are still requirements on whether they can talk.
[16:15] <Hobbsee> or set modes, etc.
[16:15] <Hobbsee> ie, only some of the official bots can talk, adn no others
[16:15] <Hobbsee> bots which are properly lobotomized are of little consequence.
[16:16] <gnomefreak> the IRCC will need to ammend the guidelines to state that
[16:17] <Hobbsee> i thought they did somewaht, but it would be nice if they did, yes.
[16:17]  * gnomefreak not really for or against it but i am trying to catch up on it since this all happened on my leave
[16:17] <Hobbsee> there's certianly an on join message now
[16:17] <Hobbsee> heh
[16:19] <Hobbsee> stdin: the main problems are that it's israeli, and may end up using the logs for profit, as it's a side project done by a company.
[16:19] <gnomefreak> IRSeek has used questionable methods in the past to log channels without permission
[16:19] <gnomefreak> that kind of bothers me without knowing what they did
[16:20] <Pici> I'm curious to hear why emma is now okay with Irseek
[16:20] <stdin> most clients log by default, so anyone could do whatever they wanted with the logs they have of just being in #ubuntu
[16:20] <gnomefreak> Pici: due to the email between her and ariel
[16:20] <Hobbsee> Pici: because it doesn't log forever.
[16:20] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: it wasn't an email.
[16:21] <gnomefreak> oh i thought it was
[16:21] <Hobbsee> Pici: the fact that it can still use logs for profit, etc, emma has either forgotten about, or appears not to care about.
[16:21] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: nah, was in #irseek-victims - i was lurking in those channels for a while
[16:21] <gnomefreak> oh he stated he didnt get to her email but they talked on irc (i dont have link anymore)
[16:22] <Hobbsee> was interesting, particularly as i had questions of my own to ask.
[16:22] <gnomefreak> how does ariel fit into IRC or ubuntu other than logging?
[16:22] <stdin> Hobbsee: in what way could a company (any company, not just IRSeek specifically) use the logs for profit?
[16:22] <gnomefreak> i might be misspelling his/her name sorry if i am
[16:23] <Pici> stdin: datamining perhaps?
[16:23] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: ariel == cohead of irseek
[16:23] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: i always get it confused too
[16:23] <gnomefreak> so he has no ties to irc or ubuntu other than to log channels?
[16:23] <Hobbsee> stdin: unsure.  i'm sure that there's probably some way, if you could sift through and find useful information in it, for  any given problem.
[16:24] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: he has an interest in logging irc to produce informatoin in a searchable way, and to let people tap into that resource, pretty much
[16:24] <stdin> they could do the same with the logs kept by ubuntulog 
[16:24] <Hobbsee> stdin: oh, of course.  but it's a 'slimey israeli company' and therefore shoudl not be encouraged.  So the argument goes.
[16:25] <gnomefreak> well thats kind of what i mean why change what works? what do we (community) get out of IRSeek seeing as they are getting maybe getting something out of it
[16:25] <Hobbsee> stdin: the argument never did make sense, although emma's essay covers some of the finer points
[16:25] <stdin> I think sabdfl made it clear that the discussion should not include the origin of the company
[16:25] <Hobbsee> sure he did.
[16:25] <stdin> so, their argument on that is mute
[16:26] <gnomefreak> the company being based out of anywhere should never be the issue
[16:26] <Pici> Indeed.
[16:26] <Hobbsee> i'm going on their old information that they used to give in here, and in emmaland.
[16:26] <Hobbsee> I presume it hasn't changed
[16:26] <gnomefreak> its kind of against the ubuntu definition
[16:27] <stdin> Hobbsee: I think that's probably the basis of some peoples objection (IMO)
[16:27] <Hobbsee> interestingly, she's deleted her old blogposts.
[16:27] <Hobbsee> stdin: which, that it's israeli?
[16:27] <stdin> yes
[16:27] <gnomefreak> yes
[16:27] <Hobbsee> likely.
[16:28] <gnomefreak> someone at meeting made a comment about that (dont remmeber) but not important who
[16:28] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: many did, iirc.
[16:28] <stdin> from what I have seen, for some that seems to be the predominantly cited reason
[16:29] <bazhang> hmm /cs m is not mute but who is
[16:29] <gnomefreak> are we willing to do this with other companies that decide he did it i want to do it too
[16:30] <gnomefreak> bazhang: lol
[16:30] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: assuming the bots are silent, then, yes, i would assume so
[16:30] <bazhang> sorry to interrupt :)
[16:30] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: as stdin rightly pointed out, if they want to copy the logs off of irclogs.ubuntu.com, then we really can't stop them from doing that either.
[16:30] <gnomefreak> bazhang: welcome to any time 
[16:30] <bazhang> gnomefreak, :)
[16:30] <gnomefreak> i agree
[16:31] <gnomefreak> bazhang: mine is /at for mute :)
[16:31] <bazhang> :)
[16:31] <gnomefreak> well 10 minutes i think or 155
[16:31] <gnomefreak> 15 minutes
[16:32] <Hobbsee> stdin: i *presume* that when they do the IRseek wiki page, they'll find actual reasons why it shouldn't be there, and why they don't like it, apart from it's country of origin.
[16:32] <gnomefreak> i guess it wouldnt really matter from the stand point of google since people get our email addresses from chat anyway
[16:32] <stdin> Hobbsee: well, I hope so
[16:33] <gnomefreak> it shouldnt get that far if they are gonna have 2nd thoughts
[16:33] <Hobbsee> stdin: well, because otherwise mark and the CC would be likely to tell them to go fishing, if htey can't manage to write an objective thing on why something is bad.
[16:33] <Hobbsee> particularly if they happen to make a slur against...say....africans.
[16:33] <Hobbsee> in the process
[16:34] <gnomefreak> out of the 4 points in the lets do IRSeek 1 of them is no guessing or hoping
[16:34] <stdin> I have no doubt of that
[16:34] <Hobbsee> stdin: if they prove, in their writing, that they cannot be objective, then i'd expect them to lose all their credibility with the CC.
[16:35] <Hobbsee> on any given issue
[16:35] <bazhang> IRSeek is like Tivo :)
[16:35]  * gnomefreak wants tivo i dont care too much about IRSeek
[16:35] <gnomefreak> ;)
[16:35] <bazhang> haha
[16:36] <Pici> Are our irclogs published under a paricular license?
[16:36] <Hobbsee> Pici: 'public domain' afaik.
[16:36] <gnomefreak> but the more i look at this wiki im even rethinking my on the fence part
[16:36] <Hobbsee> Pici: there's no real way to enforce it, so....
[16:36] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: oh?
[16:37] <gnomefreak> the first part "For IRSeek logging" half of them is "they claim" or "as far as we are aware" those are not knowns
[16:37] <gnomefreak> they are kind of " we really dont know enough about this"
[16:38] <Amaranth> http://people.freedesktop.org/~david/gdu-luks-easy.png <--look it's OS X
[16:38] <gnomefreak> and the practices in the past with them
[16:39] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: well, 1 certainly seems to be true, for what i've tried
[16:39] <gnomefreak> it kind of makes me wonder if we really know enough about this and maybe we need to find hard questions for them
[16:39] <Hobbsee> although it's very hard to search it, just given the amount of data
[16:39] <gnomefreak> thier interface is nice in certain ways
[16:40] <gnomefreak> you click on Ubuntu and all i saw was #ubuntu logs im sure it was in otehr channels no?
[16:40] <jrib> what's the difference if irseek logs the channel or just uses the logs ubuntu makes?
[16:40] <Hobbsee> i also think that these guys are relative pioneers, so aren't going to have the years of research as to whether people find it useful.
[16:40] <gnomefreak> jrib: not much of anything
[16:40] <Hobbsee> jrib: zomg, there's an israeli thing in the room!
[16:40] <stdin> Hobbsee: you can search the entire logs with google already
[16:40] <Hobbsee> jrib: apart from that, nothing at all.  maybe a different timezone.
[16:41] <Hobbsee> stdin: likely, yes
[16:41] <gnomefreak> personally i think our interface is easier to navigate through "its simple"
[16:42] <stdin> google has a site filter feature, you can tell it to search only one site, so you just tell it to only search ircligs.u.c
[16:42] <Hobbsee>  gnomefreak there are certainly obstacles to overcome to make irc logs useful, to search through.
[16:42] <Hobbsee> stdin: it's still a heck of a lot of content.
[16:42] <Hobbsee> stdin: i presume that irseek is getting better at determining useful content, somehow.
[16:43] <stdin> they probably are
[16:43] <jrib> pairing questions with answers and cataloging this info would actually help users
[16:43] <nalioth> gnomefreak: bottom line: google has all our logs in its DB, the irclogs.ubuntu.com site is publically scrapable, so there is really 0 that we can do one way or the other
[16:44]  * stdin happens to agree with nalioth there
[16:44] <Hobbsee> +1 nalioth 
[16:44] <nalioth> gnomefreak: irseek originally sent its log bots in under anonymous nick!ident and tor
[16:44] <bazhang> they should make the logs into an audiobook
[16:44] <jrib> what's the policy though?  "anyone can log #ubuntu" or "anyone that irc ops approve can log #ubuntu"?
[16:45] <Hobbsee> jrib: try stoping joerandom logging ubuntu.  his client does it by default
[16:45] <gnomefreak> agreed im more so questioning the company and if they are still using "questionable methods" than us acking that might change how people percieve us
[16:45] <nalioth> jrib: the only folks "authorized" for public logging are ubuntulog and irseek
[16:45] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: they say they aren't.
[16:45] <jrib> Hobbsee: I understand that
[16:45] <gnomefreak> i say i dont drinks either
[16:45] <gnomefreak> but i had one today
[16:45] <Hobbsee> jrib: as to logs that are regarded as official....that'd be ubuntulog and irseek.
[16:45] <nalioth> gnomefreak: they got klined within hours of their arrival back then
[16:45] <gnomefreak> nalioth: ah ok
[16:46] <nalioth> gnomefreak: this is all on the freenode blog    blog.freenode.net
[16:46] <gnomefreak> didnt know there was one :(
[16:48] <gnomefreak> thanks ill be back in a bit im gonna read this and maybe eat something
[17:18]  * mneptok yawns
[17:23] <Daviey> 13:12 <+elkbuntu> Daviey, asking once was fine, asking repeatedly was rude, <-- A member of the CC said i should re-raise the issue in pm
[17:39] <mneptok> Daviey: what issue?
[18:06] <Daviey> mneptok: The issue elkbuntu accused me of being rude by raising.. I really don't want to get into this again.
[18:52] <mneptok> Daviey: alright, you should raise it with her, then. if i'm still curious later, i'll find it in logs.
[18:52]  * mneptok runs to the commute routine
[18:52]  * ompaul pokes mneptok in the commute
[18:52] <ompaul> ;-)
[20:27] <bascule> just alittle piece of fedback re lastnights meeting of the CC
[20:27] <bascule> < mdke> issues will always arise in any area of the community, the key is to deal with them in a mature and conciliatory way to ensure that they do not become polarised
[20:28] <bascule> using words like stalking and vendetta do not help any situations at all
[20:28]  * PriceChild wonders why irssi detected that as a netsplit join
[20:28] <bascule> witch hunt is worse
[20:28] <bascule> my join?
[20:29] <bascule> no idea
[20:31] <bascule> please don't fuel things that are already very difficult for all concerned by posying such things where they can be easily read
[20:31] <bascule> posting*
[20:32]  * PriceChild PMs
[20:33] <mneptok> if this keeps up, there are going to be a lot of back-channel ... channels ... set up.
[20:33] <mneptok> *sigh*
[20:33] <nalioth> you mean like #ubuntu-back-channel?
[20:33] <nalioth> ooops
[20:33] <PriceChild> secret is out!
[20:38] <Amaranth> aww, i wanted to join the secret cabal
[20:39] <Amaranth> yes, i know that is redundant :P
[20:42] <nealmcb> !coc
[20:42] <Amaranth> ?
[20:43] <nealmcb> ubottu coc is <reply> The Ubuntu Code of Conduct, to which we ask all Ubuntu community members to adhere, can be found at http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct/
[20:44] <nealmcb> I'm just thinking that the coc doesn't apply itself to users, but to community members
[20:44] <nealmcb> probably some problems with the GPL among other things :-O
[20:45] <nealmcb> and inserting some commas
[20:45] <stdin> see the word "ask" in the previous definition
[20:48] <nealmcb> stdin: I'm a big fan of the coc, but just think it will be best to use it as it is written.  i.e. who is doing the asking?  ubuntu-ops?  ubottu?  If the coc itself were to ask that it would make more sense.  But users aren't asked to do anything in it
[20:50] <nealmcb> or "ask all users of ubuntu-related irc channels" perhaps?
[20:50] <mneptok> nealmcb: the CoC is not confined to IRC
[20:50] <nealmcb> sure - I'm just thinking of how the factoid will be used.  the coc speaks for itself
[20:50] <mneptok> nealmcb: anyone participating anywhere within the Ubuntu community of users and members is asked to abide by the CoC.
[20:51] <stdin> signing it is just confirming that you will
[20:51] <bascule> is it fair to place and end user lifestyle agreement on an operating system?
[20:52] <mneptok> bascule: there is no compulsory agreement, so yes.
[20:52] <PriceChild> I think the factoid is referring to people's conduct whilst participating in the ubuntu community... these channels.
[20:53] <mneptok> bascule: it's perfectly fair to ask you to exhibit certain behavior when interacting with the community. you may choose not to. there may or may not be consequences to that based on the reaction of the community, members, and leaders.
[20:53] <bascule> as in all walks of life, actions have consequnces
[20:55] <nealmcb> I noticed this while seeing how it was used recently in #ubuntu-server to refer to a guy mouthing off over the last few days.  I really don't want to have to have this argument with someone who is already hot and belligerant, so having the factoid clarify that it is irc ops asking irc users would help.  Actually, more than "asking" in this case, no?
[20:56] <PriceChild> "to which we ask all channel participants to adhere"?
[20:56]  * nealmcb nods
[20:56] <nealmcb> expect?
[20:57] <nealmcb> or perhaps a reference to the coc text and to the ircguidelines would be better
[20:57] <PriceChild> guidelines are in a seperate factoid, which also references the coc
[21:12] <nealmcb> !guidelines
[21:33] <PriceChild> Hey there Jackult[AFK], how can I help?
[21:45] <nealmcb> PriceChild: the language in https://help.ubuntu.com/community/InternetRelayChat is  "When participating in Ubuntu IRC channels, please abide by the  Code of Conduct."   That sounds better to me for the factoid.  I would think that help page should also link to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcGuidelines
[21:50] <Myrtti> Lots of nicks I don't recognize
[21:50] <gnomefreak> Myrtti: in here?
[21:50] <PriceChild> nealmcb: i have added the ircguidelines link to the help. page
[21:50] <nealmcb> PriceChild: Thanks!
[21:50] <Myrtti> Yup
[21:51] <ompaul> what is that -back-channel?
[21:51] <PriceChild> nealmcb: will see if there is any other thoughts on the coc factoid, will change it soon if not
[21:52]  * PriceChild resists sarcy answers
[21:52] <ompaul> ahh
[21:52]  * ompaul makes a guess
[21:52]  * jussi01 tries to resist...
[21:52] <PriceChild> Oh wait no I won't... jussi01 could I have editors access please?
[21:52] <Myrtti> Back to a pint -->
[21:52] <jussi01> PriceChild: do @login
[21:52] <gnomefreak> ompaul: were you at meeting yesterday?
[21:52] <PriceChild> @login
[21:52] <ompaul> gnomefreak, yes
[21:52] <gnomefreak> may i pm you?
[21:53] <ompaul> gnomefreak, you may, and john you know you don't have to ask ;-) alright buddy!
[21:53]  * ompaul puts on his best dublin accent
[21:53] <ompaul> alrightbudzo?
[21:53] <gnomefreak> yep :)
[21:53]  * ompaul restores normal service
[21:55] <nealmcb> PriceChild: much appreciated.
[22:14] <PriceChild> bascule: I think it has been hilighted lately how we should be much more careful of the contents of this quite public channel. I feel the CC expressed that well.
[22:16] <bascule> yeah it did, my concern was more to do with the overall attitude that some comments suggest are being harboured
[22:17] <bascule> I am well aware that people are imperfect, and that times are often stressful in main chans
[22:18] <bascule> but things said here are known in wider circles, and some of them are easily jumped on to further resentment and ill feeling
[22:18] <PriceChild> Lost you there, 'some comments suggest'... comments since the meeting?
[22:19] <bascule> there were things said by Hobsee earlier today that I felt were further polarising difficulties
[22:19] <PriceChild> ok
[22:19] <bascule> mainly in the semantic content of the words being used
[22:20] <bascule> I am aware of the situation, and can try my best to see both sides, but I felt such things need to be discussed with different emotional tones
[22:40] <elkbuntu> bascule, pray tell, how does one describe in one or two words the act of what the definition of stalking is, without mentioning stalking?
[22:41] <Seeker`> malicious following
[22:42] <bascule> yes that is a fair 2 words
[22:42] <bascule> but what would constitute stalking, as you have used that word
[22:43] <bascule> and it is the use of that and other terms that I am reacting too
[22:43] <elkbuntu> Seeker`, how is 'malicious following' any less polarising than 'stalking'?
[22:43] <PriceChild> I think there's a slight difference... stalking doesn't need to be malicious in intent?
[22:43] <Seeker`> I dont know, I just answered the question
[22:43] <elkbuntu> PriceChild, i agree there
[22:43] <PriceChild> I think this is a little petty.
[22:43] <bascule> well to me it does, I mean stalking is a designated crime in many countries
[22:44] <Nafallo> ehrm. someone stalked someone now?
[22:44] <elkbuntu> bascule, then please give me an alternative accurate non-accusive descriptor to use to describe the act, which will make you happy
[22:44] <elkbuntu> Nafallo, a few occurances, yes
[22:44] <bascule> this isn't about making me happpy
[22:45] <bascule> this is about trying to prevent ab already diffcult situation from becoming worse
[22:45] <elkbuntu> bascule, then if you cannot offer a sensible alternative, do not complain about the descriptors being used.
[22:45] <PriceChild> elkbuntu: I don't think that's fair.
[22:45] <bascule> it isn't
[22:46] <elkbuntu> PriceChild, how is it not fair. how am i supposed to say that someone is being ...... without saying ......
[22:47] <elkbuntu> i think the expectation to not use a perfectly valid word is unfair
[22:47] <mneptok> bascule: let's be fair. i'm sure a lot of things have been said about ops and policies in means and tones that are non-CoC. however, these happen in non-logged channels and private messages.
[22:48] <PriceChild> elkbuntu: I think it is unfair to ask someone not to complain if they don't have a solution. That's why we have a team and council, to solve these problems and help make things run smoothly.
[22:48] <bascule> the expectation placed on leaders is higher
[22:48] <elkbuntu> PriceChild, i think it's quite fair to expect constructive criticism rather than dismissive criticism
[22:48] <mneptok> bascule: no one here has ever complained about the "tone" used in ##ubuntu-uncensored, ##club-ubuntu, or any other such channels. if these channels are logged, we don't go looking.
[22:49] <elkbuntu> PriceChild, i offer alternatives when i reprimand people for using the g or n words.
[22:49] <Myrtti> I feel like a curse word might just soon slip out of my keyboard
[22:49] <Myrtti> this is plain silly
[22:49] <mneptok> bascule: i can almost guarantee that the outcome here will be ops using private, secret channels to say these same things.
[22:49] <gnomefreak> the word stalker is not an insult nor against CoC why should it be part od censorship? this is just a question nothing more
[22:49] <bascule> mneptok: and this is what I fear
[22:49] <mneptok> bascule: is this what's you want?
[22:49] <Myrtti> FCOL
[22:49] <bascule> of course not
[22:49] <LjL> bascule: and this is what you ("you" generically, you know who you are) have been looking for.
[22:49] <mneptok> bascule: so then i suggest removing the micrscope from -ops
[22:50] <Pici> mneptok: +1
[22:50] <bascule> I am here giving feedback on how things are affecting people
[22:50] <Pici> er, Myrtti +1 too
[22:50] <bascule> things said
[22:50] <LjL> bascule, no
[22:50] <LjL> i appreciate your feedback but
[22:50] <bascule> I am
[22:50] <LjL> there is a fine point here
[22:50] <bascule> ok
[22:50] <LjL> things can be said that "affect people".
[22:50]  * gnomefreak thinks censoring what ops say or type is gonna lead to itchy trigger fingers in the long run because the stress will build up
[22:50] <LjL> things can be said that "affect trolls".
[22:51] <bascule> I am not trolling, in any way shape or form
[22:51] <LjL> just as mneptok can almost guarantee that a private channel will end up existing,
[22:51] <elkbuntu> gnomefreak, or, a lack of willingness to act at all for anything. have fun with GNAA
[22:51] <PriceChild> If someone says stalking, they mean stalking. Not really two ways about it and different wording doesn't help. If they shouldn't be accusing of that in the first place.. that's a different issue.
[22:51] <LjL> i can almost guarantee that a good troll will always find a way to claim we're saying things we shouldn't be saying here
[22:51] <LjL> bascule, it's not you that i'm talking about.
[22:51] <gnomefreak> elkbuntu: true
[22:52] <LjL> bascule, so the question is
[22:52] <Pici> Also, this channel is for discussion, not for taking one line out of context.
[22:52] <LjL> should we refrain from saying *anything* that *some people* (the ones which i subjectively tend to call trolls) might get upsettely about
[22:52] <gnomefreak> IMHO if you censor what ops say example we cant say the word shit than we will hold EVERYONE to that standard at some point due to fairness im not at all saying this will happen this is what i perseve is going to happen
[22:53] <LjL> or should we rather use this channel as this channel was intended, a place for ops to exchange opinions in a semi-informal way?
[22:53] <elkbuntu> LjL, the requirement to wear a tie and carry a namebadge to the computer is at the next CC ;)
[22:53] <gnomefreak> semi-formal == oh that guy is a real <insert your opinion here>?
[22:53] <bascule> I perhaps ned to make this clearer, what I am really getting at here is the following: a situation between some -ops and a user has escalated to the point of it using over an hour off CC meeting time, this was difficult enough
[22:54] <LjL> gnomefreak: semi-INformal
[22:54] <gnomefreak> ah
[22:54] <gnomefreak> oops
[22:54] <LjL> bascule, i know what you're saying, and while i sound confrontational here, i'm not really being - this time.
[22:54] <bascule> to compound that situation with stalking and withch hunc accusations is bad news
[22:54] <Pici> Oh. /me puts the cumberbun away
[22:54] <LjL> but see
[22:55] <LjL> can i give an example?
[22:55] <elkbuntu> bascule, it's not something we wanted, but that user has taken way more than an hour individually of all of our individual time. if i calculated my PM logs with this user, it would add up to an extraordinary number
[22:55] <LjL> elkbuntu: that's true
[22:55] <LjL> that *does* mean we didn't handle the situation very well, however
[22:55] <bascule> and I am trying to help stop it from getting worse
[22:55] <LjL> i'm not saying that i know what the good way to deal with it was
[22:55] <LjL> bascule, one example
[22:55] <elkbuntu> LjL, not entirely, she chose to make it difficult, she practically admitted that to the CC
[22:56] <LjL> i'll pretend this is just a random example
[22:56] <LjL> it's not random, but what the heck, those who know, know
[22:56] <elkbuntu> she intentionally disregarded what most of us said, so she didnt have to take the requests on board
[22:56] <LjL> someone in this channel says that someone else is "homophobic"
[22:56] <gnomefreak> bascule: what was your answer to how to not let it get worse (imight have been having a smoke at the time)
[22:56] <LjL> the one being called homophobic gets pretty upset about it
[22:56] <LjL> he explains that he dislikes homosexual behavior, and speaks against it
[22:56] <LjL> but that doesn't give us the right to label him homophobic
[22:57] <LjL> (mind, that wasn't in his presence)
[22:57] <LjL> so
[22:57] <LjL> this is the kind of thing that i find UTTER NONSENSE
[22:57] <LjL> if we are expected to refrain from saying such things
[22:57] <bascule> gnomefreak: people need to stop posting inflammtory descriptions of others actions, such as witch hunting and stalking
[22:57] <LjL> just because people like that get upset
[22:57] <LjL> well, i'm not in
[22:57] <elkbuntu> LjL, it's random enough that there's a parallel incident where s/homophobic/racist/ and s/homosexual behaviour/someone being a certain race/
[22:58] <LjL> elkbuntu: well, it's random enough that there's the exact incident i'm describing, too
[22:58] <PriceChild> bascule: what if they are stalking?
[22:58] <elkbuntu> LjL, yes
[22:58] <bascule> PriceChild: surely this is a k-line offence?
[22:58] <bascule> this/that
[22:58] <Pici> Unlike the rest of the Ubuntu channels, the job of the operators is to talk about people, not packages.  These are people's OPINIONS that we are talking about here.  I'm not sure what us as ops can do if we can't voice our opinions here.
[22:59] <bascule> I am not saying opinions shouldn't be voiced
[22:59] <gnomefreak> bascule: i didnt see anyone doing that but something people dont understand every user is held to the same standard that we are in the sense of language and actions now ops have more rules we have to follow. I saw you talking to someone about using the word stalker now if we cant use this does that make it right for us to kick or ban a user that uses it?
[22:59] <PriceChild> bascule: how can we voice the opinion if we can't say that then?
[22:59] <LjL> so bascule, my point here is, i understand your concerns, but gagging ourselves in order to avoid saying anything that loonies might get pissed off about is not on my agenda. which DOES NOT mean that perhaps we shouldn't have refrained from saying *certain* things, however, i want it to be very clear that we can't, and won't, watch every single word we say
[22:59] <bascule> I am not trying to silence people
[22:59] <elkbuntu> PriceChild, basically we're not allowed opinions
[23:00] <elkbuntu> PriceChild, and the *users* complain about censorship...
[23:00] <LjL> bascule, k-line offence?
[23:00] <stdin> we can say we have an opinion, but we can't actually say the opinion we have
[23:00] <LjL> those exist still?
[23:00] <bascule> LjL: stalking
[23:00] <LjL> bascule: sarcasm
[23:00] <bascule> sorry
[23:00] <jussi01> elkbuntu: if we are not allowed opinions, lets program ubottu to do our job and all go home!
[23:00] <Seeker`> Someone needs to implement Sarcasm-Over-Ip
[23:00] <bascule> who said you weren't allowed opinions
[23:00]  * gnomefreak is home can i go to the islands instead?
[23:00] <LjL> bascule, nobody
[23:01] <stdin> seems people want a bunch of robots to do the job anyway
[23:01] <mc44> Sarcasm isn't allowed, also.
[23:01] <Pici> /nick floodbot25
[23:01] <elkbuntu> i'm off to be a robot at work. bye.
[23:01] <LjL> bascule: but what i'm saying is that *any* opinion that's not about the weather is going to be interpreted as an "unacceptable" attack by some
[23:01] <bascule> there has been a larger reaction to this than I expected I have to say
[23:01] <PriceChild> bascule: the k-line is always the last resort.
[23:01] <bascule> LjL: would it really? I mean if it is then this is a sad situation
[23:02] <LjL> bascule, well, what do you think of the example i gave?
[23:02] <gnomefreak> do we have the Talk wiki up yet?
[23:02] <Pici> The weather is offtopic for this channel, please take the discussion elsewhere.
[23:02] <bascule> PriceChild: I know and appreciate that, but would actuall cyber stalking cause K-line?
[23:02] <LjL> bascule: that's an opinion that's been confirmed factually correct by the person opinionated about, too...
[23:02] <PriceChild> gnomefreak: for irseek?
[23:02] <PriceChild> bascule: as a last resort... there are other options first
[23:02] <gnomefreak> no for ops vs users
[23:02] <PriceChild> gnomefreak: pardon?
[23:02] <bascule> LjL: was that entirely in-house and not a user?
[23:03] <LjL> bascule: sorry?
[23:03] <gnomefreak> PriceChild: wasnt emma and us supposed to make a talk page about the actions of ops from the meeting or on how we can improve?
[23:03] <Pici> I think that sabdfl may have been confusing my comment about sarcasm with the 'death threat-like' comment that was made here.
[23:03] <bascule> the example you gave of homophobia, was it an op or a user
[23:03] <bascule> LjL: ^
[23:03] <LjL> bascule: the person being called homophobic was a user, the person making the statement was an op (sort of)
[23:04] <bascule> OK, and the user was OK with this or not?
[23:04] <stdin> I can't imagine they would be fine with it, true or not
[23:04] <LjL> bascule: no he wasn't. he claimed that, while he dislikes homosexual behavior and speaks out against it, people have not the right to call him homophobic.
[23:04] <Pici> bascule: No, they were not, but the user was not present in the channel when the comment was madew.
[23:04] <LjL> bascule: except in my book that's the very definition of the word
[23:04] <Pici> -w
[23:05] <gnomefreak> bascule: users will never be happy with actions of ops because if they get out of line most cant agree that they were out of line but that is always gonna be there
[23:05] <bascule> LjL: I see what you are saying
[23:06] <LjL> bascule: and as Pici says, it wasn't directed to them, it wasn't like "you homophobic bastard" - they weren't here at all, and it was an exchange of opinions with someone else.
[23:06] <bascule> unfortunately for you lot, you are going to be held to higher standards than others, I am sorry about that, but it is the way it is
[23:07] <LjL> bascule, but the problem is, if the "higher standards" are so high that we cannot express honest opinions about people when asked...
[23:07] <gnomefreak> bascule: make a rule for one person everyone than needs to abide by it
[23:07] <LjL> then we're gagged.
[23:07]  * gnomefreak goes to look for dinner
[23:08] <Pici> gnomefreak: good hunting
[23:08] <ompaul> and persons expressing hatred of other persons or parts of society need to be aware that such behaviour is not sanctioned
[23:08] <bascule> i would hope not
[23:08] <stdin> if my opinion is someone is trolling, and I remove them from the channel based on that, am I not living up to these "higher standards" because I express my opinion by removing them?
[23:09] <LjL> bascule, at the end of the day
[23:09] <bascule> stdin: no you remove them for the good of the channel, not the good of yourself
[23:09] <LjL> if someone comes here - say, an op of an international channel
[23:09] <stdin> bascule: same difference if I'm in the channel
[23:09] <bascule> no
[23:09] <LjL> and asks me "i'd like your plain opinion about person x, because i'm dealing with them and i'd like to know"
[23:09] <LjL> if i think person x is an idiot
[23:09] <LjL> i'll say that i think that person x is an idiot
[23:10] <LjL> because that's what i call honest feedback
[23:10] <Pici> There are sligh differences between what ops will *action* for, but most of it is based on pre-defined rules, not opinions.
[23:10] <bascule> Pici: is the way I se it too
[23:10] <Pici> Although most of our opinions coincide with the rules/guidelines.
[23:10] <LjL> unsurprisingly.
[23:11] <bascule> LjL: well it is honest, but be prepared for backlashes
[23:11] <bascule> that is not a threat ^
[23:11] <Myrtti> you know what folks? I'm too piss drunk and too frustrated
[23:11] <ompaul> it reads like one
[23:11] <mneptok> bascule: if Emma had followed the spirit of the CoC and listened to and followed the prescribed actions of the leaders of the volunteer community, we would not be here today.
[23:11] <stdin> bascule: it kind of is (not from you, but in general)
[23:12] <bascule> I am sorry Myrtti, I was honestly just trying to diffuse something
[23:12] <LjL> ompaul, it doesn't read like one, he's simply stating what he fears happens.
[23:12] <mneptok> bascule: the first step over the edge of CoC conduct was hers, and she admitted it to Mark yesterday.
[23:12] <LjL> and he's probably even too right.
[23:12] <Myrtti> if you all could only get past this, pardon moi, SHIT and do something productive that would actually BENEFIT us instead of wallowing in the past too much
[23:12] <stdin> saying "only speak when you have considered the possible repercussions of anything you say"
[23:12] <LjL> which means that, since i'm unlikely to stop expressing opinions like that, mneptok prophecy comes true.
[23:12] <Pici> Myrtti: I'm impressed at your typing for a drunk ;)
[23:12] <mneptok> bascule: i suggest you spend your time dealing with the actions of the person that first pushed the relationship over that edge.
[23:12]  * LjL proposes everyone in this channel drinks
[23:13] <LjL> actually
[23:13] <Myrtti> Pici: just about to get my fingers greasy and popping open a crowmoore
[23:13]  * jussi01 thanks LjL
[23:13] <ompaul> LjL, gimewater
[23:13] <LjL> what about "you may only speak in this channel if you're drunk"
[23:13] <LjL> ompaul: no, we need an !ontopic-drinks factoid, and water isn't in it
[23:13] <bascule> :)
[23:13]  * jussi01 goes to change the /topic...
[23:13] <bascule> ompaul: It really was not a threat, LjL intrpreted it correctly
[23:13] <mneptok> bascule: this does not condone blatant ad hominem attack. but c'mon, we have been more than patient. and inifinite patience is not a requirement to be a chanop.
[23:13] <ompaul> we reserve the right to remove sober peolplesz 
[23:14] <ompaul> hmm
[23:14] <bascule> it's not, I know and I have never asked for it
[23:14] <ompaul> na I don't think that works
[23:14] <bascule> mneptok: ^^
[23:14] <Myrtti> /me gives ompaul the other crowmoore in the fridge
[23:14] <mneptok> bascule: but you have.
[23:14] <bascule> well, have I?
[23:14] <mneptok> bascule: you want to sanction our speech on our personal opinions and frustrations.
[23:14] <bascule> for the greater good mneptok 
[23:15] <bascule> as best as I can see it
[23:15] <LjL> bascule, that's where i disagree
[23:15] <bascule> ok
[23:15] <mneptok> bascule: i'm sure most totalitarian regimes begin with similar high-minded ideas
[23:15] <LjL> bascule: given the current situation, it's easy for you to think things would go smoother if we "shut up"
[23:15] <LjL> but
[23:15] <LjL> in the long term
[23:15] <bascule> not shut up!
[23:15] <LjL> bascule: i used quotes, come on, you know what i mean
[23:15] <bascule> no, I am not trying to silence anybody
[23:15] <stdin> if we can't express ourselfs, then we may as well shut up
[23:15] <bascule> OK, sorry
[23:16] <LjL> bascule: "speech on our personal opinions and frustrations"
[23:16] <LjL> take this away
[23:16] <ompaul> in which case how do we interact
[23:16] <LjL> and things may go smoother in the short-middle term
[23:16] <LjL> i'm sure they would
[23:16] <LjL> but in the long term, what would we become?
[23:16] <LjL> a bunch of people who actually do act like robots
[23:16] <mneptok> bascule: here's a question. instead of changing the nature and tone of this longstanding channel, why don't people that don't like the content of logfiles *just stop reading them*?
[23:16] <ompaul> but build up a pile of trouble - if there is no plain speaking about issues
[23:16] <LjL> we're asked for an opinion, being trusted as channel ops
[23:16] <stdin> mneptok: a question I've asked many, many times
[23:17] <LjL> and we reply with some useless babble
[23:17] <stdin> people actively seek out these things, then complain
[23:17] <bascule> automatons, not a good prospect
[23:18] <mneptok> bascule: i really think you need to stop chatting, go take a long, long look at the chessboard, and rethink your endgame.
[23:18] <mneptok> one man's opinion
[23:18] <LjL> bascule: right. so if we're to preserve a human-looking face, and i think it would ultimately benefit the community if we do, then i think we NEED to sometimes "speak on our personal opinions and frustrations", even if that causes "backlash" from some people
[23:18] <ompaul> mneptok, ehh is it available under the gpl? I would not mind using it
[23:18] <LjL> (who don't have any better way to spend time than checking our logs, yes)
[23:18] <bascule> mneptok: the analogy is unclear to me
[23:19] <ompaul> bascule, you are suggesting that ops have no conversational rights in public 
[23:19] <mneptok> bascule: "you are pushing things in a direction that does not lead anywhere you want to be."
[23:19] <bascule> I am?
[23:19] <ompaul> this leads to them being automatons 
[23:19] <stdin> we can't speak our minds, so yes
[23:19] <ompaul> this means that they will act in silence
[23:19] <ompaul> and then where will you be
[23:19] <bascule> carrying on I guess
[23:19] <ompaul> - this is not going to be the endgame unless we play it your way -
[23:20] <mneptok> bascule: i'm starting the secret ops channel where we can say whatever we want now. nothing will be logged. no one can join. it's a secret club without transparency. but at least we can speak our minds.
[23:20] <ompaul> and we are not going to be silent
[23:20] <bascule> I am not trying to get my own way
[23:20] <mneptok> bascule: sound good?
[23:20] <ompaul> bascule, mark used a phrase last night - now think about this
[23:20] <ompaul> "leadership in a fish bowl" -- I hope I got it right
[23:20] <bascule> mneptok: no, but I really hope that doesn't seem like the best idea
[23:21] <bascule> ompaul: yes I heard it
[23:21] <mneptok> bascule: it's what will happen if you keep pushing for superhuman emotional responses from ops.
[23:21] <LjL> ompaul: do i get the water plants and other furniture?
[23:21] <ompaul> well think about what you are saying - silence no consultation about issues - no consultation about opinion
[23:21] <ompaul> LjL, ;-)
[23:22] <ompaul> no casual I am off to work now - have a nice day
[23:22] <bascule> ompaul: when did I say that? I didn;t
[23:22] <ompaul> that is the end implication of your thinking - from what I see
[23:22] <ompaul> bascule, and you have not done anything to make me think otherwise
[23:22] <LjL> bascule, you're "merely" saying we should tone very much down on the ways we say thing
[23:22] <LjL> but we might as well use morse code
[23:22] <Pici> hawaiian shirt day?
[23:22] <LjL> if we're to use newspeak for everything we say
[23:22] <mneptok> --. --- --- -..   .. -.. . .- 
[23:22] <bascule> I was asking for more carefulness in what was said, and the impact it may have
[23:23] <LjL> just in order to avoid using words like "staking"
[23:23]  * Pici steaks LjL 
[23:23] <ompaul> Pici, I always knew he was a vampire ;-)
[23:23] <Pici> LjL: Try garlic next time
[23:23] <LjL> mneptok: .-- . .-.. .-..  -.-- . ...    ..   -.- .. -. -..   --- ..-.   .- --. .-. . .
[23:23] <bascule> perhaps my expectations have been to high
[23:24] <bascule> perhaps many peoples are
[23:24] <ompaul> bascule, we are as entitled as anyone else on the network to have opinions, we are as entitled to express them
[23:24] <mneptok> LjL: lets get it on an agenda
[23:24] <ompaul> we do keep in mind the CoC
[23:24] <mneptok> -. . -..- -   .. .-. -.-.   -.-. --- ..- -. -.-. .. .-..   -- . . - .. -. --. 
[23:24] <LjL> mneptok: i'm almost forgetting it too so it would make for some practice
[23:25]  * bascule needs a bot to decipher that
[23:25] <Seeker`> If someone does something to annoy you IRL, you talk to your friends and say "that person is a ....", it helps vent frustration etc. - It may give the wrong impression if ops do it in a public channel, but they still need to do it
[23:25] <mneptok> bascule: welcome to the brave new world you helped to forge
[23:25] <bascule> troll!! :)
[23:26] <LjL> mneptok: .-- --- ..- .-..   -.-. ..- -   -.. --- .-- -.   .-   .-.. --- -   --- -.   --- -. - ... .. -.. . .-. ...    -.-. .... .. .-. .--. .. -. --.   .. -.   - --- ---
[23:26] <mneptok> bascule: trust me, now that i know LjL knows Morse code, i'll be using it to discuss any thorny issues.
[23:26] <stdin> - · ·  · ·  - · ·  - ·  · - - - - ·  -      · · -  - ·  - · ·  ·  · - ·  · · ·  -  · -  - ·  - · ·      -  · · · ·  · -  -
[23:26] <LjL> mneptok: ... .... --- ..- .-.. -..   ... ..- --. --. . ... -   - ---   CC - --- ---
[23:26] <bascule> well thanks for your time people, and for helping me realise you are more human than I actually thought
[23:27] <Myrtti> I just had the best pizza ever
[23:27] <mneptok> -. ---   -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --.   .. -   .... .- ...   -- ..- .-.. - .. .--. .-.. .   -... . -. . ..-. .. - ... 
[23:27] <Nafallo> ehrm
[23:27] <ompaul> bascule, ehh we were what --- automatons? ;-) we are people we have beliefs ideas ideals 
[23:27] <Pici> The Ops were created by humans, there are many copies, and they have a plan.
[23:27] <ompaul> we will continue to have them - we frame them 
[23:27] <Nafallo> encryption is actually a fair bit to far I would say.
[23:27] <bascule> I know and knew that, I am just more aware of it than I was if that makes sense
[23:28] <Myrtti> rot13
[23:28] <bascule> re my own comment about perhaps having overly high expectations
[23:28] <Pici> rot26
[23:28] <mneptok> gung'f n tbbq vqrn, gbb  
[23:28] <LjL> Nafallo: well, finnish might do
[23:29] <bascule> finnish morse code
[23:29] <Myrtti> nå men nej
[23:29] <mneptok> LjL: Finnish is just ROT13 Hungarian, plus all the vowels missing from Serbian
[23:29] <Myrtti> kanske bara svenska?
[23:29] <LjL> Myrtti: svenska är inte så oförstårbar som finnska olyckligen
[23:29]  * Nafallo just thinks things are getting more and more silly at the moment.
[23:30] <Myrtti> no puhutaan sitten suomea, sopii mulle
[23:30] <Pici> There is no silliness in this channel.
[23:30] <mneptok> Nafallo: discussions of issues surrounding this subset of users usually do after a time.
[23:30] <Myrtti> kunhan ette käytä mitään ihme automaattisia käännössivustoja
[23:30] <ompaul> Pici, and now for something completely different
[23:30] <Myrtti> *röyh*
[23:30] <Myrtti> namnam pitsaa
[23:30] <Myrtti> ja KOLAA
[23:31] <Pici> omnomonom
[23:31] <Seeker`> 3Wi nøt trei a høliday in Sweden this yer?
[23:31] <Nafallo> mneptok: then maybe the operators would like to convince me they are actually not as silly? doing encryption in various ways are not convincing...
[23:31] <Seeker`> See the løveli lakes
[23:31] <Seeker`>   The wonderful telephøne system
[23:31] <Seeker`>   And mani interesting furry animals
[23:31] <mneptok> Nafallo: why is it important to convince you of that, exactly?
[23:31] <LjL> Nafallo: i don't think i want to convince you i'm not silly
[23:32] <Myrtti> we're ALL BONKERS
[23:32] <Myrtti> /me gives LjL a cookie
[23:32] <LjL> jdong too
[23:32]  * stdin fgbcf orvat fvyyl
[23:32] <mneptok> Nafallo: i don't see "sense of humor" as being a disqualification for being a chanop
[23:32] <Seeker`> Convincing you that people here aren't silly would be silly
[23:32] <Seeker`> and a blatant lie
[23:32] <Myrtti> THE CAKE IS A LIE!
[23:32] <bascule> mneptok: I do  :P
[23:32] <jussi01> ok, night all!
[23:32] <Nafallo> mneptok: didn't say it was, but I do believe this team might want to start thinking about the message they send out :-). not anything personal about anyone and something I would tell any team doing this.
[23:32] <mneptok> bascule: then you want EFnet
[23:32] <Myrtti> jussi01: <3 nightey
[23:33] <bascule> bye
[23:33] <mneptok> Nafallo: you'll lose friends quickly, from my experience.
[23:33] <stdin> avtug whffv01
[23:33] <mneptok> Nafallo: take the humor out of a project and guess what? it's no fun any more.
[23:33] <Pici> Nafallo: Just curious, are you an op somewhere? or just hanging out in here for kicks?
[23:33] <LjL> -se
[23:33] <Nafallo> LjL is to fast for me :-)
[23:33] <Myrtti> Ok, I'm quitting this whole ubuntu junk, move over to spend my time with WoW and irc in quakenet.
[23:34] <PriceChild> Myrtti: anything but wow!!!
[23:34] <Nafallo> Pici: -se and actively involved in Ubuntu since pre-Warty :-)
[23:34] <Pici> Myrtti: nooooooo
[23:34] <Myrtti> Nafallo: du har knackkorvar för fingrarna
[23:34] <Myrtti> WoW or LOTRO
[23:34] <Pici> WoW is more of a timesink than this channel
[23:35] <TheSheep> Myrtti: wackamole online
[23:35] <mneptok> Pici: not for me. i'm trying to level up my gnome priestess in ##windows
[23:35] <Myrtti> lol
[23:35] <Myrtti> aurgh my head
[23:35] <Pici> I didnt think gnomes could be priests.
[23:36] <mneptok> Pici: that statement violates the spirit of the CoC. please refrain.
[23:36] <Myrtti> I want to play with the mouse fairy
[23:36] <TheSheep> Pici: that's specieism!
[23:36] <stdin> or priestism
[23:36] <ompaul> (-؛ ɹǝısɐǝ sı sıɥʇ ǝsɹoɯ ʇnoqɐ ʇǝƃɹoɟ 'ʞoʇdǝuɯ
[23:36] <stdin> depends how you look at it
[23:36] <ompaul> hehee
[23:37] <mneptok> ompaul: you need my morse script. ;)
[23:37] <ompaul> how you look at it /me rofl
[23:37] <LjL> Nafallo, thing is, this channel isn't really intended to "send out a message"... nor for that matter as a place to harvest logs to nitpick us with, which was the point
[23:37] <PriceChild> stdin: :D
[23:37] <mneptok> LjL+1
[23:37] <bascule> LjL: does it really seem that that is what I did tonight?
[23:38] <mneptok> the only message this channel sends out is "operators for official Ubuntu channels are available to users."
[23:38] <ompaul> bascule, read the logs in 24 hours and then you choose
[23:38] <LjL> bascule, you are getting this habit of thinking that everything i say is directed against you, now?
[23:38] <bascule> well it seemed very much in context with the discussion
[23:38] <LjL> bascule, it's what *we were discussing*, that doesn't mean it's what *you have done*
[23:39] <bascule> OK
[23:39]  * bascule feels considerably better than 2 hours ago
[23:39]  * TheSheep tickles bascule 
[23:39] <Nafallo> LjL: the channel is publically logged. if you don't want to send out a message I would suggest you refrain from doing that. from my perspective this is a role channel.
[23:39] <LjL> Nafallo, yeah, perhaps we should stop logging it.
[23:39] <ompaul> I wonder if John Von Newmann ever thought his "hard maths and logic" would ever turn into IRC 
[23:40] <PriceChild> Its TheSheep!
[23:40] <LjL> or as mneptok say, move to somewhere else for our internal discussion.
[23:40] <bascule> Neumann*
[23:40] <Nafallo> I'm not intending to start any fights btw. I'm trying to get a grip on the situation, cause it's really not good :-/
[23:40] <Myrtti> mass lagged logs
[23:40] <Myrtti> logs are available with 24h lag
[23:40] <LjL> Nafallo, i've said it yesterday, i reiterate it now: the reason we decided to log this channel was for transparency, but not to get some self-inflicted pain in the arse regarding the world being looking at us
[23:41] <LjL> i'm *really* starting to think it's not worth the hassle
[23:41] <ompaul> Nafallo, leadership in a fish bowl - it was a great phrase - and perhaps speaks to the logging being dropped
[23:41] <Nafallo> LjL: well. with the messages I saw pasted in the meeting log I really think you don't want public logging :-)
[23:42] <stdin> Nafallo: many things can look bad when they are *completely out of context*
[23:42] <tonyyarusso> Nah, I'm fine with a fish bowl.  Just stop worrying about people who want to jump in and go for a swim whenever the fish starts eating the wrong color rocks.  Fish bowls should be view only.
[23:42] <Seeker`> Nafallo: Are you referring to logs pasted in to the meeting, or BunnyRevolutions webpage?
[23:42] <Myrtti> what I think is really missing from this converation is that this emma thing is such a small part of the everyday work we ops do
[23:42] <Pici> Seeker`: what webpage?
[23:43] <mneptok> Nafallo: is the correct response to that to stop logging, or to tell certain users that are hell-bent on finding ammunition to take offense at to stop it?
[23:43] <Nafallo> Seeker`: I only had a look at the meeting log today.
[23:43] <Seeker`> Pici: He posted a link to a webpage with various out of context quotes from various ops
[23:43] <bascule> Myrtti: I think so too
[23:43] <Seeker`> Pici: Dont have the URL any more
[23:43] <stdin> ^* massively edited log
[23:43] <LjL> Myrtti: well... that's not strictly true for a few ops anymore
[23:43] <mneptok> Nafallo: as a community member, i want transparency. and if that means telling a deliberate offense-seeker to stop seeking, so be it.,
[23:44] <Myrtti> LjL: *shrug*
[23:44] <stdin> the page was dumb, oh wait, that's an opinion and I can't say that in here, sorry
[23:44] <Myrtti> the time in Myrtti-landia is... ermm...
[23:44] <Myrtti> 2008-05-08 01:44:35
[23:44] <PriceChild> bunny pulled the content of the page
[23:45] <Nafallo> mneptok: I would agree with transparency, but that doesn't give anyone the rights to ask for bullets put into anyones head. if you don't agree with that, fine. it's just the way I feel about messages like that.
[23:45] <Myrtti> I think it's about time for me to go nighteynight and sleep this starting hangover away, this convo is not worth the headache it's causing
[23:45] <TheSheep> Myrtti: sweet dreams
[23:45] <mneptok> Nafallo: when one person in a group says something disagreeable, you do not carve out the voicebox of every member of that group.
[23:45] <LjL> well, the debate with bascule was kind of interesting, on the other hand going over the meeting etc is really something i've very uninterested in, so /me waves goodnight
[23:46] <bascule> night LjL 
[23:46] <bascule> thanks for the time and honesty
[23:46] <Nafallo> mneptok: I did not. but you should know how things work. one message from an official of a group gets the message going if no action is taken.
[23:46] <mneptok> Nafallo: what you are saying to me is, "you did not exhibit poor behavior or judgment, but we're censoring your speech anyway." uncool.
[23:48] <mneptok> Nafallo: if you have a problem with an individual's speech, take it up with them. but this is not a channel-wide administrative issue.
[23:49] <Nafallo> mneptok: not what I said. in that case you misunderstood me. so lets touch grounds on one thing... would you say a message like the one I refer to is suitable on a logged channel adhering to CoC in an official role in the project?
[23:49] <mneptok> no.
[23:49] <mneptok> next question.
[23:50] <Nafallo> good. then I can't see why you defend the action?
[23:50] <mneptok> Nafallo: where di di do that?
[23:50] <mneptok> *did i
[23:50] <mneptok> don;t bother scrolling, i didn't.
[23:50] <Seeker`> Nafallo: what message are you referring to?
[23:51] <mneptok> Nafallo: you are holding the entire group and its channel policies responsible for the words of a single user.
[23:51] <Nafallo> mneptok: it's just that you seem to argue about it. not explicitely saying that you agree :-)
[23:52] <mneptok> Nafallo: i argue about you wanting *me* to change *my* behavior because of something i *didn't do*.
[23:52] <tonyyarusso> I would like to make a proposal.
[23:52] <Nafallo> mneptok: you're putting words in my mouth that does not belong there. I'd rather say I hope the group and it's channel reacted right away to the single person in that role :-)
[23:52] <tonyyarusso> Take all further discussion to the mailing list so that this channel can get back to work.
[23:52] <Seeker`> tonyyarusso: Yes! of course I will marry you!
[23:52] <tonyyarusso> lol
[23:52] <mneptok> Nafallo: what evidence do you have that we haven't?
[23:53] <tonyyarusso> Seeker`: Are you a citizen of a country with socialized health care?
[23:53] <Seeker`> tonyyarusso: You mean the NHS?
[23:53] <tonyyarusso> Seeker`: UK?  All righty then.
[23:53] <TheSheep> aww
[23:53] <nalioth> Seeker`: can we help you?
[23:54] <Seeker`> nalioth: that better?
[23:55] <bascule> i think I am finished here, thank you and good night
[23:55] <nalioth> Seeker`: thank you, sir
[23:56] <Seeker`> nalioth: not a problem :) Can I catch you at some point tomorrow to discuss mootbot?
[23:56] <nalioth> Seeker`: no.
[23:56] <nalioth> i am going out of town on the morrow
[23:56] <Seeker`> when will you be back?
[23:56] <nalioth> perhaps after this time tomorrow
[23:57] <nalioth> maybe a couple hours later
[23:57] <Seeker`> Its midnight here now
[23:57] <Seeker`> well, almost
[23:58] <nalioth> mneptok: you are an Agateophobe (or maybe the opposit)
[23:58] <Seeker`> nalioth: Some point on saturday evening BST?
[23:58] <nalioth> the fact that people object to be descibed is TOTAL and COMPLETE bullcrackers
[23:58] <nalioth> Seeker`: YOU ARE HUMAN!
[23:58] <nalioth> eeek! i've described him factually
[23:59] <ompaul> nalioth, shame on you, have a peppermint tea
[23:59] <mneptok> nalioth: a huhwhaphobe?
[23:59] <Seeker`> nalioth: I really cant believe you just said that...I mean...how could you?!
[23:59]  * mneptok googles
[23:59] <nalioth> the example person admitted he hated gays.  the word for a person of his convictions is homophobe, not "bouncy furry eathter bunny"