/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2009/08/05/#ubuntu-ops.txt

th0rin case you guys don't recognize it, this jigawho is fillling #ubuntu with racist remarks and vulgarity00:26
ubotturichardcavell called the ops in #ubuntu (Jigawho)00:26
=== tritium_ is now known as tritiu
=== tritiu is now known as tritium
=== Gary is now known as evilGary
=== vorian is now known as v
geniiWeird evil trend. Jussi and now Gary.00:56
evilGaryit's due to being staff, it does things to you00:56
=== v is now known as vorian
geniiHeh00:57
LjLhi. i'd like to remove freenode webchat users controlling from the floodbots, if that's ok.01:05
PriceyLjL: pardon?01:05
Priceyas in the forwards from proxy-users ?01:06
Priceymeh exemptions01:06
LjLyes. there is no reason to favor freenode's webchat over other gateways.01:06
LjLand i don't want that to happen.01:06
PriceyAny reason for this change in heart?01:08
LjLthere hasn't been any change01:08
Priceyis there any reason why we couldn't/shouldn't make it work on @gateway/web/ ?01:08
LjLi programmed the floodbots to give *mibbit* exempts, and i planned to extend that to other gateways that proved reliable so far as giving users' IPs01:09
Priceyhmm i guess not all web gateways giv... yeah01:09
LjLfreenode has subsequently decided to use its position to ban the dominant gateway, and i don't want to help with that.01:09
PriceyOh so this is about mibbit.01:09
LjLfreenode has never published a valid reason for that, either.01:09
LjLabout mibbit and freenode, yes.01:09
Priceythey've made blog postings01:10
LjLthey don't explain anything01:10
FlannelAren't all gateways forwarded right now?01:10
LjLthere's no abuse potential, you know as well as i do that channels can ban mibbit if they want01:10
PriceyLjL: mibbit was banned in #ubuntu for a reason.01:10
LjLPricey: all gateways were banned in #ubuntu01:10
PriceyLjL: why?01:10
LjLPricey: because #ubuntu ops decided so, because they decided it would be too much hassle to ban the hex idents.01:11
Priceynot all gateways provide hex idents01:11
FlannelI'm confused.  What change are you proposing LjL?01:12
PriceyFlannel: stopping the +e's01:12
PriceyI have absolutely no problem whatsoever with reevaluating our gateway policy.01:12
LjLPricey: and those that don't were never allowed in01:12
FlannelI think the current setup is good.  It prevents people from being banned, then running off to a web gateway and getting another crack at it.01:13
PriceyWhat I have a problem with, is getting involved with freenode 'politics' and stopping something that isn't really broken?01:13
LjLPricey: mibbit wasn't really broken, either01:13
LjLi've been upset about this for a while01:13
PriceyLjL: and that's why we (ubuntu) allowed it into #ubuntu via this system!01:13
LjLi'm particularly upset right now, because the only way i have to connect is web gateways, and i'm just with something decidedly inferior compared to mibbit01:13
PriceyLjL: freenode's webchat isn't really broken either...01:13
LjLi don't care01:14
LjLi do want to get involved with "freenode's politics" at this point01:14
LjLi am on freenode01:14
PriceyDoes 'ubuntu' have a say in this?01:14
LjLif freenode staff like to do everything without even telling its users what exactly it is about, that's their prerogative01:14
LjLdoesn't mean i'll like it01:14
PriceySeen as your changes reflect what we wish.01:14
FlannelYou have beef with Freenode, so we're taking it out on Ubuntu?01:14
LjLPricey: yes, you can write brand new bots if you want.01:14
PriceyLjL: I'm speaking to you as an Ubuntu guy.01:15
PriceyLjL: You're making a decision for Ubuntu here.01:15
LjLPricey: as an ubuntu guy, i say that our current IRC provider is abusing its position, and we shouldn't be supporting this01:15
LjLif they shut off gateways access, then we shouldn't be willing to provide their specific gateway an advantage01:15
PriceyLjL: Could we sort this out with the IRC Council, operators and users though?01:16
PriceyLook over our policy.01:16
PriceyThen make the required changes?01:16
FlannelLjL: How are the floodbots supporting anything?01:16
PriceyI believe we have a meeting scheduled for this weekend.01:16
LjLFlannel: if you don't know that, that means you've never looked01:16
FlannelLjL: We have a responsibility to our users, blocking gateway users entirely isn't in the best interests of our userbase.01:17
LjLPricey: look01:17
LjLPricey: i never *added* support for freenode's webchat to begin with01:17
LjLPricey: someone who had access to the bots' servers did01:17
LjLand now i'm saying i don't like that.01:17
PriceyI don't want to come down on one side or the other right now. I'm just saying lets not be hasty.01:17
PriceyLets evaluate what #ubuntu requires first, then make changes.01:17
LjLFlannel: i never said you should block gateway users entirely.01:18
LjLyou can easily let every gateway user in.01:18
PriceyWe may even decide to place an exempt on the entire freenode or gateway/web01:19
Priceywho knows01:19
Pricey /remove the ban01:19
FlannelLjL: If our current stance is offensive to you, letting everyone in would be offensive to you as well, because it wouldn't be materially different.  Mibbit still wouldn't be allowed in, because we don't control that.01:19
LjLFlannel: letting every web gateway in is different from only letting the freenode one in.01:20
PriceyLjL: You seem to be wanting to remove this feature solely because of freenode <-> mibbit politics.01:20
LjLPricey: the original feature of exempting mibbit users got "broken" by freenode's politics, too.01:21
PriceyLjL: hmm?01:21
LjLPricey: if freenode hadn't banned mibbit, no one would have ever had to touch the floodbot code to remove the mibbit code and add code about webchat.fn.net instead01:22
PriceyLjL: sure01:22
LjLso.01:22
LjLfreenode has a say on ubuntu's politics01:22
FlannelEr... If freenode had added a webchat, we should've added it, regardless of whether mibbit still existed.01:22
LjLi don't see why i shouldn't be able to make a statement on theirs.01:22
Pricey00:22:54 < LjL> i don't see why i shouldn't be able to make a statement on theirs.01:23
Priceythat is it01:23
Priceyit is not "i"01:23
Priceyit is "ubuntu"01:23
Priceyright there01:23
Priceymaking this change is "ubuntu" making a statement01:23
LjLit's my bots. they were never made open source, as you very well know.01:23
LjLyou're free to make other bots.01:23
PriceyDo you see that point though?01:23
PriceyPlease don't rush into this.01:23
LjLyep, and i believe that the time i put into writing the bots is enough to morally allow me to attempt to make a statement.01:24
LjLok, i won't rush it then.01:24
LjLi'm not sure if i can attend the next meeting though, that depends on whether i manage to stay connected through webchat01:24
PriceyLjL: Could you add an item to our agenda about evaluating our stances on gateways?01:25
LjLPricey: i doubt it, i don't really have HTTPS access01:25
PriceyLjL: Could you jot your points down somewhere in an email to us, or just in PM, or leave htem in #ubuntu-irc-council incase you can't make the meeting?01:27
LjLI intended to remove gateway-exemption support from the floodbots. This is because, while that feature initially applied to Mibbit, Freenode unilaterally stopped Mibbit from accessing the network, and concomitantly created its own web gateway.01:31
LjLI consider this an unexplained abuse of a privileged position, and I do not think we should support it by explicitly supporting their gateway in #ubuntu by means of the bots.01:31
LjLI am not concerned about whether this should result in all gateways being disallowed, or all gateways being unbanned and allowed without any restrictions.01:31
LjLPricey: ^01:31
PriceyLjL: and to clarify. Is this 'intention' going to happen, whatever we decide about our policy?01:35
LjLPricey: yes01:35
LjLPricey: unless of course you convince me i shouldn't01:35
Priceyso no..01:35
Seeker`isn't unilateral action like that just a little anti-CoC?01:38
LjLSeeker`: then i'll step down from ubuntu membership if it is01:40
LjLi've already taken care of removing the cloak some time ago01:40
Seeker`what about making the change to a copy of the code and giving the council a choice aobut what is run01:41
LjLwhat about no01:41
LjLare you kidding me?01:42
Seeker`no01:42
LjLSeeker`: then how is that different from having no say?01:42
Seeker`becuase you will hae made your point01:43
LjLi'm sorry but i don't exactly see how.01:43
LjLany more than i have made it by speaking here as i have, anyhow.01:43
Seeker`it doesn't strike me as particularly fair or good form to provide someone with a bot to fufil a particular service, and then giving them no say in how the bot runs in their channels01:44
LjLSeeker`: for that matter, it doesn't strike me as particularly good form to "convert" the bot from mibbit-exempting to webchat-exempting without even so far as telling me01:45
LjLi might not have agreed with that change - and as a matter of fact, i do not01:45
PriceyThat is an issue you should take up privately.01:45
PriceyRevoke their access to your systems if required.01:45
LjLPricey: actually, my bot is running on their systems.01:46
Seeker`saying "you've done something that I don't like, so I'll do something equally stupid" is just childish though01:47
LjLSeeker`: is also not what i'm saying01:47
Seeker`from what I've read, it does seem to be01:48
LjLwhat i'm saying is that i don't want to support special treatment of freenode's webchat01:48
LjLand since that's a feature i never introduced into the bots to begin with (someone else did)01:48
LjLi want to revert that.01:49
PriceyTo clarify something, you did introduce the initial feature to treat mibbit with +e didn't you?01:49
PiciI thought you added support for another web gateway shortly before or after the mibbit ban...01:49
LjLPricey: yup01:50
Seeker`I just don't its a particularly nice thing to do to project personal issues you may have with freenode onto a channel that isn't yours01:50
LjLPici: oh yes01:51
LjLPici: i added it for emma (funnily enough)01:51
LjLit was the gateway she used01:51
naliothSeeker`: check this out:  his code is NOT open source.  somoene rewrote his code.01:51
PiciI never really looked at who was using it or what the site was exactly.01:52
Seeker`I'm not saying that the code should have been changed without his permission01:52
LjLPici: well, for that matter i was about to say "wth are you talking about", i almost forgot. anyway, i didn't add it because mibbit was gone, if that was the spirit of the question (i think i added it while mibbit was still working)01:52
AmaranthSeeker`: But you're saying that change should stay01:53
Seeker`yes, I am01:53
Seeker`provided the council want it to stay01:53
naliothSeeker`:  it's not open source.  the council has no say in it, except "we like floodbots" or "please take them away"01:54
PiciI'm not going to dig through my logs for this right now, but I think I remember that the change to support freenode's webchat over mibbit in the Floodobot code was more of a maintenance task since the mibbit ban came at us all of a sudden as well.  We weren't going to re-assess banning gateways at that time, we just wanted a fix for a new situation.01:54
Seeker`if code has been developed for someone, the developers political idiosyncracies shouldn't play a part in the functionality of the code01:54
LjLPici: yes, i can imagine it was because of that01:54
LjLPici: i'm not honestly exceptionally upset at whoever made the change01:54
naliothand we do like the floodbots, and appreciate LjL's work on them01:55
PiciLjL: I'm just making sure that we have those points down though.01:55
PiciLjL: You've heard it from me enough that I like the floodbots too01:55
LjLSeeker`, i don't know if i'm understanding you correctly01:56
LjLbut are you telling me what i should and should not do with my code?01:56
Seeker`I have no way of telling you what you should or shouldn't do with your code01:56
LjLah.01:56
Seeker`I am merely stating my belief that if you have offered to develop some functionality, your internal politics shouldn't determine the functionality of that code01:57
LjLSeeker`, i developed that code for others, but not under no implied condition01:57
LjLif, say, ubuntu suddenly turned into an entirely commercial thing whose aim is to kill free software01:57
LjLwell, the floodbots wouldn't stay for a minute01:57
LjLsurely, i have a right to decide what to do with my code based on changes on the environment they operate in?01:58
Seeker`but that is an ubuntu issue01:58
FlannelActually, that depends on the license under which you wrote the code....01:58
LjLFlannel: proprietary. never licensed under anything.01:58
Seeker`this is an issue that the IRC council have no control over; it was freenode's decision to screw with web clients01:58
naliothFlannel: they're written under the LJL License01:59
LjLSeeker`: true enough (although part of the ircc are freenode staff), still #ubuntu is not only part of ubuntu, it's also a very important part of freenode01:59
Seeker`it would be like me deciding that mootbot shouldn't respond to people with nicknames beginning with "n" because someone called neil annoyed me at work today01:59
Seeker`i'd be within my rights to do it, but it would be a pretty crappy thing to do01:59
PiciSeeker`: You too?!01:59
Picidarn those neils...01:59
mneptokLjL: "By hosting your code on our server, you grant us an irrevocable public domain license for it." it could happen.02:00
FlannelEh, stop picking on me.  Or at least, spell my name correctly.02:00
LjLmneptok: i'm sure it wouldn't in this case.02:01
Seeker`I'm just asking you to consider seperating out "I'm providing a useful service to a group of people" and "I have an issue with a decision made by a group of people tangentially related to first group"02:01
Amaranthmneptok: Actually that can't happen02:01
mneptokAmaranth: of course it could. you put source on my disk space, i can call the shots if you don't explicitly do so.02:02
LjLSeeker`: i'd hardly say that freenode staff is "tangentially related" to the operation of these channels.02:02
Seeker`mneptok: legally, you couldn't02:02
Amaranthmneptok: But you can't let you upload it then afterward say that02:02
Amarantherr, let me02:02
Seeker`LjL: was the decision made by any of the staff that run the #ubunt channels?02:02
PriceyLjL: please. That 'party of the council that are freenode staff' are talking with you as ubuntu irc people. Not freenode staff.02:02
Seeker`mneptok: by reading the first word in this line, you agree to pay me £1,000,000,000,00002:03
Pricey*the part02:03
LjLSeeker`: how would i know02:03
LjLPricey: you should have remembered that at some other point, but ok.02:03
mneptokSeeker`: you don't own my screen. i own my disk.02:03
PiciI'd really rather not get into a fight about who owns the code.. be it with LjL or with anyone who did or might code something for us.02:04
Seeker`mneptok: you cannot create a contract unilaterally after an event has taken place02:05
PiciIts not constructive to go down that road..02:05
Seeker`LjL: I am assuming that you created the bots to aid the ubuntu project. Freenode and ubuntu are linked, but they are seperate entities, and the vast majority of the ubnutu project have no link to freenode other than that they are users on their network02:06
LjLSeeker`: i am not really a 360-degrees Ubuntu person02:06
LjLi am an IRC person02:06
LjLalways been02:06
LjLi have to do with IRC, not Ubuntu at large02:06
Seeker`ok, replace "Ubuntu" with "Ubuntu IRC"02:07
LjLi mean meh, why do you think i left the irc council to begin with? because i liked Ubuntu politics? what do you think?02:07
LjL"Ubuntu IRC" is on freenode, and interaction between Ubuntu staff and Freenode staff has been important according to both Freenode people and Ubuntu people.02:08
Seeker`but that does not mean that they are one and the same02:08
Seeker`and most of the people that use #ubuntu have absolutely nothing to do with that relationship02:08
LjLand when i say people, i mean shuttleworth and dahlskjaer02:09
LjLmost of the people that use #ubuntu have nothing to do with freenode, either, yet they were stopped from using mibbit02:09
Seeker`how many of the 1500 or so people have a clue about the workings of the interactions between Ubuntu and Freenode?02:09
LjLprobably too feww02:09
Seeker`so because they were stopped from using mibbit, they shouldn't be able to use any web client?02:10
LjLSeeker`: whether they are or are not able to use any web client is not something i can or want to control. that's up the irc council.02:10
LjLi just don't want to provide auto-exempting and auto-banning services02:10
LjLfor a gateway that freenode introduced because, allegedly, mibbit was prone to abuse.02:11
LjLif their gateway is *not* prone to abuse, then it can be left open without any floodbots to check it, surely.02:11
FlannelI don't think they ever made that claim02:11
LjLFlannel: well, they did claim they shut down mibbit because it was prone to abuse02:11
Seeker`I'm not trying to debate whether what freenode did was right or wrong02:12
LjLFlannel: considering they immediately made their own gateway, one would only assume they consider it much better in that respect02:12
FlannelLjL: No, their post clearly says that they shut it down because they spent too much time dealing with mibbit staff/whatevers dealing with abuse.02:12
LjLFlannel: not really, they say it "comes down to abuse" and they "couldn't maintain a relationship" with mibbit's owners02:13
LjLwhich i believe is bollocks, by the way02:13
stewits certainly not bollocks02:14
FlannelI have no idea whether its true or not, but the reason for shutting it down is that it took too long to deal with abuse from mibbit, not that there was abuse at all.02:14
LjLFlannel: also, i'd have explained my opinion on their blog, if my comment had ever been approved.02:14
Seeker`all I am trying to do is ask that you seperate out your dislike of freenodes decision from the functionality of the bots provided to the benefit of #ubuntu users and the #ubuntu operators02:14
Seeker`(some of which, like me, are not freenoe staff and have no say in freenods decisions)02:15
LjLSeeker`, connecting from web gateways thanks to the bot was always a privilege, not a right. by default, we always had all proxy-like connections flat out banned, and the topic in -proxy-users said that, and so did the bot.02:15
LjLstew: axod was going to provide DNSBL pruning.02:16
stewLjL: he did02:16
LjLstew: so what is the problem?02:16
Seeker`and the functionality is not being removed because a decision was taken by the owners of the channel that they dont want proxy users in the channel, the decision was made by you because you dont agree with a decision made by freenode02:16
LjLSeeker`: yes, yes indeed.02:16
LjLnow, i think you've made your point about that, but i stand by my point02:16
Seeker`This probably won't mean much (or anything at all) to you, but I did think you were better than that02:18
stewLjL: many many problems.  he was unwilling to reasonably communicate with us until we actually started putting bans in place on their client.  then he said that if we wanted abuse to stop, we were going to have to implement new protocols that we don't have volunteer power in order to implement02:18
LjLSeeker`: no, indeed to be honest just about everything you said made me less willing to negotiate about this02:19
stewLjL: then his staff becaume quite abusive, getting themselves banned,  evading those bans02:19
stewLjL: then said they would be putting all their efforts into helping users of their client avoid our bans02:19
stewLjL: and things rapidly degraded02:19
stewLjL: we have concerns about the logging they do of users personal information02:19
LjLstew: he was simply right, though: if chanops actually wanted transparents bans and all (and you, on your turn, didn't want chanops to come complaining to you and asking for assistance), you'd have needed transparent hostmasks02:19
PriceyLjL: Do you understand the risk that brings with it though?02:20
stewLjL: yes, and especially given how poorly they are able to communicate, we're not comfortable wasting more volunteer time in order to exchange this data with them which we feel needs to be protected in ways we cannot trust them to do02:20
Seeker`I will go now then02:21
LjLstew: at least now you're saying that, while no one was on the blog. tell me though, how is that all different from just about any other gateway?02:21
PriceyLjL: allowing something outside our control to basically spoof any hostmask? :s02:21
stewLjL: and we really don't want to waste more volunteer time on this guys commercial venture02:21
LjLPricey: yup, you need to trust the gateway about that.02:21
stewLjL: we've had fer less abuse from other gateways, and much less instances of other gateway owners themselves being abusing and trying to evade bans02:21
LjLstew: why do you allow other web gateways then?02:22
stewLjL: why wouldn't we?02:22
LjLstew: because they have potentially the exact same issues, as far as i'm aware. i guess most of them are just less popular.02:22
stewyes, there is potential for abuse of other gateways02:22
Picis/you/freenode/02:23
LjLstew: not only abuse, but also misuse of personal data by the proxy itself02:24
stewLjL: yes02:24
stewLjL: if you are aware of such things going on, please let me know02:24
LjLPricey: anyway, it can be implemented in a way that doesn't make it much of a risk: @gateway/web/<hostname>. so channels could just ban @*hostname to ban everything in one move02:25
LjLstew: and if you are actually aware of such things going on with mibbit, then i believe you should have informed users properly, instead of just writing a generic "there is abuse" posting that smells like bollocks to anyone who reads it and knows anything about it02:26
PriceyLjL: hostname@gateway/web/random02:26
LjLstew: that is really my main gripe - as usual, freenode doesn't communicate its motives for doing things. while that's their prerogative, it also pisses me off. as it did the other times.02:26
LjLPricey: that's the way it is now...02:26
stewLjL: we've communicated our motives02:26
PriceyLjL: pretty much what you suggested above.02:27
LjLPricey: i'm saying, change that "random" into the actual hostname, and you have an easy way for ops to ban without actually letting it "spoof hostnames" literally02:27
LjLPricey: eh, nope, because if you just ban the "random" part, then the abuser reconnects and gets another session ID02:27
LjLthat won't happen with the hostname02:27
PriceyLjL: with a 'gateway/web' in there, you can't set one ban which works on gateways too.02:28
LjLstew: then his staff becaume quite abusive, getting themselves banned,  evading those bans then said they would be putting all their efforts into helping users of their client avoid our bans  /  we have concerns about the logging they do of users personal information02:28
LjLstew: i haven't seen any of that anywhere before. on the other hand, i've seen on mibbit's blog that freenode's reasons for disallowing mibbit "aren't technical" but "have to do with general distrust of third parties". i'm led to believe the latter when the former party doesn't really tell me anything that doesn't smell like fud02:29
PriceyLjL: Please could you separate your issues with freenode from this discussion(channel)?02:29
PriceyThis really isn't hte place.02:29
LjLPricey: yup you can, you ban @*hostname02:30
LjLnote the *02:30
LjLPricey: considering there is no place (as #freenode really isn't the place, either), then i guess i'm just not discussing it.02:31
PriceyLjL: I believe * stands for "any, but at least one..."02:33
Seeker`* is 0 or more02:33
Seeker`typically, anyway02:33
LjLPricey: no, there isn't that wildcard on irc02:34
LjLPricey: you'd need ?* for "any but at least one"02:34
PriceySeeker`: go for it02:34
Priceyodd, my test must fail02:34
Priceyi wonder what i did wrong02:35
Seeker`?02:35
Priceyanyway, i don't make those decisions :)02:36
Priceyhehe, forgot to deop when i tried it in a random channel02:37
Seeker`hehe02:37
PriceyYou learn something new every day.02:38
Seeker`time for bed; I have to be in work in 7 hours02:38
Seeker`bye02:39
LjLbye02:39
LjLoh by the way02:41
LjLi was wondering what hateball did so horrible to stay banned all this time? (at least, last time i checked he still was, i don't think i can check from here)02:42
Flannel!away > Cream03:16
Picitopyli: That was your (hateball) ban that LjL was referring to, may want to revisit it at some point in time.03:16
=== Guest9171 is now known as tonyyarusso
ubottuFloodBot1 called the ops in #ubuntu-ops-monitor (exploit)04:37
ubottuFloodBot2 called the ops in #ubuntu-ops-monitor (exploit)04:37
elkyPici, it should be noted however that hateball has not bothered to contact this channel about it, and that is the procedure specified in !appeals -- whereas i'm pretty certain "send LjL" is not.04:42
FlannelHowdy lasj, how can we help you today?04:43
lasji need to be tested for the DCCExploit04:44
Flannellasj: It seems you've already been tested, and should be able to join #ubuntu now04:44
lasjthanks04:44
Picielky: Agreed.04:48
=== stew is now known as Guest26458
topyliPici: hateball's ban is pretty old, true06:37
jussi01Just a reminder, we should be cleaning up bans not just in #ubuntu, but elsewhere as well.06:39
ubottugogeta called the ops in #ubuntu ()07:11
elkytopyli, might be worth having a conversation with him, rather than just an unbanning. He's been around long enough to know the proper process for unbanning, but it'd be worth giving him a refresher.07:33
elkytopyli, just a simple "oh hey, why didn't you tell me i'd forgotten to unban you! you could have asked in -ops at any time as per our appeals process" would do07:34
topyliaye, will do07:35
topylican't really just go on and remove the ban, as i can't know whether the reasons for it are still around07:36
Flannel!u > abddu07:58
elkytopyli, exactly the point.08:10
jussi01I disagree for that slightly. You can go ahead and remove the ban, if he comes back again and misbehaves, then it isnt hard to re-ban...08:13
elkyjussi01, except that puts us at fault for letting him back in without sufficient precautions.08:15
elkyi don't particularly like being held responsible for the misappropriated free will of others.08:15
jussi01elky: well no. we regularly (or should be) clear out old bans.08:15
elkyjussi01, yes, but not blindly.08:16
elkyjussi01, if you know you can access someone who is a known regular, then do so. if you cannot access someone and they are not a known regular then they are a completely different risk factor.08:16
topylishould at least make sure he knows his previous behavior is still not welcome. memoserv could do that i guess08:17
topylii think i'd rather see if i can get him in pm within the next couple of days08:18
elkyjussi01, if you have been clearing out bans without putting that much thought into them, then please start putting that thought in post haste.08:18
elkytopyli, he's been in *that* channel.08:18
jussi01topyli: I agree. I feel that a memoserv + an unban is sufficient.08:18
elkyjussi01, communication without acknowlegment is not communication.08:19
=== evilGary is now known as Gary
ikoniatopyli: jussi01 elky if you like I'll speak to hateball as he has always been %101 fine with me11:11
jussi01ikonia: lets see how it goes with topyli, as its his ban. Unless topyli wants to jump in on that.11:12
topylioh looks like he's online now11:13
ikoniatopyli: yes, that's why I mentioned it11:13
topyliikonia: i'll chat with him11:14
ikoniasuper11:15
ikoniaeyeballs on lando-spacepimp11:17
jussi01where?11:21
ikoniaot11:22
ikoniahe was a bit stupid in #ubuntu and11:22
ikoniahe seems quiet now11:22
gnomefreakcan someone set bot to make !info... default in #ubuntu-mozillateam12:26
jussi01gnomefreak: come again?12:46
gnomefreakjussi01: #ubuntu+1 is set up so !info bleh gives you Karmic version can you please do the same for #ubuntu-mozillateam12:47
jussi01gnomefreak: ahh. do you have ubottu or a clone?12:47
gnomefreakhold on i think its just ubottu12:48
gnomefreakyep just ubottu12:48
Amaranth!info12:54
ubottuRetrieve information on a package: !info <package>12:54
Amaranthoh, I see what you mean12:54
jussi01gnomefreak: I cant remember the variable atm, but Ill try get to it. also, try pinging tsimpson13:06
gnomefreakjussi01: ok thanks :)13:07
=== Guest26458 is now known as stew
gnomefreaktsimpson: if you get a chance can you please make !info bleh default to Karmic in #ubuntu-mozillateam13:08
ubottuFloodBot3 called the ops in #ubuntu-ops-monitor (exploit)16:24
Flannel!away > cryptide19:05
NetEchouh.. I'm getting redirected from #ubuntu because of an old DCC exploit that hasn't affected me in some time20:12
NetEchoand test me isn't working20:13
PiciNetEcho: Can you please try it again20:14
PiciNetEcho: You're all set then20:14
NetEchothere we go, so howcome you guys started doing that?20:14
PiciIf someone does the exploit and we detect that you got booted, then we forward you there.20:15
mneptokNetEcho: to prevent a ton of people from getting disconnected when idiots use that exploit20:15
NetEchoI haven't been affected by it.. that I know of20:15
NetEchooh well20:15
NetEchogenerally I use port 800120:15
NetEchomighta been on 6667 and got hit while I was afk20:15
NetEchothanks guys20:15
NetEchottyl20:16
guntberthi, please have an eye on BTK_Green_River in #ubuntu, he is only bad mouthing22:38
Flannelguntbert: We'll take care of it, thanks.22:45
guntbertok, I'm off22:45

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!