[01:14] <bazhang> AlphaWaves, this is an issue for #ubuntu-irc , not here please /part this channel
[01:26] <AlphaWaves> bazhang: what's the motto of ubuntu already?
[01:27] <bazhang> AlphaWaves, your issue in #ubuntu-fr is not dealt with in this channel but in #ubuntu-irc ; please do not idle here as per the channel topic. Thanks.
[01:31] <AlphaWaves> ah ok
[01:44] <slidinghorn> why am I getting forwarded here?
[01:56] <Seeker`> @bansearch slidinghorn
[01:57] <slidinghorn> really...what'd I do?
[01:57] <Seeker`> It seems that the host shellium.org is banned
[01:57] <slidinghorn> oh...why?
[01:57] <Seeker`> I imagine its somewhere you can sign up for free shells?
[01:58] <slidinghorn> correct, but all I use it for is znc -- and I only help in the room
[01:58] <slidinghorn> rarely ever do I ask questions for myself
[01:58] <Seeker`> I suspect there were a large number of instances of people using shells from shellium.org to spam #ubuntu
[02:00] <slidinghorn> i find it hard to believe...they're pretty strict about following other channels' rules -- is ikonia around by any chance?
[02:00] <Seeker`> he hasn't been active for the last 2 hours or so
[02:00] <Seeker`> @btlogin
[02:04] <Seeker`> I'm finding it hard to piece together what happened at the moment, would you be ok coming back sometime tomorrow morning?
[02:05] <slidinghorn> probably won't be available to come on but I can try...
[02:06] <Seeker`> I've sent a PM to ikonia asking him to take a look when he gets on next
[03:12] <Niglop> ikonia:
[03:12] <Niglop> sorry about yesterday I was in a bad mood
[11:05] <Jordan_U> Galdor2 in #ubuntu is likely a troll
[11:08] <Misterio> It seems Galdor2 is trolling, any op avaiable?
[11:12] <om26er> please do something about Galdor2 in #ubuntu
[11:13] <om26er> done ;)
[11:17] <KB1JWQ> Tempquieted galdor2 due to offtopicness / user complaints in #freenode.
[11:18] <om26er> KB1JWQ, thanks :
[11:35] <KB1JWQ> No worries.  :-)
[13:50] <Seveas> any #ubuntu or #ubuntu-offtopic op available for pm? Sensitive matter...
[13:55] <nhandler> What's up Seveas ?
[13:55] <Seveas> nhandler, can I pm you?
[13:55] <nhandler> Sure
[16:09] <ikonia> topyli: why is this guy trying to cause a row ?
[16:12] <topyli> no idea
[16:13] <topyli> sorry ikonia, didn't notice you're trying softer medicine
[16:14] <ikonia> no problem
[16:19] <ikonia> hi there
[16:19] <Random832> hi
[16:19] <ikonia> thanks for joining, easier to chat in here, rather than keep #ubuntu-offtopic in an agrument
[16:20] <Random832> so who decided on the "obfuscated swearing" rule, anyway?
[16:21] <Random832> there's a LONG tradition that says that obfuscated swearing is considered family-friendly
[16:21] <ikonia> Random832: not really interested in history, the current channel owners don't want to see it
[16:21] <topyli> obfuscated swearing is swearing. wtf means "what the fuck". nobody needs to "decide" that
[16:22] <ikonia> the bottom line is the channel owners decide the rules, they don't want to see it, it's a rule it's not allowed
[16:22] <ikonia> in fact I'll make sure thats in the guidelins
[16:22] <Random832> topyli: "dang it" means "damn it"
[16:22] <ikonia> !guidelines
[16:22] <Random832> "goshdarn" [16:23] <Random832> and yet there are layers of meaning that _are_ different there
[16:23] <ikonia> mega, it's in there
[16:24] <ikonia> Random832: I don't know why you are trying to push this,
[16:24] <ikonia> it's really simple, people know the core swearing phrases, try not to use them, apply common sense
[16:25] <Random832> 'core' == 'american'?
[16:25] <Random832> i've seen people get away with saying 'bloody' before, at least
[16:25] <ikonia> you could argue all day that phrases like "fiddle sticks" me "of fuck it" or "oops" means "shit" but it's intention really
[16:25] <ikonia> Random832: if you're not comfortable with someone using bloody, askg them to stop
[16:25] <ikonia> Random832: most people will
[16:26] <Random832> it's not a matter of what i'm comfortable with, it's a matter of double standards
[16:26] <ikonia> no it's not
[16:26] <ikonia> Random832: if you genuinly find it offensive, ask them to stop
[16:26] <ikonia> it's family friendly channel, and if it's causing an issue, most people still stop
[16:26] <Random832> did anyone genuinely find 'wtf' offensive, or were they just being busybodies?
[16:26] <ikonia> some people don't know the rules (as you didn't when you said wtf) so just give them a nudge
[16:27] <Random832> it's not so much that i didn't know the rules as i forgot which channel i was in
[16:27] <topyli> Random832: look. if you walk into a new pub and the regulars don't like how you're behaving, they will (hopefully) let you know. what do you do? act accordingly, or get thrown out?
[16:27] <ikonia> Random832: that's fine, accidents happen
[16:28] <Random832> topyli: yeah well the whole thing had an air of enforcing a rule for the sake of enforcing a rule, rather than anyone actually being offended
[16:28] <ikonia> Random832: it is a rule though
[16:28] <ikonia> Random832: if no-one at that time is offended or not is just a bonus
[16:28] <Random832> so, in the analogy, it's not "the regulars don't liike how you're behaving", it's "the regulars seeing an excuse to beat on the new guy"
[16:28] <ikonia> Random832: accidents happen, no-one is pefect
[16:29] <ikonia> no it's not
[16:29] <ikonia> it's just someone asking you to watch the language, incase you didn't know
[16:29] <Random832> [not a perfect analogy, but it was really doomed from the start anyway]
[16:29] <ikonia> it's that simple
[16:29] <ikonia> people slip up, or don't know, so it's easy to do
[16:29] <ikonia> you just got a nudge to say hey, incase you didn't know, that's not allowed
[16:29] <Random832> and it's not "the regulars", it's "the owner" - this is a hierarchial structure, not a community
[16:30] <ikonia> the rules are set by the channel owners which is in line with community request
[16:30] <Random832> you've set it up that way by defining rules by fiat rather than consensus - not that there's anything WRONG with that, but don't lie about what it is
[16:30] <topyli> it's certainly not a democracy
[16:30] <ikonia> the community can self moderate
[16:33] <Random832> so where exactly is the rule that says we had to take this discussion in here, rather than continuing it in -offtopic?
[16:34] <topyli> it's more a matter of common sense. never argue with ops on channels, you'll lose
[16:35] <topyli> basic irc reality
[16:38] <Random832> yeah, well, i didn't even know either of you were ops
[16:38] <Random832> not your fault, really - sometimes i think freenode policy is a bit out of touch with reality
[16:38] <Random832> (but, in so far as it's meant to say that ops and other users should be considered equals, it's more of just a failure)
[16:42] <Flannel> Random832: If someone asks you to stop using bad language, it shouldn't matter if theyre an op or not, should it?
[16:44] <Random832> Flannel: this isn't about someone asks you to stop using bad language
[16:44] <Random832> this is about someone asks me to stop discussing the matter, after i've already stopped using [allegedly] bad language
[16:45] <Random832> why does everyone keep confusing the issue?
[16:45] <IdleOne> No this is about you wanting us to agree with you that the rules are randomly enforced.
[16:45] <IdleOne> They aren't
[16:45] <Random832> IdleOne: i got kicked for something that there was no actual rule against. this is not a hypothetical matter.
[16:46] <IdleOne> ops are not always around, we have lives also and can't always be watching the channels. So that means that when a user (op or not) asks another user to stop they should stop.
[16:46] <Random832> IdleOne: THIS ISN'T ABOUT USING BAD LANGUAGE
[16:46] <Random832> what i was _ACTUALLY KICKED FOR_ was not breaking any rule.
[16:47] <Random832> i _did_ stop
[16:47] <Random832> and then i started a discussion about the meaning behind the rule, why some things are considered bad language and not others
[16:47] <IdleOne> Random832: I didn't say anything about language. in -ot any subject can be o4o. if it makes someone uncomfortable we are supposed to all be adult enough to understand that and stop.
[16:47] <Random832> etc
[16:47] <Random832> IdleOne: the simple fact is that _I_ don't have the right to just demand that someone drop a subject and have them kicked if they don't.
[16:47] <Random832> ikonia apparently does.
[16:47] <Random832> there is no rule justifying this
[16:47] <ikonia> huh ?
[16:48] <ikonia> I do what
[16:48] <IdleOne> Random832: you do have that right to ask someone to stop discussing a subject
[16:48] <Random832> IdleOne: right, but they're not required to stop discussing whatever subject i ask them to stop
[16:48] <Random832> whereas ikonia on the other hand
[16:48] <ikonia> sorry, what have I done ??
[16:48] <ikonia> I wasn't following
[16:48] <Random832> ikonia: it's a bit late, after you already kicked me from the channel once for something that was not in fact breaking any rule
[16:49] <IdleOne> Random832: correct they aren't. In that case you come here and ask an op to take a look and see if they can do something about it
[16:49] <Random832> if you were going to deny the presence of a double standard, try not actually doing it
[16:49] <ikonia> Random832: I didn't kick you
[16:49] <Random832> IdleOne: and they would say that my demand was frivolous garbage - rightly so.
[16:49] <IdleOne> IF the op judges that kicking/banning is needed they will.
[16:50] <IdleOne> Random832: That is where the common sense part comes in.
[16:50] <ikonia> Random832: I simpley asked you to stop discussing it in #ubuntu-offtopic and join #ubuntu-ops
[16:50] <Random832> ikonia: there is a sentence i would ideally say, filling in a word in the phrase "________ you didn't!", but it would break a rule so i wouldn't.
[16:50] <ikonia> Random832: I didn't kick you
[16:50] <Random832> oh, wait, it was topyli, sorry
[16:50] <Random832> you were the one who was actually talking to me at the time, so i got confused
[16:50] <ikonia> Random832: I asked you (didnt demand) to stop discussing it in #ubuntu-offtopic and join us in #ubuntu-ops to discuss any problem you had with the rule
[16:50] <Random832> and you were the one who went +o, and he didn't, so it was doubly confusing
[16:50] <IdleOne> I got lunch.
[16:51] <Seeker`> Random832: what do you want to get out of this argument?
[16:51] <ikonia> Random832: as I said, accidents happen, mistakes are easy. Don't worry about it
[16:51] <Random832> ikonia: and then i was kicked from the channel for not complying. you were the only one who in fact had +o at the time, so i didn't look too closely. sorry for the confusion
[16:51] <ikonia> Random832: no, you got kicked as I understand it as you wouldn't do anything unless someone was an op
[16:51] <Random832> seems a bit silly to claim it wasn't a demand, though, when i _was_ kicked [even if not by you] for not complying
[16:51] <ikonia> but I didn't kick you so I don't know, I suggest Seeker` has the most valid point
[16:52] <ikonia> what do you actuall want to achieve from this discussion so we can put it to bed
[16:52] <Random832> Seeker`: i want an admission that there's a double standard - that ops can demand that people drop whatever discussion they don't want to have, and that they'll be kicked if they don't comply, whereas anyone else who wants someone to drop a discussion has to convince an op to agree with them first
[16:52] <ikonia> Random832: that's not going to happen
[16:53] <ikonia> Random832: there isn't a double standard, mistakes do happen though
[16:53] <Seeker`> It wasn't that the ops didn't want to discuss the matter
[16:53] <Random832> [whereas ideally there _wouldn't_ be a right for _anyone_ - op or not - to simply say that a discussion can't continue when there's no rule against that discussion]
[16:53] <Seeker`> we are more than happy to discuss it in here
[16:53] <Seeker`> it isn't an appropriate topic for #ubuntu-offtopic though
[16:53] <Random832> right where there's no neutral audience - can't risk anyone else agreeing with me after all
[16:53] <ikonia> Random832: people can agree/disagree, it won't change anything
[16:54] <Flannel> Random832: The point of bringing it here is so that this discussion doesn't disrupt that channel
[16:54] <Random832> how is it not an appropriate topic for #ubuntu-offtopic?
[16:54] <Seeker`> !appeals
[16:54] <ikonia> Random832: so if you just want an admission, I suggest we drop it now, and
[16:54] <Random832> who decides what is an appropriate topic for #ubuntu-offtopic?
[16:54] <Random832> oh, right, THE OPS
[16:54] <Seeker`> That states that the appropriate place for a discussion of an operator decision is in here
[16:54] <Random832> which brings us back to what i was saying in the first place
[16:54] <ikonia> I'm off out as I don't believe this conversation now adds any value beyond a petter fight and a odd hunt for a blind admission
[16:54] <ikonia> "petty"
[16:55] <ikonia> if the other operators feel like continuing this, great, you've got a platform, if not, I suggest you accept the facts and go about your day and enjoy the channels your in
[16:58] <Seeker`> Random832: if you have nothing more to add, please do not idle in this channel
[17:42] <slidinghorn> is Seeker` around?
[17:49] <topyli> slidinghorn: looks like you just missed him
[17:49] <slidinghorn> dang...was wondering why I was banned (or if it was just the fact that I had a shellium vhost, for that matter)
[17:49] <topyli> memoserv <3
[17:49] <slidinghorn> topyli, no idea what that is/means?
[17:50] <topyli> i think shellium is not very popular on freenode right now, too much spam
[17:50] <topyli> i haven't been following the situation however
[17:50] <slidinghorn> ikonia set the ban (at a time when I was asleep) -- and I'd love to know who it is who's spamming, as the shellium community definitely doesn't want its members doing those types of things
[17:51] <topyli> i'm sure they don't
[17:51] <IdleOne> topyli: would it be possible to set an exception for slidinghorn?
[17:52] <slidinghorn> if it's me individually, I think I would know why...had "awaynick" enabled on my ZNC -- which I can make sure to remember to leave the #ubuntu room before exiting my irc client
[17:52] <topyli> IdleOne: perhaps with a registered nick
[17:52] <slidinghorn> it's registered & identified
[17:52] <topyli> ah
[17:53] <IdleOne> topyli: I don't know how to do it is the thing
[17:53] <topyli> i don't know how it's done in practice though :)
[17:55] <topyli> slidinghorn: generally, /remove is enough to deal with awaynicks, since clients don't autoconnect after that. no need to ban really
[17:55] <slidinghorn> well if you guys are able to figure it out, it'd be greatly appreciated...also I'd really like to talk to ikonia when he returns, as I'll be sure to let the admins @ shellium know if someone's been spamming from our community...not acceptable and I'd apologize profusely from the community itself :-\
[17:56] <slidinghorn> topyli, I just may have had autorejoin on as well -- it was a default setup -- I've set up my own znc now that doesn't have that mod enabled -- could have been an issue
[17:56] <IdleOne> slidinghorn: you can message ikonia and he will get back to you.
[17:57] <topyli> slidinghorn: sorry for not being more knowledgeable in this issue. it is vacation time, so i'm a bit out of the loop
[17:57] <slidinghorn> let me check my mods again just to be sure there won't be anything that's questionable or against the rules
[17:57] <topyli> slidinghorn: clients might autojoin after /kick if setup that way. /remove, however, looks like you simply /parted the channel, so your client won't try to autojoin
[18:01] <slidinghorn> ok...sent a msg to ikonia -- if you guys are able to find anything out, please let me know :)  I won't stick around in here, but I'll try coming back a little later to see if anything was figured out.  Have a good one guys :)
[18:03] <IdleOne> thank you and same to you slidinghorn
[18:21] <ikonia> I've put notes in BT about this
[18:30] <topyli> @login
[18:30] <topyli> @btlogin
[18:32] <IdleOne> ikonia: Can you tell me how to add an exempt?
[18:32] <topyli> ikonia: ikonia please add it to the agenda if you want to bring it up: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/MeetingAgenda
[18:33] <topyli> gives everyone some time to ponder :)
[18:46] <ikonia> topyli: will do, I'm just formalising the info
[18:46] <topyli> aye
[18:47] <ikonia> slidinghorn: want to give it a try
[18:47] <ikonia> IdleOne: same as a ban but +e instead of b
[18:47] <IdleOne> thank you
[18:47] <slidinghorn> worked...thanks guys :)  and again, sorry about the trouble makers...sent an email to the shellium admins for them to be taken care of
[18:47] <topyli> ah, thanks ikonia  :)
[18:48] <ikonia> all sorted, so he's got an excempt now but all other shellium users and bzshells users are forwarded here for the moment
[18:58] <ikonia> @mark #ubuntu-offtopic jungli bandodging as neo AGAIN ! repoted to freenode staff
[18:59] <ikonia> @mark #ubuntu-offtopic jungli also using nick mahen23 to ban dodge as well as neo and neo_
[19:08] <ikonia> hello Fringe
[19:08] <Fringe> Hi
[19:08] <Fringe> once again i am back
[19:08] <Fringe> for bans on shelliums ips
[19:09] <ikonia> oh, I didn't know you'd been here before
[19:09] <Fringe> i have been
[19:09] <Fringe> and i though we had clear this up
[19:09] <ikonia> I'm not aware of anything, so could you give me a little back fill pleaes ?
[19:09] <ikonia> (there maybe something I'm not aware of)
[19:11] <Fringe> well we had some report of spam and other relate issues with member coming to ubuntu and causing problem
[19:11] <Fringe> we also kow not your jobs to police this
[19:11] <Fringe> but we did ask to drop us a note if this occured
[19:11] <Fringe> i haven't seen any reports of miss handling by members but i see hand is on again
[19:12] <Fringe> hand = band
[19:12] <Fringe> ban**
[19:12] <ikonia> in that case that's my personal fault
[19:12] <ikonia> not the ubuntu operator channel teams
[19:13] <ikonia> I wasn't aware of that, and due to abuse from shellium and bzshells users I took the decision to ban forward to this channel all members joining for manual except until I could talk with the ubuntu irc council
[19:13] <ikonia> no doubt the council would have made me aware of this agreement
[19:13] <ikonia> I can only apologise on a personal note as it was my decision not the whole teams
[19:13] <Fringe> that is fine
[19:13] <Fringe> i respect that
[19:13] <ikonia> shellium users are not banned, I've just put an excempt in for one
[19:13] <Fringe> and u have all right
[19:13] <Fringe> i see that as well
[19:14] <Fringe> got a detail email from member for action you have taken
[19:14] <ikonia> the forward was only while I took the time to speak to the council to decide how to handle it
[19:14] <Fringe> i personal would like to know person who abuse your channel
[19:14] <ikonia> ahh good
[19:14] <Fringe> because this is in our AUP
[19:14] <Fringe> and i like to revoke
[19:14] <Fringe> where possible
[19:14] <ikonia> there has only been one or two recently, however they have tied in with a number of bzsehslls users and the "free shell" situation got a bit tainted
[19:15] <Fringe> aye
[19:15] <ikonia> if you give me the correct way to contact you to inform you of this sort of problem, I'll document a process for the ubuntu operator team
[19:15] <ikonia> that way you won't be here "again"
[19:15] <Fringe> do u have to member whodid this recently
[19:15] <ikonia> we'll just contact you correctly next time
[19:15] <Fringe> that is good by me
[19:15] <ikonia> Kwpolsak
[19:15] <ikonia> is an easy example
[19:15] <Fringe> admin@shellium.org
[19:16] <Fringe> i saw that as one of the name
[19:16] <Fringe> and paddymelon
[19:16] <Fringe> as another
[19:16] <ikonia> no problem, I assume nickname and vhost is all you need (along with some details of the incident)
[19:16] <ikonia> paddymelon is a differnt issue
[19:16] <ikonia> he has been a long term issue in the channel, and started using shellium to get around some bans, however 've not seen him him on for a while
[19:16] <Fringe> yes please
[19:16] <ikonia> (and he's currently not banned )
[19:16] <Fringe> since they no spoof
[19:17] <Fringe> we can identify who they are
[19:17] <ikonia> no problem, I'll document this and submit it to the council and we'll get the shellium ban forward resolved ASAP
[19:17] <ikonia> I'll keep you updated so you know the status
[19:17] <ikonia> but it was my fault personally, not the teams, so please don't think they ignored your efforts before
[19:18] <Fringe> no one fault
[19:18] <Fringe> and no personal blame
[19:18] <Fringe> you did right thing
[19:18] <Fringe> i would have done the same
[19:18] <ikonia> didn't realist you'd spoke about this before though
[19:18] <Fringe> we did
[19:19] <ikonia> hopefully, we won't have to agin
[19:20] <Fringe> np
[19:20] <Fringe> Thanks for your help
[19:20] <Fringe> and you can keep us posted via email address
[19:20] <ikonia> thanks for coming in
[19:20] <Fringe> ty
[19:20] <ikonia> will do
[19:20] <Fringe> np
[19:21] <ikonia> I'll draft something for submission for the next irccc meeting
[19:21] <ikonia> if only bzshells was that easy
[19:30] <topyli> yeah the shellium staff is doing a good job afaik, but of course it's difficult for them to keep things under control
[19:33] <ikonia> if anyone knows that we do
[19:33] <ikonia> it's harder if we on't tell them there is a problem
[19:34] <ikonia> however I didn't know there was an agreement in place
[19:37] <topyli> i'm not aware, must be from before my time
[19:38] <topyli> or i forget
[19:43] <mneptok> i'm at the CLS and OSCon with one of the shellium admins and bigwigs. it would be trivial for me to ask him to idle here. despite the "no-idle" policy, we might want to make exceptions for some cases.
[19:44] <Tm_T> indeed if they start being a problem too much
[19:44]  * Tm_T does his hit'n'run comments
[19:48] <topyli> mneptok: that could possibly be a good idea at least for a while
[19:49] <ikonia> they are not that big a deal to be honest, they are only the odd few bad apples, however they have been lumped in with (by me) the bzshellz guys due to a suddent surge of activity from both
[19:49] <IdleOne> I think the shellium admin could confirm the user to be "ok" and much like with the membership status is handled between group contact and freenode staff the shellium admin could ask that an exempt be applied
[19:50] <ikonia> no need for a ban + exempt situion in the longterm
[19:50] <ikonia> the ban was only temporary to decide what to do
[19:50] <ikonia> I had no idea the shellium admins where on the ball and so open to resolving issues
[19:50] <IdleOne> ikonia: agreed but if it does turn into a long term issue....
[19:51] <ikonia> I can't see how it would
[19:51] <ikonia> we shouldn't be crying to them for minor issues, just persistant users
[19:51] <ikonia> or users using shellium to get around a ban
[19:51] <ikonia> same as going to freenode
[19:51] <ikonia> if we have a contact method that's all we need to do
[19:51] <mneptok> well, for futurte reference i'm very friendly with a shellium admin. i'm happy to be a conduit.
[19:51] <ikonia> as long as all the ops are aware of it
[19:51] <IdleOne> shellium does seem to be on the ball about abuse
[19:51] <ikonia> mneptok: alawys handy
[19:51] <ikonia> always
[22:42] <mneptok> Bryanstein: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/07/18/%23ubuntu-ops.txt <---- convo with Fringe today