[00:31] <Jordan_U> Google translate says that th1nG is a troll. Any native russian speaker able to confirm?
[00:32] <Jordan_U> (in #ubuntu).
[00:32] <bazhang> yeppers
[00:32] <Jordan_U> OK, I'll let you handle it then.
[00:33] <bazhang> sorry; yes to trolls, no to native speaker
[01:29] <bazhang> ah need_space
[03:36] <bazhang> thats need_space from before
[03:36] <bazhang> "why cant I install programs on the live cd?"
 wats gmail  trolling?
[05:25] <elky> with a nick like that?
[05:47]  * rww solves that problem
[06:15] <bazhang> looks like need_space aka dada_dede
[06:16] <rww> oh hey, it's that telepac.pt person I've been keeping an eye on. He's known to y'all too?
[06:17] <bazhang> windows_is_gay now
[06:18]  * rww lastlogs
[06:18] <rww> oh look, ban-evasion. Thanks, bazhang.
 is there too many gays in #ubuntu ?
 do you really think you can ban me?
 you will need to ban all the vpns out there
[06:20] <rww> bazhang: PM, I take it?
[06:21] <bazhang> rww, yeppers
[06:22] <bazhang> he's giving realtime pointers on how he's going to ban evade next
[06:25] <rww> (currently pondering something with exempt-setting, please ignore me being opped in #ubuntu ;)
[06:26] <bazhang> hehe
[06:28] <rww> hrm, looking at old BanTracker records too. uLinux was on telepac.pt as well.
[06:29] <bazhang> oh yeah
[06:29] <rww> heh, as is BUGabundo. nice ISP -.-
[06:30] <rww> alrighty, the webchat user (also from telepac.pt!) that I asked to part and rejoin #ubuntu isn't, so whatevs. I'm going afk again, have fun ;P
[06:31] <elky> I see no problem with driving the revenue of VPS providers by making him go to each and every one of them.
[06:38] <bazhang> * [rwww] (~sorry@bl12-91-179.dsl.telepac.pt): :)
[06:43] <bazhang> * ubotttu (~ubottu@bl12-91-179.dsl.telepac.pt)
[06:44] <elky> cute
[08:59] <rww> bazhang: !opsnack much ;)?
[09:03] <Tm_T> I notified of his rising hostility
[09:03] <bazhang> rww, am I opped somewhere?
[09:03] <Tm_T> and he's gone
[09:06] <bazhang> he seems intent on being disruptive
[09:12] <Tm_T> is Atomicspark always this joyful?
[09:19] <elky> i think he is when he knows he's saying stuff that will be deeply upsetting people that isn't explicitly against the guidelines
[09:20] <bazhang> far far worse problems in -ot than that
[09:22] <elky> well yes, but it lowers the atmosphere enough to make those other things not stand out enough :(
[09:22] <bazhang> the things that came before (ie in the last 24 hrs) were much worse than the bits he has said of late
[09:23] <Tm_T> sure, but that's no excuse for bad behaviour
[09:24] <bazhang> indeed. also not an excuse to let the complete breakdown in authority in there of late
[09:26] <Tm_T> couldn't we begin to poke those who are solely annoying others without clearly breaking guidelines, as I believe that guidelines does or should say something about not disrupting others on purpose
[09:31]  * Tm_T is getting more and more annoyed of any unconstructive and hostile activity, IRC or not
[09:31] <Tm_T> ... just like my statement above
[10:39] <TheSarge> can i be unbanned from #ubuntu now please. im very sorry.
[10:39] <TheSarge> !ops
[10:40] <Tm_T> TheSarge: please don't use ops trigger if it's not needed
[10:40] <TheSarge> ooops i didnt know that was only for emergencies....
[10:40] <TheSarge> sorry!
[10:42] <topyli> hrm
[10:42] <TheSarge> will someone remove my ban though? it waz for arguing with an op a month ago and offensive language. it was a month ago.
[10:42] <TheSarge> i said it was a month ago 2 times lol.
[10:43] <Tm_T> TheSarge: one moment, I'm reading the logs
[10:43] <Tm_T> TheSarge: and for the record, it wasn't a month ago
[10:44] <TheSarge> sorry. guess i didnt write it down. seems like a month ago.
[10:45] <TheSarge> im on my phone sorry for the typos.
[10:45] <Tm_T> TheSarge: so please finish the phone call first and we talk then (;
[10:46] <TheSarge> no i mean im using an irc client on my phone... not talking on a phone call.
[10:46] <topyli> TheSarge: you seem to agree that the language was offensive now?
[10:47] <topyli> mind, i'm not familiar with your #ubuntu ban, just the one in #ubuntu-offtopic
[10:47] <Tm_T> topyli: it was direct continuation of the issue
[10:48] <topyli> ah yes, i see the logs now
[10:48] <TheSarge> yes i agree.
[10:48] <TheSarge> i was being stubborn and immature.
[10:48] <TheSarge> if removed i will cause no futher trouble
[10:49] <topyli> alright. then i suppose your language will be civilised in the future?
[10:49] <topyli> ah ok
[10:49] <TheSarge> yes it will.
[10:50] <topyli> alright
[10:51] <Tm_T> TheSarge: while we're at it, you're familiar with our channel guidelines?
[10:52] <Tm_T> !guidelines > TheSarge
[10:52] <topyli> good idea
[10:52] <TheSarge> yes i am.
[10:52] <Tm_T> TheSarge: good, just remember to look at it when in doubt and stay in the friendy side (:
[10:52] <topyli> i'm not really an op in #ubuntu, i just remembered
[10:52] <topyli> :)
[10:53] <Tm_T> I'm on it
[10:53] <topyli> ah good
[10:53] <topyli> i would have to jump through a couple of hoops, so thanks
[10:54] <Tm_T> TheSarge: you may enter #ubuntu now, thanks
[10:54] <TheSarge> so i am welcome again?
[10:54] <TheSarge> thanks!
[10:55] <topyli> TheSarge: enjoy
[10:55] <Tm_T> TheSarge: bye
[10:55] <TheSarge> bye
 i want to buy Ubuntu <RHC-Jungli> nope whole company
[12:49] <bazhang> in #ubuntu just now already parted
[13:20] <bazhang> thought 'st' was banned
[13:23] <ikonia> I probably removed it my clear down
[13:23] <ikonia> real simple
[13:23] <ikonia> if he is stupid again, he's gone
[13:23] <bazhang> ok sorry. he's gakhan now
[13:24] <bazhang> just an odd way to remove broken packages
[13:24] <ikonia> yup, gakhan was stupid the other day with a bad attitude
[13:24] <ikonia> didn't realise it's the same guy
[13:24] <ikonia> same applies, any more rubbish from him, he's gone, he's had enough warnings
 zelev, remove the broken package from /var/lib/dpkg/status
[13:25] <ikonia> that's not an unreasonable thing to do
[13:25] <ikonia> (in my view)
[13:25] <bazhang> assuming he means rm
[13:25] <bazhang> okay
[18:22]  * LjL points to idoru's treatment of marlow59
[18:22] <LjL> seriously, while i have no sympathy at all for repeaters, isn't this a bit much?
[18:28] <tsimpson> it only kills their connection, doesn't automatically earn them a k-line
[20:50] <marienz> tsimpson: idoru kills actually are followed by a kline, and we try to unset ones set for people repeating a question quickly, but idoru just isn't smart enough to distinguish that from an offensive or otherwise inappropriate repeated message
[20:51] <tsimpson> that would explain why I saw someone "killed" then come back a couple of minutes later
[20:56] <LjL> well if it k-lines then i really think that's oversensitive for #ubuntu, unless we've decided once and for all that annoying people should be punished as harshly as possible...
[20:59] <popey> 4
[20:59] <popey> bah
[21:02] <marienz> perhaps we should try removing it from #ubuntu for a while again. What it does is rather effective though, and I'm pretty sure we've previously tried removing it only to end up putting it back soon afterwards as spammers noticed
[21:02] <LjL> can't it just be made... a little less sensitive?
[21:14] <KB1JWQ> LjL: Sure, but that lessens its effectiveness.
[21:15] <marienz> LjL: I have to admit it's not as good as I'd like it to be at being differently sensitive on different channels
[21:16] <marienz> LjL: the idea is that it'll automatically catch disruption considerably faster than someone with human reflexes can
[21:16] <marienz> LjL: also, the primary (frequentl only) thing making these repeated questions not spam is that the question itself is offtopic for #ubuntu, which is rather hard for a bot to figure out
[21:17] <marienz> err, *ontopic*, obviously
[21:22] <LjL> marienz: ok, but maybe just three identical messages, separated by seconds, is too much. the floodbots are more lenient than that, and what they do is much less invasive
[21:22] <LjL> besides
[21:22] <LjL> if a spammer spams fast, they'll get the standard 6 messages through before idoru intervenes, no?
[21:22] <LjL> (before the server starts throttling)
[21:24] <marienz> removed it, let's see how it goes
[21:26] <LjL> or maybe you could make its k-lines expire automatically after a short while
[21:27] <marienz> we try to doublecheck them, either removing them manually or leaving them for quite some time
[21:27] <marienz> (virtually all klines already expire automatically, although how long it'll take before they do so varies)
[21:27] <rww> and if no staffers are around to doublecheck them?
[21:27] <marienz> we're *usually* good at catching things like repeated question-askers, but sometimes we do miss one
[21:28] <marienz> LjL: what kind of "short while" did you have in mind?
[21:28] <marienz> rww: then they're doublechecked later (I hilight on all idoru activity and I'm not the only one doing so)
[21:29] <LjL> marienz: quite short. like two minutes, possibly with informing the k-lined person that they should try reconnecting in some minutes
[21:29] <rww> I don't think I
[21:29] <LjL> doublechecked later isn't much use for people who're joining #ubuntu una tantum to ask something, though
[21:30] <marienz> that defeats the purpose of killing spammers (unless you're proposing only setting such short ones if #ubuntu is involved, which I don't think the code currently supports)
[21:30] <marienz> I agree that the bot has been less than useful on #ubuntu lately, and I appreciate the reminder
[21:30] <rww> 'm very comfortable with people who repeat their question being banned for a few hours because we don't have staff around to undo it :\
[21:31] <marienz> it's in quite a lot of other channels though, and on average it's more effective than its recent performance on #ubuntu may have led you to believe
[21:31] <rww> though admittedly I haven't seen any users complaining.
[21:31] <marienz> (it also has a couple of safeguards against accidental klines like this one, but I'd prefer not to list what they are)
[21:35] <KB1JWQ> It's noteworthy that the vast majority of idoru kills are "valid."
[21:36] <marienz> it's possible the vast majority of idoru kills on #ubuntu isn't, though (I don't have reliable statistics for that around)
[21:36] <marienz> so let's see how the channel fares without it
[21:36] <KB1JWQ> Yeah, I'd need to go data mining on that.
[21:37] <Tm_T> marienz: KB1JWQ: thank you for all your efforts from me (:
[21:38] <KB1JWQ> Tm_T: No worries.  The word came down at $CONSULTING_CLIENT, we're converting something like 300 instances from CentOS to Ubuntu over the next six months.
[21:42] <KB1JWQ> So I'll be abusing the channel myself periodically. :-p
[21:43] <marienz> a *very* quick glance over my logs for this month shows more valid than invalid hits on #ubuntu for the running month, and that's counting a few instances of it killing half a dozen bots as one hit
[21:45] <LjL> it's not that i don't appreciate this either, but it's not the first time i or others here notice people being killed who were just being stupid, not malicious.
[21:45]  * marienz nods
[21:49] <KB1JWQ> Be aware that you may still see idoru killing users in #ubuntu if they misbehave elsewhere.
[21:59] <LjL> course
[22:44] <user____> hi, webchat is quieted at #ubuntu and no #ubuntu-proxy system is in place like it was a few months ago, is that on purpose?
[22:45] <LjL> yeah
[22:45] <user____> is NOT in place*
[22:45] <LjL> but you can speak
[22:45] <LjL> when you join, a ban exemption is set for you
[22:45] <user____> [09:14] <user____> . [09:14] == Cannot send to channel: #ubuntu
[22:45] <LjL> unless you're supposed to be banned at least
[22:45] <user____> Hm. I didn't get joined to -proxy automatically. Is that ok?
[22:45] <LjL> user____: try again now, if it still doesn't work i'll have a look at what might be going on
[22:45] <LjL> yes that's normal
[22:45] <LjL> -proxy isn't used anymore
[22:46] <user____> I did /cycle ; same result.
[22:46] <LjL> one moment
[22:47] <user____> [09:16] == LjL-Webchat [5d2034bd@gateway/web/freenode/ip.93.32.52.189] has joined #ubuntu
[22:47] <user____> [09:17] <LjL-Webchat> test
[22:47] <user____> odd.
[22:47] <LjL> yes, it works for me. maybe you're banned or the bots think you're banned, let me look
[22:47] <LjL> well i don't see why they would
[22:48] <LjL> i'll restart them and let's see
[22:48] <rww> There's an active ban exception on user____!3a6f691f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.58.111.105.31
[22:49] <user____> Ok, seems fixed now; was it something manual?
[22:50] <LjL> user____: could it be that you simply didn't wait very long between joining and saying something? it does take the bots a second or two
[22:50] <user____> ok thanks all
[22:52] <Jordan_U> Why does webchat need to be treated specially? I would have expected that the captcha would keep bots out, and it doesn't hide your ip.
[23:08] <rww> Jordan_U: bans set against one's hostmask don't apply automatically if one switches to webchat. The Floodbots check for bans against the real hostnames of webchat users before giving them ban exceptions. The Floodbot programming for #ubuntu-unregged doesn't work right with webchat users for unrelated reasons.
[23:10] <rww> actually, no, there's also the related fact that -unregged doesn't set ban exceptions, so it wouldn't override a +q or +b stopping webchat users.
[23:10] <rww> (and the +q or +b is needed to prevent people from switching to webchat to evade bans...)
[23:10] <LjL> Jordan_U: bots aren't really the issue with webchat, human trolls are
[23:13] <rww> Yeah, I guess just scratch what I said and go with "webchat's treated specially to deal with ban-evasion, #ubuntu-unregged is to deal with bots" ;)
[23:41] <Jordan_U> Interesting. We have a much smarter system than I expected :)