[01:07] <truepurple> Earlier I asked a question in a channel, the only person replying there at the time said s/he did not know, so I asked in another channel, and had ikonia jump all over my for cross channel topics or something
[01:08] <rww> and?
[01:09] <truepurple> and I think that was unfair
[01:09] <rww> which channels?
[01:09] <truepurple> It was not necessary or proper to make a issue of this
[01:09] <truepurple> ubuntu-beginners and ubuntu
[01:10] <truepurple> I would note that while I was in ubuntu, someone who knew something did answer
[01:10] <truepurple> but it didn't seem like there was anyone there at the time when I asked in ubuntu
[01:11] <truepurple> I mean someone from ubuntu beginners
[01:12] <rww> Asking the same question in multiple channels is not a good idea because it duplicates the effort of our helpers and can cause confusion if you're following instructions from two sets of people. Please do not do it.
[01:15] <truepurple> You would object even if there is noone in the channel at the time?
[01:16] <rww> You sent your first message of the day to #ubuntu-beginners at 11:08. You were answered by yofel at 11:17. 10 minutes is not an adequate amount of time for you to decide there is nobody in the channel.
[01:18] <rww> And besides, it looks like the first message you sent about TRIM was to #ubuntu at 11:04. So you posted to #ubuntu, then #ubuntu-beginners, then #ubuntu.
[01:18] <truepurple> Aside from wish, asking different people sometimes results in difference answers, and a spectrum of opinions is useful to getting to a trueth. Also I don't see how asking the same question in mulitple channels causes confusion
[01:18] <rww> I just told you how it does.
[01:19] <truepurple> ubuntu is one of those channels that if someone doesnt answer you soon, it is soon lost in the tide of other people talking about other things
[01:19] <rww> Increasing that tide by getting into arguments with our channel operators doesn't really help things.
[01:20] <truepurple> Id have rather have done it in PM, but ikonia at first refused
[01:20] <truepurple> And at first, I just wanted to know exactly what the reprimand was about
[01:21] <truepurple> Ikonia might have found his/her words clear on that matter, but I did not
[01:21] <rww> I'm not surprised. You've repeatedly demonstrated a tiresome tendency to debate and complain about everything you can.
[01:21] <rww> Crossposting is against our guidelines. Don't do it. Not following operator instructions is against our guidelines. Don't do that either. I think that's really all that needs to be said.
[01:23] <truepurple> Well I disagree, those words are not so clear, it is not blatantly obvious to everyone what is considered cross posting for example.
[01:25] <truepurple> And if this has been answered before, I apologize, but where does it forbid "cross posting"?
[01:26] <rww> in our IRC guidelines, as you've been told.
[01:26] <rww> It has its own nicely bolded and indented heading, for pete's sake
[01:26] <rww> I'm not interested in discussion what you think is blatantly obvious to everyone or rehashing things you've been told repeatedly.
[01:27] <truepurple> This is not something I have been told repeatedly
[01:27] <truepurple> I do not feel I have earned your anger here either.
[01:27] <rww> I'm not angry, I'm contemptuous.
[01:28] <truepurple> Then your contempt, and contempt is even worse
[01:28] <rww> Your attitude over the last few days indicates to me that you are doing one of: 1) deliberately wasting time, 2) not reading things people tell you, 3) severely lacking in comprehension. I am not fond of any of these alternatives.
[01:29] <truepurple> Where are these IRC guidelines if you would please
[01:30] <truepurple> Would it really injure you to repeat it, even if I was told before.
[01:30] <rww> ChanServ NOTICEs you our Terms of Service, which include the IRC Guidelines, when you enter the channel. They're also in #ubuntu's /topic.
[01:30] <rww> I'm not interested in indulging any of the problems that I just enumerated.
[01:31] <tonyyarusso> Why is he back?
[01:32] <truepurple> well entering text has long been shoved off for ubuntu, and I dont see it for this channel
[01:32] <Pici> tonyyarusso: --team might be a good place to ask
[01:32] <rww> truepurple: Your continued inability to use your IRC client is also not something I plan to indulge.
[01:33] <truepurple> FFS, I just asked you for a link
[01:33] <rww> and I told you where to find it
[01:33] <truepurple> If its so common and easy
[01:33] <truepurple> I told you, if its at the start of ubuntu channel, its long been pushed off
[01:34] <rww> I believe I answered that, too.
[01:34] <truepurple> Oh, I enter the command "/topic"?
[01:34] <truepurple> I see
[01:37] <truepurple> well that entry is pretty broadly worded, with no consideration of lack of response, you said 10 minutes, well specification like that would be a big help
[01:41] <elky> this is mr audit my helpers, yeah?
[01:41] <rww> yes
[01:42] <elky> so now he's collecting responses and then going to what? poll us?
[01:42] <elky> sigh.
[01:42] <rww> ask more questions, I expect
[01:43] <truepurple> How do I may I get a discussion going about a policy for the possibility of change?
[01:43] <rww> truepurple: of the IRC Guidelines?
[01:43] <truepurple> Or any policy, but sure, of the IRC guidelines
[01:44] <truepurple> I mean ops policy
[01:44] <rww> truepurple: email the ubuntu-irc list on lists.ubuntu.com
[01:44] <rww> or bring it up at an IRC Council meeting
[01:44] <truepurple> So I suppose the IRC guidelines would encompass all of that, right?
[01:44] <rww> I don't understand the question, can you rephrase it?
[01:46] <truepurple> Is all the hard and fast dictates of behavior regarding ops and ops enforcement, present in that IRC guildeline?
[01:46] <tonyyarusso> No.
[01:47] <tonyyarusso> It's like the Catholic Church - it's a mix of written documents and deliberated agreements.
[01:47] <rww> I resent that analogy :(
[01:47] <truepurple> I assume at a IRC council meeting, there would not be alot of room for discussion, its only so long after all
[01:48] <truepurple> So may I discuss the policy here to find out the reasons behind it ahead of time?
[01:48] <rww> truepurple: As the IRC Guidelines say, users are also held to the Code of Conduct, freenode policy, and directives from operators. Operators are additionally held to the Leadership Code of Conduct.
[01:48] <truepurple> and perhaps if I manage to persuade anyone, they could also bring it up if I am not able to make it.
[01:49] <rww> This isn't a good venue for soliciting opinions on channel policy. I've mentioned the two venues that are.
[01:49] <tonyyarusso> truepurple: The mailing list is much better suited to these sorts of things than this channel or in meetings, actually.
[01:49] <truepurple> well I am sure meetings aren't
[01:50] <truepurple> And mailing list, I hate those, not really gotten the hang of them, are you really saying that is my only option?
[01:50] <truepurple> Plus live chat would be better
[01:50] <tonyyarusso> (This channel should be kept clear to deal with any immediate issues that may crop up, and not distract people in the meantime.)
[01:50] <truepurple> Is there another channel I could do it in?
[01:51] <rww> You've been told where you can do it.
[01:51] <tonyyarusso> Not a currently defined one, no.
[01:51] <rww> I note that your behavior continues to fall under either deliberate timewasting, failure to read, or failure to comprehend.
[01:52] <truepurple> rww, Please, I am trying to remain calm but the way you speak to me really upsets/angers me.
[01:52] <rww> I'll stop speaking to you like this when your attitude and behavior stop being problematic.
[01:53] <truepurple> Would one of you please consider bringing up the subject of a channel or something for discussing issues of policy regarding ops?
[01:53] <rww> If you want that subject to be discussed, please bring it up at one of the locations I've mentioned.
[01:53] <truepurple> rww, in my eyes, you have things wrong, and are just using your quick conclusions as a excuse.
[01:54] <rww> If you don't have another subject that's on-topic for this channel to discuss, I believe we're done here.
[01:54] <truepurple> The subject is another venue,  and you only mentioned two, the meeting, which I might not be able to make, and the mailing thing, which I hate. And the subject is another venue to discuss things like this, the Irony!
[01:54] <truepurple> You said it could be discussed in the meeting
[01:54] <truepurple> So would you please bring it up, or someone
[01:55] <rww> No, I don't think there's a problem with the current situation.
[01:55] <truepurple> I see a need, I really do. That is why I brought it up
[01:55] <rww> As I've already said, if you want the policy changed, you bring it up. If you don't care enough about the policy to attend a meeting or send an email, I'm afraid I can't help you.
[01:56] <truepurple> You could help me, is it against the policy to bring it up yourself to be nice?
[01:56] <truepurple> You would think courtesy itself was against the policy
[01:57] <truepurple> and the issue with the mailing thing isnt sending emails, its getting a mess of them
[01:58] <hypatia> truepurple: you can use filters to deal with that.  send them all to a folder.
[01:58] <truepurple> Would someone please do me this small courtesy?
[01:58] <rww> tonyyarusso: Would you kindly put an end to this silliness?
[01:59] <truepurple> I still have to sort through em and stuff, anyway so noone?
[01:59] <tonyyarusso> truepurple: You're welcome to create an About channel per Freenode guidelines if you must discuss things on IRC, with the caveat that there won't be anyone there with you.  Otherwise the mailing list is the appropriate venue.  Do you have any further business?
[01:59] <truepurple> hypatia, might you please?
[02:00] <truepurple> tonyyarusso, That caveat makes it the same as nothing at all, would you please consider bringing this up at the next meeting?
[02:00] <tonyyarusso> truepurple: I don't care about it, so no.
[02:00] <truepurple> Well there is one other thing
[02:00] <tonyyarusso> If you want something done, you do it yourself.  That's a pretty basic rule of life.
[02:01] <truepurple> I dont see anything in the rules about not PMing someone, and I think you guys should be more open to talking to someone in PM if they are having trouble understanding a instruction given
[02:02] <truepurple> Thankyou for your time
[02:02] <rww> You're not welcome.
[02:02] <tonyyarusso> Well, if there was an individual interested in discussing in PM that would of course be fine.  It's just that nobody was interested.
[02:03] <rww> He's not interested in discussing anything, he's interested in being a burden on the channel operators :P
[02:04] <rww> My prediction is that he creates a channel and then starts advertising it in #ubuntu*, then comes here to complain about the consequences.
[02:08] <tonyyarusso> Well, I know that, and you know that, but my statement is still true for the general case for the logs.  ;)
[02:10] <rww> Meh, I stopped caring. The worst that can happen is that I get de-opped for expressing my opinion, and that's a rather weak worst-case scenario :P
[02:11] <tonyyarusso> True enough.
[02:22] <elky> getting de-oped for that would be a case whereby it'd be a favour to you, as if it gets to that you'll want to run from the implosion.
[04:47] <Tm_T> why all the interesting happens while I'm away
[04:58] <elky> because too much interesting in once place would implode the universe?
[04:59] <rww> going through bans from over 90 days ago is tedious and some of you should feel bad for having removable bans over 3 months old :(
[05:00] <Tm_T> like me? (:
[05:00] <rww> Tm_T: Yes :P
[05:02] <Tm_T> I could do again what I did once in #k, do -b *
[05:02] <elky> no
[05:02] <elky> unless you want us to come over to finland and throw snowballs at you
[05:02] <elky> i may or may not consider putting rocks in the snowballs
[05:03] <rww> I would not be opposed to removing all of #ubuntu's bans, readding IRCC decreed bans, then letting the rest sit until needed again.
[05:03] <rww> but I'm weird.
[05:04] <elky> maybe some time when we have lots of active ops for an entire consecutive week.
[05:05] <Tm_T> elky: you can come and throw snowballs at me even without me doing the -b (;
[05:05] <rww> I wouldn't be mentioning that if I thought we didn't have enough ops to handle it.
[05:07] <elky> rww, based on experience, i believe we fail to have enough for at least *one 24/7 week*
[05:08] <Tm_T> agreed
[05:08] <rww> elky: based on experience, I disagree. but then, if we're paying attention to #ubuntu to see if it has ops paying attention to it, then ops are paying attention to it, so...
[05:08] <rww> if that makes sense (:
[05:09] <elky> do you remember the last time we lost our ban list?
[05:09] <rww> anyways, I'm well aware that that suggestion is about as likely to happen as I am to start working for Canonical, so.
[05:10] <rww> elky: If I say no, I lose the argument. If I say yes, people start poking into how I remember things that happened before any of my nicks were around :P
[05:10] <rww> unless it happened while I was around and it was so uneventful that I forgot
[05:11] <rww> although I could dodge it by saying "we have better op coverage than then" :P
[05:12] <elky> we don't actually
[05:12] <rww> I guess we'll have to disagree on that, too :(
[05:12] <elky> we had half as many people and still the same number of ops for my timezone.
[05:12] <elky> (people = users there)
[05:13] <elky> in fact, my timezone is like twice as covered now as it was a month ago.
[05:14] <rww> I remember back when I was up during Australiatime a year ago and would end up calling ops for half an hour or so before anyone turned up. If this is still happening, I'm not seeing it.
[05:15] <rww> I could probably go grab irclogs.ubuntu.com and graph ops calls as a function of time, under the premise that if we have ops watching the channel we're less likely to get to the point of ops being called, but I'm too busy fixing the banlist.
[05:28] <Tm_T> unless we do set up watch turns, we cannot cover the channel 24/7
[05:29] <Tm_T> we cannot cover it even for 6 hours for that matter (:
[09:48] <ikonia> hello gary
[09:58] <Gary> hey ikonia
[12:56] <bazhang> student and whity seem to be same exact IP
[12:56] <Pici> bazhang: good catch
[14:45] <oCean> larsT in #kubuntu
[14:45] <ikonia> just +b on him, so he can sit there quietly, enough of him
[14:46] <oCean> he was even in #u couple of days ago (as marmelade)
[14:47] <ikonia> I can't be bothered waiting for the usual stuff
[14:47] <genii-around> Hard to tell if they are trolling there yet, all I've seen is they want to switch from unity and try kubuntu....
[14:47] <oCean> here we go again, he will start explaining how maximizing a window will maixmize that window on another desktop
[14:48]  * genii-around hears boss yelling down the hall, investigates
[14:49] <ikonia> if this is the same problem he's been asked and had explained to him mutliple times, I'm going to ban him
[14:50] <oCean> many, many times indeed
[14:50] <oCean> this https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/790394 is his, marked invalid
[14:53] <popey> why is that bug marked invalid without specifying the dupe?
[14:53] <ikonia> ask the bug team
[14:53] <ikonia> so much is marked wrong
[14:56] <ikonia> normally it tells you who changed the status
[14:59] <charlie-tca> That does tell who did it, at least he commented that it is a duplicate.
[14:59] <ikonia> I don't see it ?
[14:59] <popey> i do
[15:00] <ikonia> where, am I being blind ?
[15:00] <charlie-tca> first comment - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/790394/comments/1
[15:01] <popey> that view doesnt show it
[15:01] <popey> the big list of all comments does
[15:02] <ikonia> you can only see it if you're logged in
[15:02] <ikonia> I an now
[15:02] <ikonia> charlie
[15:03] <ikonia> dider sorry
[15:04] <charlie-tca> Really have to log in now to read comments? That seems wrong
[15:05] <charlie-tca> LarsT now in #ubuntu-devel
[15:05] <Pici> not anymore
[15:42] <Pici> "Where did you get the python script?"
[15:42] <Pici> "From the internet"
[15:42] <charlie-tca> heh, the always available source of anything
[16:02] <Pici> Weird.
[16:05] <ikonia> Pici: do you mean X or Y - "yes"
[16:05] <ikonia> love it
[16:05] <Pici> ikonia: I mean't Psydoll's question, but this is weird too.
[16:05] <ikonia> ah, that's just him being his foolish self
[16:06] <ikonia> yeah pici, abusive
[16:06] <Pici> what
[16:07] <ikonia> pici_ is being abusive
[16:07] <charlie-tca> huh?
[16:07] <Pici> Did I somehow have that ignored? I didn't see anything.
[16:07] <ikonia> 17:06 < ubottu> FloodBot1 called the ops in #ubuntu-ops-monitor (Pici_ appears to be abusive and has been muted, will need to be UNMUTED MANUALLY)
[16:08] <Pici> I saw that.
[16:08] <ikonia> it was hit and run spam
[16:08] <Pici> But not the nickspamming.
[16:08] <Pici> or anything from them at all.
[16:08] <ikonia> 17:06 < Pici_> !!!FREENODERS GONE WILD!!! WATCH KLOERI TEACH FREENODERS
[16:08] <ikonia> blah blah
[16:09] <Pici> for some reason I have Pici_ on my ignore list.
[16:09] <Pici> Weird.
[16:09] <ikonia> I ignore myself too
[16:11] <Pici> oh
[16:11] <Pici> thats why I have it ignored... some bitlbee thing.
[17:07] <Pici> Mabye I was wrong to remove $r:noob
[20:38]  * genii-around sips and thinks about croon jobs