[01:40] <em> AlanBell: We should now also add #ubuntu-women to the list of places I would like explanations for :)
[01:40] <em> You know when Ubuntu claims to be an open community that embraces diversity and freedom of information is there any actual truth to that?
[01:41] <IdleOne> Don't bother, #ubuntu-women doesn't have the same rules as the core ubuntu channels.
[01:41] <em> Or is a person only safe so long as they, for example, agree with IdleOne?
[01:41] <IdleOne> You were making the channel an unsafe and unwelcome environment. I banned you.
[01:41] <em> Im sure we do have different philosophical views but do you actually claim to be more civilised, rational or worthy than me?
[01:42] <IdleOne> I'm done explaining.
[01:42] <em> That's pretty rich, "Unsafe"
[01:42] <em> That is a remarkable comment to make about a person who was typing fully articulated and defensible sentences into a channel that claims to be interested in making sure everyone is included.
[01:43] <em> It is a regrettable thing that free-thinking makes #ubuntu-women unsafe, and yet here it is immortalised in the #ubuntu-ops log for all to see.
[01:43] <em> Let's for the time being forget about #ubuntu-women. That will be easy.
[01:44] <em> AlanBell: Is there any chance that the bans in either of the other two could be lifted since there is no apparent reason for them and they are ancient?
[01:44] <IdleOne> Not today.
[01:44] <em> IdleOne: And what is the reson for that?
[01:45] <IdleOne> Your past history.
[01:45] <em> IdleOne: Past history of what?
[01:45] <IdleOne> You know where the logs are located.
[01:45] <em> IdleOne: Bring it forth. Past history of what?
[01:46] <em> IdleOne: Are my relevant questions making you feel "unsafe"?
[01:46] <IdleOne> I think it is best if you email the IRCC (/msg ubottu !appeals) and let them answer any questions you may have.
[01:47] <em> Someone should perhaps message them and encourage them to look at this entire operation. What are you doing here?
[01:47] <em> That is not just a philosophical question.
[01:47] <em> You are a volunteer, and good for you, thanks for that. What did you volunteer to do?
[01:48] <em> Did you volunteer only to ban people? Does this channel we are in right now exist for any reason?
[01:48] <IdleOne> I volunteered to help maintain a safe and welcoming irc experience for all users. Sometimes those users don't understand the ubuntu community guidelines and we are forced to ban them.
[01:48] <em> I suppose these questions are becoming too rhetorical. I'll tone it down.
[01:49] <em> Then articulate how I have violated the "Ubuntu community values" in #ubuntu
[01:49] <em> Anything you have to contribute to that would be a wonderful surprise.
[01:50] <Flannel> em: I don't think any operator, given the history and discussions today and on the day AlanBell linked to a few hours ago, is going to unban you today, or probably any day.  I think your best recourse is to have a conversation with the IRCC.  They'll be able to look at all of the aspects involved and get an answer to you.
[01:51] <Flannel> Not to say that you're not unbannable, merely that it would require a good deal of homework, and discussions with various parties, and these things don't happen over the course of an hour.
[01:51] <em> Flannel: Could you invite them to come on to IRC, that would be a lot easier.
[01:52] <Flannel> em: I think some of them are here, but your best bet is to follow the official channels and not try to invent your own process.  I believe that is still an email to their mailing list as an initiation, and I believe they can/may invite you to discuss things on IRC if anything needs to be worked out interactively.
[01:53] <em> Flannel: I claim there is absolutely no reason for me to be banned in #ubuntu [full stop]. The non-reasons I was banned in #ubuntu-offtopic are ancient and irrelevant. So irrelevant that I was not even banned and no one seemed to mind I was there until two days ago when it was placed again in closed-source fashion.
[01:53] <Flannel> I just checked, and yes, it does appear that an email to their mailing list (let me know if you need the address) is the first step.
[01:53] <em> Flannel: Finally I claim that the single reason I was banned in #ubuntu-women is because I have an independent mind and IdleOne finds that dangerous.
[01:54] <IdleOne> even if that were true, team channels are free to govern their channel as they see fit.
[01:54] <Flannel> First, the easy stuff: #ubuntu-women isn't covered by this channel, if you have an issue there, take it up with #ubuntu-irc.
[01:55] <em> Flannel: Then what you are saying is that any person who was mistakenly given the privilege of being an op can ban me in #ubuntu for no reason and the only way that can be resolved is to force me to go through time consuming lengths and a lengthy process to have it possibly resolved.
[01:55] <em> Flannel: Then I think it is clear for all to see that your processes are broken.
[01:55] <Flannel> Now, if you feel you're not happy with the resolution there, I believe you should still appeal to the IRCC.  Because they still have purview.
[01:55] <Flannel> em: Slow down there slugger.  I haven't even responded regarding #ubuntu.
[01:56] <em> Flannel: I will only contact the IRCC if there is the possibility that not only will I have the ban lifted but I will also receive a direct apology from the Ubuntu Community for insulting me and wasting my time.o
[01:56] <em> Flannel: When is the next meeting of the IRCC here on IRC. I will attend it if possible.
[01:56] <Flannel> Alright, do you want me to respond to everything you say? or just the most recent thing? since you're typing so much that I find it difficult to think you're interested in having a conversation.
[01:56] <em> Flannel: Sorry for that, go ahead. I'm listening.
[01:57] <Flannel> I think I'm like eight statements back/
[01:58] <Flannel> Alright, about you being banned in #ubuntu, I acknowledge that you believe you shouldn't be banned there.  I'm not sure that simply stating that is going to further your cause for becoming unbanned, however.
[01:59] <em> Correct.
[02:00] <Flannel> em: I'm saying that any person who was given the responsibility of being an operator has the power to behave like an operator in any channel they are an operator of (that's only a shred above a tautology).  When people become operators, they are observed closely for a period of time, and beyond that there's still course corrections that take place.  The person banning you need not be the one who unbans you either.
[02:00] <Flannel> This, along with other things, prevents a single person's opinion from blacklisting someone.
[02:01] <em> Sounds good. For some reason it is failing in practice.
[02:01] <Flannel> In your particular case, there are a number of people who have been involved, so I don't think focusing on a single person "mistakenly" being made an operator is relevant, nor constructive.
[02:02] <Flannel> em: Well, that's the operator level, your next step is to appeal to the IRCC when you feel the operators are in error, which is entirely possible, as we're all human.
[02:02] <Flannel> From what I understand, you haven't yet attempted to do so, so I can only conjecture wildly at this point.
[02:03] <Flannel> em: I think the IRCC has the ability, if they see fit, of issuing you an apology.  It won't be from the "Ubuntu community", as the IRCC is not the entire community.
[02:03] <em> Flannel: Well I give you credit for being lucid and rational. If you could be cloned to replace a few of the trolls who are allowed to idle here in #ubuntu-ops everything would be right with the world.
[02:04] <Flannel> But again, I am not the IRCC, so I can't speak for them.
[02:05] <em> IRCC stands for the IRC Community Council? Or something else?
[02:05] <Flannel> IRC Council. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil
[02:05] <em> Okay thanks.
[02:06] <em> This is a pretty slick system you guys have. It is a lot like Best Buy giving me a rebate that they know I'm unlikely to bother with.
[02:07] <Flannel> em: It's not quite a system.  It's "discuss it with operators in -ops" then "email the IRCC".
[02:07] <em> Alright.
[02:07] <Flannel> em: I do see that apparently you can go talk to them in #ubuntu-irc-council instead of emailing.
[02:08] <em> Ahh. That would be a lot better.
[02:08] <Flannel> I'm not sure which would be more expedient.
[02:08] <em> Okay thanks.
[02:09] <Flannel> em: Even with IRC, I imagine they will have to discuss it with the entire body (as that's the point of a council).  So either way, don't expect a turnaround of a couple of hours.  This is things-via-the-internet, people don't always check email, etc.  You know the drill.
[02:09] <em> I'll be parting as soon as you indicate that you had a chance to say everything you wanted to tell me.
[02:09] <Flannel> I'm good.
[02:09] <Flannel> If there's nothing else on your end, I bid you good day and wish you a speedy resolution.
[02:10] <em> Sure, thanks for your feedback and information. Take care.
[02:17] <IdleOne> That is not spam is it?
[02:18] <IdleOne> because it sure looks like a troll spamming
[02:24] <Flannel> where?
[02:32] <IdleOne> I guess you don't see part messages
[02:34] <IdleOne> I should probably look before jumping in the pool
[02:34] <Flannel> I did.  I have no idea how that would be spam.  That's her standard part message, at that.
[02:38] <IdleOne> I wasn't aware she had been interviewed. I honestly thought it was just some fake ubuntu interview.
[03:33] <elky> it's been in her part message since it happened i think
[03:35] <IdleOne> I never noticed it before
[03:36] <elky> i especially like q3
[03:40] <elky> anyway, considering the whole interview was a contrived publicity stunt to advertise a channel which shuns the primary tenet of the community... it is somewhat spammerific.
[07:15] <Tm_T> how amusing
[07:17]  * gnomefreak wants to laugh :) its beocme a crappy month already
[07:18] <gnomefreak> its :18 and im decindin gif i want coffee. (2:18am
[07:18] <gnomefreak> )
[07:19] <gnomefreak> ok that copmment sucks
[07:19] <Flannel> gnomefreak: Irish Coffee?
[07:19] <gnomefreak> Flannel: nope
[07:20] <gnomefreak> didnt even knew there was an irish coffee
[07:20] <gnomefreak> yu would think i would have learned that in the 36 years ive been here
[07:21] <Tm_T> hmmm, so em was or was not going to contact IRCC?
[07:21] <Tm_T> I didn't really get what was the outcome
[07:21] <elky> gnomefreak, try having coffee before trying to work the keyboard again :P
[07:21] <Flannel> Tm_T: I'm not sure.  She knows that's the next step.
[07:24] <gnomefreak> :) should really do that
[07:24] <Tm_T> Flannel: I know she knows
[07:26] <IdleOne> There's no audience on the mailing list
[08:43] <usr13> elfer
[08:46] <Myrtti> oh man
[08:46] <Myrtti> I was trying to press backspace
[08:46] <Myrtti> not enter
[08:47] <elky> ?
[08:47] <elky> i looked at the logs, i still don't know
[10:51] <AlanBell> oh dear that didn't go so well with em did it
[10:55] <Tm_T> good rule would be with her "direct to ircc and be done with it" at this point?