 hey can anywher ehere give me some live assistant?
[03:29] <bazhang> define "live"
[11:28] <phix> hai can I join #ubuntu and be productive in support?
[11:28] <phix> I am quite knowlegable when it comes to ubuntu, debian, linux and programming in a multitude of languages in general
[11:29] <phix> Don't let your social stance of me be a reason for banning me
[11:29] <phix> in 10 years time the word I said would be common tongue, if it isnt now
[11:37] <Tm_T> phix: hi, do you know why you're banned?
[11:37] <phix> Yes
[11:38] <Tm_T> like to tell it? I haven't seen records yet
[11:38] <phix> Well I could tell you but you may get offended which won't help my case
[11:38] <phix> Apparantly ops on #ubuntu are very sensitive
[11:38] <Tm_T> not telling won't help your cause either (:
[11:38] <bazhang> there are guidelines
[11:39] <phix> I am just tell things as they are, very bluntly which does get me in trouble but it doesn't negate the fact I can be highly contributive in #ubuntu
[11:39] <bazhang> that does not match the guidelines, then your kind of support is not needed
[11:40] <phix> yes I have rough edges, but that shouldn't be a reason for being banned
[11:40] <phix> I see
[11:40] <bazhang> thats no excuse
[11:40] <phix> perhaps
[11:40] <bazhang> we all have rough edges, we just dont type them out contra the guidelines
[11:41] <phix> bazhang: really? have you ever been charged with an offence in real lidfe?
[11:41] <phix> life*
[11:41] <phix> speeding, parking fine perhaps?
[11:41] <Tm_T> phix: bans are not punishment
[11:41] <phix> umm yeah they are, if I can't do something I want to do then it is a punishment
[11:42] <phix> I want to join #ubuntu and help support the community as well as be helped in my own questions as a side effort
[11:42] <phix> effect*
[11:43] <phix> bazhang: your lack of an answer tells it all
[11:43] <Myrtti> no, they're not a punishment, they're to stop whatever disruptive behaviour there is
[11:43] <Tm_T> phix: your ban record shows some unwillingness to play with our rules, is this how you recall this too?
[11:43] <bazhang> phix, I was busy elsewhere actually
[11:43] <phix> Tm_T: I may of bent the rules now and then
[11:43] <Tm_T> phix: also derailing discussion to someone else's case won't help sorting this out
[11:44] <phix> there are grey areas in the rules any way
[11:44] <Tm_T> phix: you understand that on a busy channel like #ubuntu we have to take strict stance on behaviour, attitude and respect?
[11:45] <phix> Tm_T: no, I wasn't derailing I was hopefully causing a apethic (is that how you spell it) response
[11:46] <Tm_T> IRC support channels aren't comparable to "real life" (irc isn't real?) anyway
[11:46] <phix> Tm_T: If IRC isn't real then you shouldn't have an issue unbanning me
[11:47] <Tm_T> phix: IRC is real, and I do have a problem unbanning you
[11:47] <phix> Then you're an idiot
[11:47] <phix> Yes I am blunt
[11:47] <phix> but I know alot about Ubuntu
[11:47] <phix> and can be helpful
[11:47] <Tm_T> not because I want to punish you, but because I want to ensure our support channels function well and along our community guidelines and spirit
[11:47] <Tm_T> doesn't matter if you cannot follow community guidelines
[11:48] <Tm_T> or channel rules
[11:48] <phix> Tm_T: Punish me for what?
[11:48] <phix> What have I done that is blasphomy?
[11:48] <Tm_T> phix: nothing, ban is not punishment
[11:48] <Tm_T> noone is punishing you here
[11:48] <phix> great, then I Will just /j #ubuntu then
[11:48] <Tm_T> no
[11:49] <phix> oh, so I am being punished?
[11:49] <Tm_T> no, you're helped to not disrupt our support channel
[11:49] <phix> I didnt do that when I was allowd in the channel
[11:49] <phix> there were a certain few ops that had something against me
[11:51] <Tm_T> phix: I have read the logs of your ban and the conversation in here following it
[11:51] <phix> ok
[11:51] <phix> and it was how many months ago?
[11:51] <Tm_T> so stop saying "ops has against me" card, please
[11:51] <Tm_T> doesn't matter
[11:51] <phix> I am not being abusive or distruptive here, so why not let me back in?
[11:51] <Tm_T> 1347.15 < phix> Then you're an idiot
[11:52] <phix> Tm_T: and?
[11:52] <Tm_T> that's kind of an attitude I don't want to see in our support channels
[11:52] <phix> Are you offended by what people say on an IRC channel/.
[11:52] <Tm_T> nope, I'm still discussing with you here so why would I be offended
[11:52] <phix> great
[11:53] <phix> then why would you be concerned by that then and bring it up as defense against me?
[11:53] <Tm_T> phix: because it's kind of an attitude and behaviour I do not want to see in our support channels
[11:54] <Tm_T> if I let you in I wouldn't be doing my duty
[11:54] <phix> That is fine, I have no reason to tell the people in #ubuntu that you are an idiot, that will stay between you and me
[11:54] <Tm_T> phix: FYI this channel is publicly logged (;
[11:54] <phix> heh
[11:54] <phix> that is fine :)
[11:55] <Tm_T> phix: anyway, I won't be removing the ban anytime soon until I can be sure you can behave and follow channel rules
[11:55] <phix> The people in #ubuntu that need support don't read it any way :)  otherwise they wouldnt be asking questions in there
[11:55] <phix> Tm_T: I see, so no trial period?
[11:55] <Tm_T> no
[11:55] <phix> really
[11:56] <phix> the last time I went in ubuntu people were asking questions that were covered in your documentatioln
[11:56] <phix> I am great at answering those auestions
[11:56] <phix> questions*
[11:57] <phix> I am usually not rude, just when I am speaking to ops, which is my down fall
[11:57] <Tm_T> if you want to continue arguing this matter, please take the next step per our appeal process
[11:57] <phix> ops are usually power hungry and arrogant and I dont stand for that
[11:57] <Tm_T> phix: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/AppealProcess
[11:57] <phix> THe reason why I am banned was not because I was offering poor support it was because an op had an issue with me
[11:58] <Tm_T> if you want to continue arguing this matter, please take the next step per our appeal process
[11:58] <phix> LjL for example
[11:58] <phix> yes maam
[11:58] <phix> brick through window, got it
[12:02] <Tm_T> phix: now as we're not going to deal this ban any further here, I would kindly ask you to leave this channel (see channel topic)
[12:02] <phix> hmmm
[12:03] <phix> I still can't join #ubuntu though
[12:03] <phix> so the reason for me being here hasn
[12:03] <phix> 't changed
[12:03] <phix> I will just wait a bit here then
[12:04] <Tm_T> phix: you won't help your matter by idling here, so I ask you again to leave the channel
[12:05] <phix> I see
[12:05] <phix> I guess I won't idle then
[12:06] <phix> What is the idle policy here again?
[12:06] <phix> not saying anything for more than a minute? or 5?
[12:07] <phix> What are your thoughts on the consistency of cheese?  Should it be firmer or softer?  Or is it ok as it is?
[12:08] <phix> that was rude
[12:08] <phix> I would like to lodge a formal complaint
[12:08] <phix> what was the url again?
[12:08] <Tm_T> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/AppealProcess
[12:09] <phix> much appreciated
[12:09] <Tm_T> now please leave
[12:09] <phix> Yes maam
[12:12] <phix> ah I see where I went wrong
[12:12] <phix> thanx for the limk
[12:12] <phix> what should i do now?
[12:12] <phix> I would like to be contributing member to the Ubuntu movement
[12:13] <phix> I can see how I may of come off as being a bit brasin, blunt and abusive
[12:13] <phix> I will definitly tone things down a bit
[12:14] <Tm_T> best solution would be that you would take couple weeks off, let things to settle and come back with a new attitude that would fit to our rules
[12:14] <phix> umm I have taken a few months off, I have been banned for over that
[12:15] <Tm_T> and you have shown unacceptable attitude today
[12:15] <phix> I guess I could connect to #ubuntu through a third party and evade ban but I don't really want to do that, I am trying to be honest and productive
[12:16] <phix> Tm_T: I see
[12:17] <phix> I am trying
[12:17] <phix> I am far from perfect
[12:17] <phix> more so than yourself it sounds like
[12:18] <phix> but still you should give a chance
[12:21] <phix> Tm_T: thoughts?
[12:23] <Tm_T> phix: see above (:
[12:28] <phix> ok
[12:29] <phix> It has come to this
[20:49] <CarlJhonson> NIGGAS ON YOUR FEET
[21:20] <ikonia> @mark #ubuntu bobweaver quieted for offtopic multiple times, said "hi" in pm - that only, to resolve it, and I was told not to talk to him, so I have not engaged
[21:36] <bobweaver> hello there all I have a dude that has it out for me
[21:36] <bobweaver> he is a op who do I take this up with
[21:36] <bobweaver> I am willing to do a google hangout
[21:37] <bobweaver> and until this is changed and he is still gunning for me I am not developing for anything untill after that
[21:37] <ikonia> not sure if this works as your client has me on ignore
[21:37] <ikonia> I know this works with quiets, but not sure on ignores (don't think so)
[21:37] <bobweaver> this means that all of this https://plus.google.com/+UbuntuTV/posts
[21:37] <ikonia> but suggesting blackmail or randsom rarly works well
[21:37] <bobweaver> stops untill I can resolve this
[21:38] <Fuchs> ikonia: entirely client dependent, since ignore is entirely client side
[21:38] <ikonia> holding a project to randsom won't work well, and doesn't reflect well o nyou
[21:38] <ikonia> I'm guessing you can't see this so I'll shutdown
[21:38] <ikonia> Fuchs: thought so, it was worth a punt
[21:38] <bobweaver> IU am sick of this happening and there was no reason for it no pm asking me to stop doing what ever it was aka go niners  or sending a msg to someone via bot 1 time mind you
[21:39] <Fuchs> (I'd be surprised to see it working, and I'd slap that clients devs </sidenote>)
[21:39] <bobweaver> also this is not the 1st time that I have had a run in with this person
[21:39] <ikonia> Fuchs: it was a wild punt to stop him complaining into air
[21:39] <Fuchs> bobweaver: hi, just mentioning that ikonia tried to reply, so maybe you might want to take him off ignore for now and see whether you can find a good solution together first
[21:40] <bobweaver> Fochs with all due respect for you I will do this but I realy really really dont want to
[21:40] <bobweaver> how to turn it off ?
[21:40] <ikonia> leave it on
[21:40] <ikonia> I'll leave it alone
[21:41] <bobweaver> btw I was not the only one that said go niners
[21:41] <ikonia> the world won't end because of a lack of "development ????" on a google+ web page that's unofficial
[21:41] <Fuchs> bobweaver: from what I get: leave it on for now. Guess you'll have to check with a different operator then
[21:41] <k1l> bobweaver: 2 things: first: i dont think blackmailing an op (or us) will help you when talking about some missbehaviour that resulted in a quiet/ban. second: when youignore the op you cant see what he talks here.
[21:41] <bobweaver> and no one else got silenced
[21:41] <Fuchs> bobweaver: if that doesn't happen, there is an appeal process
[21:41] <Fuchs> ah, there is a core op. Great  *hands over to k1l and shuts up*
[21:41] <bobweaver> I was not mis behaving that is the thing
[21:42] <bobweaver> I understand and respect what you guys are doi g
[21:42] <bobweaver> and plz dont feel that I am treating any of you that is not my intention at all
[21:42] <bobweaver> or blackmailing
[21:42] <ikonia> how can "I'm not working until this is removed" not be a blackmail/threat ?
[21:42] <ikonia> how else can that be taken ?
[21:43] <bobweaver> k1l,  I am doing that now trying to read all this and am furstrated
[21:45] <k1l> bobweaver: i dont see how this should not be felt as a blackmail.
[21:45] <k1l> bobweaver: but i am just reading into the logs and bantracker to see the history of this visit here.
[21:45] <bobweaver> neither do I I think that it is just a case of someone that has had it out for me for a while
[21:46] <bobweaver> k1l,  yes this is not the 1st time that me and this person have had issues that is why I say that he is out for me
[21:46] <bobweaver> no one else got selinced that said go niners !
[21:46] <bobweaver> 3 people I am the only one
[21:46] <bobweaver> go figure
[21:46] <bobweaver> what are the odds
[21:47] <k1l> bobweaver: on the issue today: you are not right. first of all one other user got kicked for the offtopic.
[21:47] <ikonia> he responded to my pm
[21:47] <ikonia> rejoined and apologised
[21:47] <bobweaver> and did did the mod warn or pm them `1st ?
[21:48] <ikonia> bobweaver: told me not to contact him, and went on an ignore rant, so I didn't
[21:48] <bobweaver> is that not part of the steps that are taken ?
[21:48] <k1l> since you are a well known user and got ubuntu cloak we can assume you know, understand and mean to follow the guidelines and the CoC
[21:48] <ikonia> and left the mute in place
[21:48] <bobweaver> I NEVER BROKE THE COC
[21:49] <bobweaver> you know if the mod would have pmed me said "hey this that and the next thing "  I would have said "you are right after thinking about this ....."
[21:49] <ikonia> I did pm you
[21:49] <ikonia> you told me not to contact you
[21:49] <bobweaver> that is what good people do is look out for each other
[21:49] <ikonia> (obviously you can't read this)
[21:49] <k1l> the user who got kicked apologised in the pm with the op who kicked and rejoined the channel without beeing offtopic afterwards. you didnt want to sort that issue with the op in the pm, like im told
[21:50] <ikonia> 21:19 <ikonia> Hi bobweaver
[21:50] <ikonia> 21:19 <bobweaver> plz dont talk to me you had no right to silence me you have had it out for me sense day  one.
[21:50] <ikonia> so I left it there
[21:50] <bobweaver> k1l,  not with that mod
[21:50] <ikonia> I was simpley going to ask bobweaver to drop the topic and keep it in check as the issue was already done
[21:51] <bobweaver> I know there is a great amount of responsablity that comes with beeing a mod and I respect what you all are doing here
[21:51] <bobweaver> but that said still no pm no nothing
[21:51] <ikonia> the remove the mute
[21:51] <bobweaver> Is that not part of the steps ?
[21:51] <ikonia> ahhh lies, blackmail and threats
[21:51] <ikonia> the mark of a good ubuntu member
[21:51] <k1l> bobweaver: i am told, that the op tried to contact you after the mute to sort that out. you told him to not contact you anymore.
[21:52] <bobweaver> you are suppose to warn the user and then if they keep it going then you take action ?
[21:52] <k1l> so how should the op sort that out?
[21:52] <bobweaver> that is not true I had to pm him
[21:52] <bobweaver> that is not TRUE
[21:52] <k1l> instead you come here, blackmail to stop contributing to the ubuntu project if that is not sorted out. so what do you want me to do now?
[21:52] <bobweaver> you are not suppost to contact the user before hand
[21:52] <ikonia> no
[21:53] <ikonia> you are supposed to use judgment
[21:53] <bobweaver> esp if there a Ubuntu Developer ?
[21:53] <ikonia> ooh right
[21:53] <ikonia> you can do what you want because you are an ubuntu developer
[21:53] <ikonia> and I'd harldy call a google+ web page an ubuntu developer ?
[21:53] <k1l> bobweaver: if you are  known ubuntu member ists its your charge to stick to the rules in forst place?
[21:53] <k1l> *first
[21:53] <ikonia> (unless there is more behind the page that I don't see)
[21:54] <bobweaver> k1l,  I feel for your postion that you are in I and again I understand . What I do not understand is why mods are not pming people before taking action ?
[21:54] <k1l> i see you blaming everyone else. but it was you who did the offtopic and the bot command, which could be seen as trolling the op.
[21:54] <bobweaver> the bot command was not trolling
[21:54] <ikonia> I didn' think it was trolling
[21:54] <ikonia> I just saw the topic going on after the user already apologised
[21:54] <ikonia> I muted bobweaver to stop the conversation, explain in PM and remove the mute
[21:55] <bobweaver> I was trying to send a OT to a user so that he could see how it was done because he was having trouble
[21:55] <ikonia> and yet you didn't do it right
[21:55] <bobweaver> and in all fairness I did take responsablity for my actions
[21:55] <k1l> bobweaver: let me explain again: an op can mute a user. that will result in no more offtopic. after the issue is sorted out via pm, or other ways, the op can release the mute.
[21:55] <bobweaver> I did say that it was my fault on the "Go Niners"   that was OT
[21:55] <ikonia> how are you taking responsibility
[21:56] <ikonia> you've said I have no right to silence you
[21:56] <ikonia> tried to black mail the ubuntu project
[21:56] <ikonia> called me a liar
[21:56] <ikonia> how is that taking responsibility ?
[21:56] <ikonia> and put me on ignore
[21:56] <bobweaver> I have 100% admited my faults , and am not blamming anyone what I am saying is that the MOD sould have PM me
[21:57] <ikonia> .....you told me not to and put me on ignore
[21:57] <bobweaver> I mean is this not part of the steps that are taught
[21:57] <ikonia> this is stpid
[21:57] <ikonia> and a waste of time
[21:57] <k1l> so in my point of view: and op muted you to stop the ongoing offtopic (after kicking another user). while trying to pm you and sort that out you come in here and blackmail with stopping in contributing.
[21:57] <k1l> bobweaver: we must not pm every user before kicking, muting or baning
[21:58] <bobweaver> k1l,  I can see you point of view can you see mine ?
[21:58] <k1l> *must= we dont have to
[21:58] <bobweaver> I can understand that but that said there is still a place for everything
[21:58] <ikonia> I'm gald this conversation is logged so I can submit it to the membership board
[21:59] <ikonia> to show how a member/developer tried to blackmail the ubuntu project
[21:59] <ikonia> can't see that going down well
[21:59] <bobweaver> I know that When I deal with people that are doing something that I wonder about I try to talk to them if I know who they are
[21:59] <k1l> bobweaver: and the ops intention was to mute the offtopic. your botcommand can be considered as an ongoing of that offtopic. so there came the mute to stop that immediately.
[21:59] <bobweaver> anything can be "considered "  << with respect
[22:00] <bobweaver> I would also like to say that I am ok with doing a google hangout to talk about this
[22:00] <ikonia> why does there need to be a google hang out ?
[22:00] <bobweaver> alot more can be done when there is not keyboards in the way
[22:00] <k1l> and when i look in the bantracker and the fact that you wear a ubuntu/member cloak get me to think, that you know the guidelines.
[22:01] <bobweaver> k1l,  how long has it been sense the niners have been to the superbowl ? I know that that does not make it right but the 1st comment got me going
[22:01] <bobweaver> I am excited
[22:02] <bobweaver> what is it 2013 - 1995
[22:02] <k1l> bobweaver: honestly i dont think that we can sort that out in this situation. i would consider you to come back in 2 days when the emotions got some time to cool down. i still think we can sort that out, but not right now.
[22:02] <bobweaver> cool I will make a youtube video about this
[22:02] <bobweaver> I will now clear the channel to make room for other issues
[22:03] <k1l> if you are not interessted in that  or still feel there was some missbehaviour you can still call the ircc.
[22:03] <ikonia> make a youtube video ?
[22:03] <ikonia> what is this guy on about, google hang outs and youtuve videos ?
[22:04] <k1l> hmm, will pm him the last bit.
[22:04] <ikonia> what a total waste of time
[22:04] <ikonia> (not pm'ing him to inform him
[22:04] <k1l> dont know. maybe he is more like a "media-guy"
[22:04] <ikonia> just the whole thing
[22:04] <ikonia> I don't know what he's "developing" for ubuntu
[22:05] <ikonia> but he's calling himself a developer and basically blackmailing the project....
[22:05] <ikonia> I'll bring this up with the membership board.
[22:06] <k1l> hmm, he quit anyway
[22:06] <ikonia> probably making a youtube film
[22:07] <k1l> well if it gets 1.000.000 clicks i want some cash seeing in my inbox :)
[22:13] <IdleOne> @mark #ubuntu-ops bobweaver IRCC needs to looks into this very sad behaviour on the part of a member and decide if this should be forwarded on to the Community Council
[22:13] <ikonia> IdleOne: don't worry, I'm just going to forward it to his membership board
[22:13] <ikonia> someone saying they are an ubuntu developer....when I don't think they actually are
[22:14] <ikonia> and someone blackmailing to do what he wants....is not an ubuntu members cloak approach
[22:14] <IdleOne> ikonia: membership boards don't have the mandate to remove membership status, it would fall on the CC.
[22:14] <IdleOne> ikonia: I absolutely agree that was not how a member should behave.
[22:15] <ikonia> I'll forward it onto the CC
[22:17] <IdleOne> You can do that.
[22:24] <topyli> ikonia: you will do it? so we don't have to?
[22:27] <ikonia> no problem
[22:27] <topyli> ok, good