[04:01] <Corey> Enough of dmitry's "faulty keyboard" for one night.
[08:39] <DJones> Hmmh, scrollbac has been joining/quitting the channel multiple times for a number of days with multiple nicks, mostly guest****, just saw this 09:37 < guest4129> thunder12121 you can login from http://scrollback.io/
[08:39] <DJones> Sounds like scrollback.io is a web interface
[08:40] <DJones> With a very unstable connection
[08:43] <Tm_T> DJones: hmmm, kind of a webchat?
[08:44] <DJones> Looking at the website, it seems sort of, but not quite
[08:46] <DJones> Website also shows live history of whats going on the #ubuntu channel on its front page
[08:47] <DJones> I'm not sure how that sits with the public logging of the channel and the decisions made for IRCAnswers & IRSeek bots
[08:47] <DJones> Maybe something for the IRCC to think about
[08:49] <DJones> In a way, it possibly gives people a way round bans if they find out about it, in that it cloaks ip's to the scrollback.io's
[08:51] <Myrtti> I have been wondering about that
[08:52] <DJones> You just click on the live channel at the bottom and it auto joins you to #ubuntu
[08:52] <Myrtti> no I think it autojoins on page load
[08:52] <Myrtti> 8601 was mee
[08:53] <DJones> Just trying, only seemed to join when I clicked on the feed
[08:53] <DJones> 2334 was my join
[08:54] <DJones> I couldn't spot any specific contact details for the people running the website
[08:56] <DJones> Although looking at the nicks using the service, one is Aravind I'm sure I've seen that nick fairly regularly as a #u user
[08:56] <DJones> But could just be a coincidence
[08:58] <tomaw> hrm, that looks a bit nasty
[08:59] <tomaw> the scrollback feature is a bit iffy
[08:59] <Myrtti> realname ban might work
[08:59] <Myrtti> but don't know if something else should be done too
[08:59] <Myrtti> the lack of contact details is a bit nasty
[09:01] <tomaw> hostname ban is enough
[09:01] <DJones> Pretty much all the connections show Guest1234!~scrollbac@ec2 etc, or occasionally @x.x.x.x ip
[09:03] <DJones> Couldn't find any way to change the nick of the user joining
[09:11] <Myrtti> yeah, you can change it, it just disconnects then
[09:11] <Myrtti> I think the disconnects probably are a design feature of somekind
[09:13] <DJones> Looking at github page, the commits are done by aravind/harish/sankha93/mengwong The only nick that jumps out is aravind
[12:40] <Pici> really?
[12:40] <bazhang> bwhaha
[12:40] <bazhang> that is my second favorite after "seriously?"
[12:41] <bazhang> I watch *way* too much Supernatural
[12:41] <Pici> :D
[14:49] <bazhang> cinnamon is in the repos? yegads
[16:41] <genii-around> In universe, apparently
[16:42] <Myrtti> well atleast MATE isn't
[16:43] <Myrtti> (please, tell me it isn't)
[16:45] <genii-around> apt-cache search   tells me it isn't
[16:54] <LjL> i remember a time when what you had in your repositories wasn't a political statement
[16:55] <Myrtti> I have no big issue with cinnamon being there
[16:55] <Myrtti> mate makes me uneasy
[16:56] <genii-around> LjL: I dunno. Like, firefox vs iceweasel has been going on a long time.
[16:58] <LjL> genii-around: ah well, when legal issues get involved, sure
[16:58] <LjL> genii-around: also, pretty sure GNOME vs KDE was hot for quite some time, but i wouldn't know because i was using WindowMaker
[16:59] <genii-around> Heh :)
[16:59] <bazhang> MINT and their codecs for everything out of the box would not pass muster
[17:00] <LjL> muster?
[17:00] <bazhang> pass licensing issues examination
[17:01] <LjL> ah
[17:01] <bazhang> pass muster is a term from the military originally
[17:02] <LjL> the WP article says some drivers are not included due to licensing issues, so maybe they're not deaf to this issue
 Can you help me please. I forget my pass root
 then aight
[18:01] <DJones> What ip did lars connect from was it a .de address?
[18:02] <bazhang> * [Lars1] (~lars@pD9FFD8EA.dip0.t-ipconnect.de): purple
[18:02] <bazhang> oh yeah
[18:02] <bazhang> the dip0.t
[18:03] <DJones> The problem lars looks to be t-dialin.net
[18:04] <bazhang> could well be
[18:04] <DJones> I'm sure I can remember another lars* nick from a .de host that was a coc compliant user
[18:05] <bazhang> perhaps he and his cousins/brothers/roommates/neighbors got an upgrade
[18:05] <DJones> From memory, I'm pretty sure it was a different user
[18:07] <DJones> Thats probably proven given that they have been connected longer that 10 seconds without causing a problem
[18:07] <bazhang> heh yeah
[18:37] <seronis> i've seen a number of people pointlessly get chewed out for doing nick changes for away status.  is anyone offering an alternative means of showing your status?  if not complaining is pointless as some people need the ability to show this information
[18:37] <seronis> and anyone NOT wanting to see it can configure their client to ignore it
[18:37] <jbroome> you don't
[18:38] <jbroome> You do /away lunch  and someone can /whois you and see the away msg
[18:38] <seronis> and.. people who dont want to see nick changes can hide them.   next ?
[18:38] <DJones> !away
[18:38] <seronis> its not being used in channels.. its being used in Freenode.   next?
[18:40] <DJones> seronis: One of the reasons in the Ubuntu channels is that if all 1600 users used it evry time they went away, it would add to the non support comments
[18:41] <seronis> if you dont want to see it,..  you HIDE it via your own client options.  your argument is the same as saying join/part msgs are spam and people should never join the channel (or leave once there)
[18:41] <DJones> If you hide joins/quits/parts as with most IRC clients, nick changes are still shown
[18:42] <jbroome> i'm not as irritated with nick changes for away as the horrible announce scripts
[18:42] <seronis> and?  someone who doesnt want to see them can still use a client that hides them.
[18:42] <seronis> jbroome:  i agree with that.  spam is spam.  a nick change is not spam
[18:42] <jbroome> next?
[18:43] <seronis> and to me its idiocy to chew people out for a single nickchange
[18:44] <seronis> which i've seen done several times the past month (all such incidents were polite.. but still idiotic)
[18:47] <DJones> Its not something that gets called that often, in general its more for the user changing nick half a dozen times in a few minutes, I don't think many people would call it for an occasional away/sleep nick change
[18:48] <DJones> Looking at my lastlog, I can only see it once in the last 24 hours
[18:48] <seronis> nope.  its been pointed out on the very first instance of use.  thus my annoyance at the policy.  if it was only enforced when reasonable (for spammed nick changes) it would be another issue
[18:48] <knome> i'm pretty sure seronis is speaking about me
[18:48] <seronis> and i also said each time i saw it it was never RUDE.
[18:49] <knome> tbh, i don't think there's much idea to enforce a rule after you've done it "several times"
[18:49] <knome> changing a nick does produce unneeded lines on the channel
[18:49] <seronis> it produces zero lines if you hide them
[18:49] <seronis> same as join/part msgs
[18:49] <knome> the fact that there is a designed /away feature only makes it more annoying
[18:50] <knome> seronis, i can't hide nick changes/join/part/quit if i'm opping a channel. i need to know what's going on.
[18:50] <seronis> knome:  but you can redirect them to a seperate window to view only as needed for OPing
[18:51] <seronis> i have all highlights redirected with a script like that and i've only been on here 3 weeks
[18:51] <knome> seronis, yes, or i can tell the user not to use awaynicks.
[18:51] <seronis> but there is no legitimate reason to tell them that
[18:51] <seronis> they are doing nothing wrong
[18:51] <jbroome> how is this still going
[18:52] <seronis> jbroome: rule lacks any intelligent purpose.  thats how
[18:52] <knome> seronis, they are noisy. the channel guidelines tell not to use public away messages (and that includes away nicks)
[18:52] <knome> seronis, you agree to the guidelines when you join the channel.
[18:53] <knome> seronis, if you aren't fine with them, you should not join the channels.
[18:53] <seronis> using nick changes has nothing to do with the channel.  it is allowed at the server level
[18:53] <seronis> a person is responsible for properly configuring their own client
[18:53] <knome> seronis, ok, this is leading nowhere. is there something else you need help with?
[18:55] <seronis> i'll stick with the ruling given by DJones.  Its something only meant to be enforced when its an issue of spam
[18:55] <knome> !guidelines | seronis
[18:56] <knome> seronis, if you are unhappy with the guidelines and/or the policy being enforced on any channel(s), you are free to leave the(se) channel(s).
[18:57] <seronis> and im also free to speak my mnind and get the policies changed when appropriate. =-)
[18:57] <seronis> which is why im in -here- mentioning this and not in #xubuntu
[18:57] <seronis> and 2 out of 3 OPs who spoke up seem to think that the guideline in this case is meant purely for issues of nick spam
[18:58] <knome> seronis, you can raise it to the IRCC council if you disagree
[18:58] <knome> *IRC council or IRCC
[19:04] <LjL> uhm, something can't be "allowed at the server level" meaning that channels *have to* allow it while you're in them.
[19:05] <LjL> there might be no "server level" rule about away nicks, but there is an Ubuntu rule, which is supposed to be respected while in Ubuntu channels.
[19:06] <seronis> LjL:  the people in question are not sending ANYTHING to the channel.  they are sending a command to the server.
[19:06] <seronis> if the server is sending you info you dont want to see its up to you to configure your client to hide it
[19:06] <seronis> its not MY responsibility to hide  join/part msgs on your client if you dont like them.  its your job
[19:06] <seronis> you can just as easily hide nick change messages
[19:07] <knome> seronis, it's your responsibility to respect the guidelines which you are agreeing on when joining the channel
[19:07] <Unit193> The same thing could be said about profanity, if you don't like it you can just as easily remove the message, or with trigger.pl change the word.
[19:07] <LjL> you're confusing technical matters with matters of policy i think, seronis
[19:07] <IdleOne> seronis: You do have a right to speak your mind. I heard a really great saying about peoples rights last week that made things very clear in my mind at least. I'll share it with you "Your right to swing a fist ends at the tip of my noes."
[19:08] <LjL> the fact that the protocol makes it so that away nicks don't technically "send anything" to the channel has nothing to do with what the rules about them are.
[19:08] <Myrtti> can't decide if typo or intentional
[19:08] <knome> Myrtti, :)
[19:09] <seronis> LjL: please logically explain the difference between having a rule against nick changes.. and having a rule against  join/part msgs ?
[19:10] <seronis> no hypotheticals.  no semmantics.  use a bit of logic and state reasonably why one is the fault of the user and one is the fault of the client
[19:10] <knome> seronis, join/part message is compulsory, using an away nick is optional.
[19:10] <seronis> false.  i cant  'not' send a join/part message when i enter or leave a channel
[19:10] <seronis> it is equally compulsory
[19:10] <IdleOne> seronis: join part message are sent to the client by the server, the client can disable those. nick changes are sent by the user via the server.
[19:11] <LjL> seronis, whether or not you send a quit message, a line gets sent and usually shown to the channel
[19:11] <LjL> there is no such thing as a join message that i know of
[19:11] <seronis> LjL:  and its the responsibility of the user to configure their own client to show or hide join/part msgs
[19:11] <seronis> same thing with nick changes
[19:11] <Myrtti> I sense a circular discussion where neither side is budging. I'll go get the popcorn.
[19:11] <seronis> Myrtti:  only real.  microwave stuff smells like cancer
[19:12] <IdleOne> wrong, it is the responsibility of the user to follow the guidelines set by the channel owners/ops
[19:12] <knome> i agree with Myrtti.
[19:12] <knome> seronis, if you really want to, raise this issue for the IRCC to decide.
[19:13] <knome> seronis, now, if you don't need further assistance, please leave this channel as we have a no-idle policy here.
[19:16] <seronis> no need to do that (yet).  i'll just bring the issue up here for discussion as the matter becomes relevant, aka when someone gets pointlessly chewed out for single uses of nick changes
[19:16] <seronis> also.. id prefer to idle.  and when i first /join'd in here i read  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/Guidelines  which i assume is the rules for discussions in here.  there is no rule against idling
[19:17] <knome> seronis, yes there is. please read the topic.
[19:17] <Myrtti> actually
[19:17] <genii-around> /topic
[19:17] <LjL> seronis: the /topic of this channel is part of the rules.
[19:17] <jbroome> this isn't an idling channel
[19:17] <knome> seronis, also, this channel isn't really the right place to do that. if you think it's necessary to change the policy, contact the IRCC
[19:18] <knome> !appeal | seronis
[19:18] <IdleOne> You have brought it up here, and you were told what the ops position is. if you want to continue you need to contact the IRCC
[19:19] <knome> seronis, you've now had 40 minutes with several people in this channel (counting up to >100 minutes of people's time for your issue); if you think it's not fair that we ask you to leave now, please tell that to the IRCC too
[19:19] <knome> oops.
[19:19] <Myrtti> or join in #ubuntu-irc and continue the discussion there
[19:19] <Myrtti> or just not continue it.
[23:31] <bazhang> @mark #xubuntu xubuntu244 (5714e24b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.87.20.226.75)  foul language, abusive