[00:20] <Unit193> You may want to remove http://ubottu.com/ljl/apt/ from !offline as he had problems and couldn't make it for newer versions.
[01:37] <LjL> Unit193, i still exist, you can prod me about that :P
[01:38] <Unit193> LjL: Sorry, I remembered something about quantal+ that you couldn't figure out.
[01:38] <Unit193> Sorry about that.
[01:39] <LjL> Unit193: yeah, there was something wrong with the repositories, like some packages being listed twice or something, i don't remember exactly. i haven't looked at whether it's been fixed later though, so maybe it has
[01:39] <Unit193> LjL: Again, sorry about that, not trying to bump it out.
[01:40] <LjL> Unit193: no worries
[14:57] <jo-erlend> The IRC/TermsOfService page doesn't mention #Lubuntu, but I guess it should?
[15:59] <AlanBell> fixed :)
[15:59] <jo-erlend> :)
[15:59] <jo-erlend> AlanBell, Malinux has already joined. We're waiting for RoyK. I've asked him to join. Are you ready?
[15:59] <AlanBell> sure
[16:00] <jo-erlend> Ok, so we're all here. Since I asked for this, I guess it makes sense if I start?
[16:01] <AlanBell> sure, that would be great jo-erlend
[16:01] <Malinux> I am ready too
[16:01] <RoyK> go on
[16:01] <jo-erlend> Let me first say that RoyK is a very valued member of our LoCo. That's not in question at all. He's been very helpful and has lots of knowledge.
[16:02] <jo-erlend> There's been a lot of offtopic chatter in #Ubuntu-no, which is our main LoCo channel. In order to reduce that noise, RoyK tok initiative to open #Ubuntu-no-offtopic. This is a very good idea, and I've supported that all along.
[16:03] <jo-erlend> RoyK has also been made a founder in #Ubuntu-no a while ago, with Malinux, Simira and myself as co-founders.
[16:04] <jo-erlend> yesterday, however, there was an incident where RoyK started using very bad language towards Malinux because of some personal issue. I don't think the cause of that situation is relevant to us, since it's not been in any of Ubuntus channels or communities otherwise.
[16:05] <RoyK> jo-erlend: a single incident and you removed my channel rights, goodie
[16:05] <jo-erlend> RoyK also kicked Malinux several times, using "bitch" as a reason, threatened to ban her for no reason.
[16:05] <RoyK> not several, twice
[16:06] <RoyK> I was deeply upset
[16:06] <RoyK> it won't happen again, she's on the ignore list now
[16:06] <jo-erlend> I've told RoyK several times before that we don't kick people because of disagreements or personal conflicts, but that we try to keep a nice and friendly tone. Yesterday, I found it necessary to remove RoyK from the Founder-list and from access lists as it was about to turn into an "ops-war".
[16:06] <RoyK> jo-erlend: no, you have not
[16:06] <jo-erlend> I have logs.
[16:06] <RoyK> jo-erlend: if you can document that, please do
[16:07] <RoyK> jo-erlend: you never warned me before you removed me as a founder (and op)
[16:07] <RoyK> jo-erlend: it was silent removal
[16:07] <RoyK> jo-erlend: and you have never before talked to me about kicking people who misbehave
[16:08] <AlanBell> ok, thanks RoyK and jo-erlend
[16:08] <AlanBell> Malinux: what is your perspective on it?
[16:08] <jo-erlend> That is true. I did that because of the way you were acting. When I told you about Ubuntu Code of Conduct, you asked if I had taken my pills, and asked if I was an Ubuntu Nazi, among other things. I was concerned that you might kill the channel and cause even more conflict.
[16:08] <RoyK> jo-erlend: the ones I've given a kick are mathias, who also Malinux has given a kick, and lolcat, for one incident
[16:09] <Malinux> personal conflicts should be outside of ubuntu and it's misbehaviour of op-rights to kick someone from ubuntu-no if there is an external conflict going on
[16:09] <RoyK> Malinux: of course, but removing my ops from the channel because of a single incident is rather harsh
[16:10] <RoyK> btw, it's a wee bit hard to sort out personal conflicts when one part doesn't reply at all :P
[16:10] <RoyK> but then, let's leave that for later
[16:10] <Malinux> I was kicked twice for not answering RoyKs personal attacks when he called me a bitch for several hours
[16:11] <RoyK> uh
[16:11] <RoyK> I think ms Malinux is overstating things here
[16:11] <RoyK> I didn't spend hours calling her a bitch, I did it once
[16:11] <AlanBell> which is more than zero, which would be a better number
[16:11] <RoyK> AlanBell: we all make mistakes
[16:12] <Malinux> bitch or how to translate sutrefitte. Dosen't matter if it was bitch og sutrefitte or whatever. It was bad language against me
[16:12] <jo-erlend> Simira has been Founder of #Ubuntu-no since at least 2005. I've been for a few years. I've never seen this kind of behaviour in #Ubuntu-no before. What I want to accomplish, is two-fold: 1) that the LoCo contact has ability to admin as many of Ubuntu Norways resources as possible, in order to make it easier to step down gently. 2) To have stable governance.
[16:12] <RoyK> and I'm sorry, Malinux, that I called you such a name
[16:12] <jo-erlend> RoyK, you did spend hours calling her a bitch, which was one of the more innocent things you said...
[16:13] <RoyK> jo-erlend: nope
[16:14] <RoyK> hey, guys, I was upset last night, it was a single incident, I regret it, but a general takeover is not the way to go
[16:14] <jo-erlend> From my logs, it started at 19:00 UTC and you're still on it at 23:00UTC.
[16:14] <ikonia> RoyK: it's not a single incident though
[16:14] <RoyK> ikonia: it is
[16:14] <ikonia> RoyK: I've had to speak to you MANY times about your language/attitude towards people in #ubuntu-server
[16:15] <jo-erlend> RoyK, it's not about the conflict. It's how you reacted to it. Using bans, kicks, etc, proves you're not suited as a chanop in these channels.
[16:15] <ikonia> you've had various short bans/mutes for it
[16:15] <RoyK> ikonia: as in for a year ago or so?
[16:15] <Malinux> the point is. such behavoiur is unacceptable for an channeloperator
[16:15] <RoyK> ikonia: people change
[16:15] <AlanBell> does anyone else have any questions or comments about this topic?
[16:15] <AlanBell> anyone who hasn't yet spoken I mean
[16:15] <ikonia> RoyK: yes, they do and can change, I fully agree, but this is true to form.
[16:17] <RoyK> ikonia: when was it I was told to not use foul language at the oter channel?
[16:18] <AlanBell> I really don't want to drag up stuff from other channels and times, it is interesting that previous conflict exists, but beyond that I don't want to go into details
[16:18] <RoyK> Malinux: your opinions should be weighted, you and I have some sort of conflict, and you want to hurt me
[16:19] <jo-erlend> I would also like to add that RoyK several times made it clear that he actively did not want #Ubuntu-no-offtopic to adhere to the Ubuntu Code of Conduct. I explained that this was contrary to the terms of use for all channels in the Ubuntu name space. I provided links so that he could read up on those rules, but he ignored that and pretty much told me to mind my business.
[16:19] <RoyK> AlanBell: as Malinux says, I may be a bad op a day or three during the year, but listening to her, after she found I was no friend of hers (for no obvious reason) maks it hard to weight her sayings too much
[16:19] <Malinux> I haven't said anything and just ignored him because of this behavoiur
[16:19] <AlanBell> so the reason we have operator access in channels in general is to provide a hostile environment to trolls, spammers and other people who want to disrupt what is going on, whilst providing a welcoming safe space for people who want to be constructive
[16:19] <jo-erlend> If the access lists for #Ubuntu-no-offtopic is made to be identical to that of #Ubuntu-no, I think the situation will improve.
[16:19] <RoyK> Malinux: wtf?
[16:19] <RoyK> Malinux: behaviour? asking you why aren't you answering?
[16:20] <AlanBell> it is pretty clear that everyone involved should be in the welcoming safe space side of the line
[16:21] <RoyK> Malinux: we ate dinner a week ago or so, it was nice, but then, you just refused to reply to anything, makes things hard to understand
[16:21] <RoyK> two weeks, perhaps
[16:22] <RoyK> AlanBell: please see this as a conflict between me an Malinux and refuse to scrub me from the ACLs
[16:22] <jo-erlend> If an op gets angry and abuses his or her privileges, that's bad, but it's a short-term situation that can be fixed by the founder(s). However, when a founder abuses his or her position, we end up in situations like these. That's even worse.
[16:22] <RoyK> jo-erlend: it was a SINGLE INCIDENT
[16:23] <jo-erlend> RoyK, well.. How do we know that another single incident doesn't compel you to delete the founders list and shut down the channel? This is not about you as a person or as a member of the community, but it is about your ability to act properly as a channel admin.
[16:23] <RoyK> jo-erlend: that won't happen, sir
[16:24] <RoyK> jo-erlend: you're overreacting, as part of Malinux's
[16:24] <Malinux> RoyK: do you think this kind of behavoiur is acceptable because someone doesn't answer you on irc, facebook, sms and phone?
[16:24] <jo-erlend> it won't happen if Simira and I are founders of #Ubuntu-no-offtopic. We know that from many years of experience.
[16:24] <ikonia> RoyK: out of interest, would it be worth while leaving you on the access list but moving ownership to the ubuntu-no owners ?
[16:24] <Malinux> isn't that overreacting?
[16:24] <ikonia> RoyK: they are well known and could control the channel, thus assist you if any conflict comes up again ?
[16:24] <ikonia> sort of a middle ground ?
[16:25] <RoyK> I don't ned +F
[16:25] <RoyK> but I hate people taking over a channel
[16:26] <AlanBell> more importantly, all ops are there to make it a safe and welcoming space for everyone who wants to be involved
[16:26] <RoyK> I do a lot of good work in those channels, and I should be respected for that
[16:26] <jo-erlend> and you are..
[16:26] <ikonia> RoyK: no-one said you don't assist well, quite the opposite
[16:27] <ikonia> but that doesn't mean you can do what you want - as has been discussed many times
[16:27] <RoyK> ikonia: I have abused my rights once, yesterday
[16:27] <RoyK> after this conflict with Malinux
[16:28] <RoyK> I hope she calls for a rest of it one day
[16:28] <ikonia> RoyK: fully accept that, but as I've said, the "I'll do what I want" or "say what I want" approach is not uncommon, which is why I suggested a middle ground
[16:28] <jo-erlend> We've also always had a culture where we don't stay opped, but only gain privileges when something specific needs to be done. Being an op is not supposed to be a status symbol of any kind. It's a responsibility, not a badge.
[16:28] <AlanBell> if the conflict with Malinux is going to mean you are unable to commit to making it a welcoming space for everyone including Malinux, then that will be a problem
[16:29] <RoyK> I'm welcoming her
[16:29] <RoyK> even if she isn't answering that
[16:29] <Malinux> I don't feeling very welcome when being called a bithc for hours :)
[16:29] <RoyK> "for hours"
[16:30] <RoyK> I feel ms Malinux has painted the devil on the walls for this incident
[16:31] <jo-erlend> she hasn't. Actually, I was the one who went to her in order to see if I could somehow help to reduce the conflict.
[16:31] <jo-erlend> she didn't respond in any way to your personal attacks.
[16:31] <jo-erlend> at least, not to me or in any of our channels.
[16:32] <Malinux> I haven't chatted with him in private either
[16:32] <RoyK> perhaps it's easier to listen to a lady in her depths than listening to what's true
[16:32] <ikonia> RoyK: the channel is logged
[16:32] <AlanBell> whut
[16:32] <ikonia> RoyK: so it's easy to see what happened,
[16:34] <jo-erlend> at one point, Malinux asked about the current state of saucy, it being the last release before the next LTS. RoyK responded that if she asked him about things without being his friend, she would be kicked out of the channel. I understand that this is a special situation and all that, but it tells me RoyK can't be trusted with +F and I've suggested that at least we wait a while before reconsidering +o.
[16:35] <RoyK> ikonia: I checked, I kicked Malinux once with the word "bitch". that word hasn't been used any other places
[16:35] <ikonia> RoyK: ok, so there is a miss-understanding here, so perhaps pointing that out rather than attacking the issue because Malinux is a lady is a better approach
[16:35] <RoyK> Malinux: so being called a "bitch" for hours, is highly overrated
[16:36] <ikonia> RoyK: no problem, so maybe it's not the exact word "bitch" but feeling negative comments for hours is the issue, it's easy to clear up
[16:36] <Tm_T> is this discussion now stuck to one incident or is the intention to discuss the bigger picture?
[16:36] <ikonia> I think picking the detail apart won't change much, if anything it's making it look worse.
[16:37] <Malinux> I was called bitch and sutrefitte (whinigbitch)
[16:37] <RoyK> ikonia: no, we had a wee argument around 2100, and then something else happened at around midnight, at which time I did the kick
[16:37] <jo-erlend> I agree, because actually, "bitch" was not among the worst things that were said.
[16:37] <AlanBell> yeah, I want to look forward rather than backwards, and I am not getting a good feeling about RoyK's ability to regulate a welcoming environment at the moment
[16:38] <RoyK> ok, please
[16:38] <RoyK> I made a mistake last night
[16:39] <Malinux> a mistake who lasted for several hours
[16:39] <RoyK> I apologize, to Malinux and to whomever else
[16:39] <RoyK> Malinux: no, it was two incidents, one at nine, one at twelve, check the logs
[16:40] <jo-erlend> you know, removing you as a chanop and founder won't be punishment, but a necessary step in order to create a stable and safe environment.
[16:40] <RoyK> as if
[16:40] <Malinux> jo-erlend: agreed
[16:40] <RoyK> yeah, let Malinux have the word, she's always right
[16:41] <Malinux> this behaviour right now ilustrates jo-erlend's and ikonia's point
[16:41] <jo-erlend> and as I've said before, I'm not saying you can't regain chanop status in time, but I would rather not have you as founder and I think you need some time to put this episode behind you before we reconsider chanopping you.
[16:42] <AlanBell> ok, jo-erlend Malinux, RoyK thanks very much for coming to discuss this, I have to go cook dinner for the kids now, I will discuss this all with the other members of the IRCC later and we will decide on what actions to take
[16:42] <AlanBell> thanks once again
[16:43] <jo-erlend> thank you.
[16:43] <Malinux> oki. thanks for your time AlanBell
[23:07] <lolcat> Doh
[23:07] <lolcat> Did I miss the ubunut-no drama here earlier?