| === bazhang_ is now known as bazhang | ||
| === PriceChild is now known as Pricey | ||
| ubottu | FloodBot1 called the ops in #ubuntu-ops-monitor (mass join (1681 users, 6 overflows, 1687 limit)) | 08:31 |
|---|---|---|
| ubottu | FloodBot2 called the ops in #ubuntu-ops-monitor (mass join (1677 users, 6 overflows, 1683 limit)) | 08:31 |
| ikonia | !backtrack | 13:30 |
| ubottu | There are some Ubuntu derivatives that we cannot provide support for due to repository and software changes. Please consult their websites for more information. Examples: gNewSense (support in #gnewsense), Linux Mint (see !mint), kali-linux (#kali-linux), CrunchBang (support in #crunchbang), BackTrack (support in #backtrack-linux) | 13:30 |
| ikonia | yes, that needs updating | 13:30 |
| Blacklite_ | I'd like to repeal a ban from #ubuntu-offtopic | 14:02 |
| Blacklite_ | I'd like to repeal a ban from #ubuntu-offtopic. | 14:06 |
| Blacklite_ | can someone help me? | 14:06 |
| Pici | Blacklite_: Please hold on. someone will be with you shortly. | 14:06 |
| Blacklite_ | thank you. | 14:06 |
| Pici | I'm a bit busy on the other side of the screen here, so I can't take a look myself. | 14:06 |
| Blacklite_ | thanks for your reply, I know how hard you ops work. | 14:07 |
| LjL | Blacklite_, why were you swearing in the channel after you had been pointed to the guidelines a few times for that? | 14:08 |
| LjL | i need to understand whether you're willing to respect the rules that have been set for the channels. | 14:08 |
| Blacklite_ | I am not a good person. | 14:09 |
| Blacklite_ | But I am willing to respect the rules, provided it can be tolerated moderately | 14:10 |
| LjL | well, we don't judge people based on their inner essence. actually, we probably aren't supposed to judge people at all, but we are supposed to stop behavior that's not appropriate. so it's the behavior that matters, so whether you're good or bad in your heart, what matters to us is that you behave properly (this is not to say only superficial adherence to the rules is okay, though) | 14:11 |
| LjL | what do you mean tolerated moderately? | 14:11 |
| Blacklite_ | I mean, If I mess up, I don't want to be immediately banned again | 14:11 |
| Blacklite_ | cause that sucks. | 14:12 |
| LjL | Blacklite_, that will depend on ops' best judgement. given you have been warned before, and even kicked/banned before, it's quite likely that ops won't cut you more slack. err on the side of caution, perhaps? | 14:12 |
| Blacklite_ | good idea. | 14:13 |
| Blacklite_ | can you spare me from the almighty banhammer? | 14:14 |
| Blacklite_ | Please? | 14:17 |
| LjL | Blacklite_: here i am again. look, i can give you another chance, but 1) first i want you to read all there is in !etiquette, including the guidelines at length of course, and the CoC 2) if you "slip" again, I'm really not sure you won't get another swift ban. So, try not to. | 14:19 |
| LjL | !etiquette > Blacklite_ | 14:19 |
| ubottu | Blacklite_, please see my private message | 14:19 |
| Blacklite_ | thanks | 14:19 |
| LjL | Blacklite_: ask if you have any doubts about what you're reading, although i might have to go in a shortish while | 14:20 |
| Blacklite_ | can you unban me now? | 14:20 |
| LjL | Blacklite_: i will unban you now because i will have to go shortly, but, please read the whole thing FIRST and only THEN rejoin. we can't know when you're actually finished reading it, i guess - but do yourself a favor. | 14:21 |
| Blacklite_ | thanks. | 14:21 |
| Pricey | LjL: I certainly hope we're allowed to judge people. | 15:22 |
| LjL | Pricey: sure, i didn't really mean judging by itself, more like judging in our op hat. my reasoning is that our op hat should judge the behavior and not the person. then we're free to think whatever we want to think. | 16:21 |
| Pricey | "judge" seems to have become a really really dirty word. | 16:56 |
| IdleOne | I hate it when people tell me not to judge others. I'm like, screw you that is the only thing I'm good at. | 16:57 |
| IdleOne | :-) | 16:57 |
| Pricey | If we didn't make opinions based on behavior then we wouldn't get anywhere in life. | 16:57 |
| IdleOne | That is exactly the point LjL is making. We should judge on behaviour and not on our personal beliefs, least that is what I understood. | 16:58 |
| Pricey | "not judging" is how you get to things like default ban periods, blindly following rules because they're rules etc. etc. | 16:58 |
| Pricey | IdleOne: I'm not sure I understand the difference. | 16:58 |
| LjL | Pricey, my point is, as ops, in our little world, we *are* acting a bit like "judges" in a court of law in some ways. now, if a judge in a court of law got an *opinion* based on the indicted person's *behavior* (say, the chap picked his nose in court), do you think it would be right for that judge to convict the fellow of (say) murder? | 16:59 |
| IdleOne | well, I might believe that you are a jerk and ban you, but if you haven't done anything that shows me your a jerk... | 16:59 |
| genii | "I don't like you personally, here's a ban for a week" | 16:59 |
| LjL | no, he should keep his opinion of the man separated from the behavior he's *supposed* to be judging - whether or not he committed a murder | 16:59 |
| LjL | genii: right | 16:59 |
| IdleOne | btw I don't believe you area jerk. just an example | 16:59 |
| IdleOne | you're* | 16:59 |
| LjL | i never area jerk. | 17:00 |
| IdleOne | please add spaces and correct typos as required. | 17:00 |
| IdleOne | thank you. | 17:00 |
| genii | Hehe, area jerk | 17:00 |
| Pricey | LjL: I don't think you can separate the two as well as you suggest. | 17:00 |
| LjL | i think you should try. | 17:00 |
| Pricey | All we see on irc is behaviour. | 17:01 |
| IdleOne | not all, with experience we learn to read between the lines | 17:02 |
| IdleOne | Some of us are very good at seeing a problem before it happens | 17:02 |
| Pricey | But that's the same thing. | 17:02 |
| LjL | Pricey, again, what i'm saying is, if someone's behavior leads you to not have much respect for them (for instance, they show they have very different opinions from you on touchy subjects you find important), you probably shouldn't let that weigh in when you're deciding whether to ban them. unless the guidelines state that those opinions are not supposed to be expressed. | 17:04 |
| Pricey | This just sounds like being a nice person and common sense... | 17:05 |
| genii | There are some people whose views or behaviour in other channels I don't agree with... detest might not even be too strong a word sometimes... but when they are in an official channel and following the rules laid out there, I don't figure it's my job to find some small reason to boot them | 17:05 |
| IdleOne | sometimes we forget the common part in the common sense | 17:05 |
| genii | For instance, hateball | 17:05 |
| LjL | Pricey: when did i say it wasn't? | 17:05 |
| Pricey | LjL: Well earlier "we probably aren't supposed to judge people at all" has turned into "judge fairly" which I won't complain about. | 17:07 |
| LjL | Pricey: yet "judge fairly" wasn't quite what i meant, although what i meant might be part of it. what i meant was that, instead of judging the person and letting them decide whether there should be op action, we should be judging the specific behavior, and whether it warrants op action (and not other behaviors from the same person which the guidelines don't care about) | 17:08 |
| genii | LjL: As you know, I don't particularly like hateball's somewhat racist views, but when he is giving help in #kubuntu, he has as much a right to be there as anyone else, and he keeps his politics out of it and follows the channel rules, etc, so I don't have any particular issue with him in there. | 17:08 |
| LjL | genii: well for that matter hateball had long a #ubuntu-offtopic member and he never really let his views out, then at some point he got banned for some stupid reason and he decided he'd just frequent ##club alone instead. i suspect the same thing happened to a few people, good or bad... | 17:09 |
| LjL | had long been* | 17:09 |
| genii | Yes, it has it's fair share of outcasts :) | 17:11 |
| LjL | genii: maybe one day the banners will realize they're the outcasts after all | 17:13 |
| bazhang | and the lambs shall lie down with wolves, r-ramen | 17:18 |
| genii | bazhang: Now I want to eat noodles. | 17:47 |
| bazhang | you must first genuflect before FSM! | 17:48 |
| bazhang | <linuxearth> can one slowly-slowly help me out? | 18:03 |
| Pici | per | 18:03 |
| Pici | haps | 18:03 |
| Pici | haha | 18:03 |
| genii | And of course daftykins has to be a smart aleck :) | 18:03 |
| Myrtti | let me tell you a story of a game with PEGI7 rating and a player chat | 19:16 |
| Myrtti | it has a technical limitation of being able to send one message every 5 seconds | 19:16 |
| Myrtti | the only links you're allowed to post are links to the forum of the said game | 19:16 |
| Myrtti | it's considered flooding if you rrreeeeeeeeeepppppppppppppeeeeeeeeeeaatttt letters. | 19:17 |
| Myrtti | and it's REALLY BAD if you use caps. | 19:17 |
| Myrtti | there are several rooms for different functions of the game, and if you wander in the wrong one, you get told off just as you do for links, cussing, flooding and shouting. | 19:18 |
| Myrtti | same for different languages, for which there are too several rooms for | 19:19 |
| Myrtti | there's ridiculously long nicknames, and no tabcomplete. | 19:19 |
| h00k | oi :/ | 23:44 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!