 its not needed t diagnose the issue, fphishing really...
[08:26] <bazhang> AUGH
 Trudko: you can discuss stuff like the thing you are interested in, in #ubuntu-offtopic or ##club-ubuntu
[14:56] <bazhang> blech
[14:57] <k1l> the club ubuntu channel dies forward to another channel
[14:57] <bazhang> which one
[14:58] <k1l> *does
[14:58] <k1l> ##club-nomicon
[14:58] <bazhang> ok
[14:58] <bazhang> hahaha
 hexchat is rubbish
[15:15] <bazhang> rly
[15:15] <IdleOne> but xchat is awesome
[15:16] <IdleOne> heh
[15:19] <IdleOne> keep an eye on bananalinux, he tends to wander off topic
[15:20] <bazhang> and is not very knowledgable at all
[15:21] <IdleOne> that too
[15:53] <ikonia> hello User328
[17:20] <k1l> lol, botwars? :)
[17:23] <IdleOne> yup
[17:31] <DJones> Heh, unopaste replies to piracte searchs 18:29 <@unopaste> baka: (search <word>) -- Searches for <word> in the current configuration variables.
 @search Reach for Infinity
[17:32] <k1l> that was the line
[17:44] <DJones> Must admit, it looks like something I'd read
[17:53] <Pici> idealy unopaste shouldn't respond to commands from unauthorized users.
[17:53] <Pici> just like ubottu
[17:53] <k1l> Pici: or not int that channels
[20:44] <k1l> @mark #ubuntu saiberz insulting nonsense
[20:44] <Pici> fyi, lusers is a valid IRC command.
[20:46] <k1l> Pici: oh well. i read losers in there
[21:41] <adamcunnington> Voice!
[21:42] <adamcunnington> oh awesome, was expecting undeliverable
[21:42] <ikonia> adamcunnington: ok, so you've just said you'll be quiet for 15 minutes as k1l requested
[21:42] <ikonia> so you join this channel and demand voice - that's not really "being quiet" for 15 minutes is it
[21:42] <adamcunnington> I wasn't demanding
[21:42] <adamcunnington> read my comment above
[21:42] <adamcunnington> assumed the flag would be active across all channels - was just testing, i'll use the word "test" next time, my bad
[21:42] <ikonia> ok, well it's still not the "wait quietly" for 15 minutes
[21:43] <rohan> hi ops -- what's with the blitzkrieg in the #ubuntu channel? k1l just silenced a guy who was making a point.. ikonia just banned someone who made a joke
[21:44] <adamcunnington> ikonia: i understand the decision made in #ubuntu but you are not a god and you won't mother me in a different channel by asking me to "wait quietly", i'm not a child.
[21:44] <ikonia> rohan: I asked 2 times to stop comment on it - he continued with jokes that are offensive
[21:44] <adamcunnington> Is there a higher ubuntu op power that I can discuss this with?
[21:44] <ikonia> so I banned him to stop it and talk to him offline
[21:44] <ikonia> I've not asked you to do anything
[21:44] <ikonia> adamcunnington: I didn't ask you to wait quietly, you said you would after talking with k1l
[21:44] <rohan> completely agree with adamcunnington here -- silencing him was just overusing the +o imo
[21:45] <adamcunnington> That's a different channel - surely the entire point of this channel is to discuss such things
[21:45] <adamcunnington> "This channel is for operator/abuse questions in the IRC Team domain only"
[21:45] <k1l> adamcunnington: i told you that you got a 15min calm down mute after you diodn not stop making a drama in #ubuntu
[21:45] <ikonia> adamcunnington: sure it is, welcome to discuss anything
[21:45] <ikonia> which means discussing not "VOICE!"
[21:45] <rohan> k1l: you should have silenced the person who provoked the drama too, then
[21:45] <k1l> there is no need to get other users to make trouble in #ubuntu just because you want to go again for that drama
[21:45] <adamcunnington> k1l: i wasn't making a drama - you may wish to pop down to the theatre. I responded to the provokation
[21:46] <adamcunnington> rohan: thanks - but i don't think you'll end up helping yourself here, i'll just wait quietly and then all will be good as new
[21:46] <k1l> the "provokation" was not a provokation at all and the user already said sorry for that and, other than you, did stop with that drama that is spoiling the support channel
[21:46] <adamcunnington> k1l: my last comment was being typed whilst he was apologising so i wasn't continuing it in the light that you have read it
[21:47] <rohan> ikonia: sorry, i don't understand what about "rohan: Don't argue with the dictators!" was particularly offensive
[21:47] <adamcunnington> k1l: if you don't think "i don't know anyone would be clueless enough to not know etc." is provocation, then you definitely must think what i said was equally "mild"
[21:47] <ikonia> calling people dictators is pretty offensive
[21:48] <k1l> rohan: i dont think giving me second worldwar nazi names is helping in here anyway. so please stop that
[21:48] <rohan> ikonia: i see people using SABDFL all the time
[21:48] <adamcunnington> :S think you need to see the slightly humorous side of it, it wasn't said in an offensive manor, it was a mild gest which reflected the nature of the op behaviour
[21:48] <ikonia> rohan: SABDFL ?
[21:48] <rohan> k1l: being called a dictator has *nothing* to do with second world war or Nazism
[21:48] <adamcunnington> k1l: second worldwar nazi names? dictator is a word to describe a particular position, a nazi leader may have been a type of dictator but they're 2 quite separate things
[21:48] <ikonia> adamcunnington: how about if I said "do as you are told worthless scum"
[21:49] <rohan> k1l: stop being a baby and using your mod power just because you have it
[21:49] <adamcunnington> ikonia: that's quite different
[21:49] <ikonia> adamcunnington: no it's not,
[21:49] <adamcunnington> ikonia: please elaborate
[21:49] <adamcunnington> using logic to justify
[21:49] <adamcunnington> that's clearly your view of a dictator - which may ironically be more offensive than calling someone a dictator!
[21:49] <k1l> rohan: ok enough of you. you are now banned from #ubuntu come back in 1 week when you want that ban to be lifted.
[21:49] <ikonia> you are calling me an offensive name for an oppessor, I am calling you an offensive term for someone under he ompressor
[21:50] <adamcunnington> not all dictators are oppressors
[21:50] <adamcunnington> a dictator is just someone who dictates
[21:50] <rohan> k1l: there, more evidence of you being a total douchebag jerk. i did *nothing* in #ubuntu
[21:50] <ikonia> adamcunnington: a fair point, but it wasn't really meant that way
[21:50] <rohan> k1l: this is exactly what a dictator does, and if rustles your german ex-nazi jimmies, it's your problem -- don't take it out on people in IRC channels
[21:50] <ikonia> and again - I'd asked 2 times to STOP with the comments
[21:50] <k1l> rohan: enough of that insulting. that is not making your ban be lifted.
[21:50] <adamcunnington> ikonia: well you didn't wait to find out :| it was clearly meant in jest no matter how different people may interpret it
[21:51] <ikonia> so other wording would have resulted in the same
[21:51] <rohan> ikonia: what is this, bootcamp? you asked twice and people should just listen to you?
[21:51] <ikonia> adamcunnington: yes, and I'd asked 2 times already for the jokes/comments to stop
[21:51] <ikonia> rohan: yes, they should
[21:51] <rohan> k1l: you are the one who is being insulting -- i did nothing in #ubuntu, and yet i am banned because you decide to take offence over nothing
[21:51] <rohan> ikonia: sorry, irc does not work that way.
[21:51] <ikonia> the channels topic is clear, and asking to keep to it is not unreasonable
[21:51] <adamcunnington> ikonia: fine, tbh i don't even know why i'm arguing now - you banning someone else isn't my problem, i'd just appreciate voice back as had a nautilus related question
[21:51] <k1l> adamcunnington: i am sorry, but i dont see how you will behave to the guidelines after all that drama.
[21:51] <rohan> ikonia, k1l -- both of you really need to grow up. IRC was around much before you kids came in and ruined it
[21:52] <rohan> if you want to be so silly, go work on Yahoo! Answers forums
[21:52] <ikonia> no-one is being silly
[21:52] <k1l> rohan: its enough. please come back in a week if you want the ban to be lifted
[21:52] <ikonia> infact the request was for the sillyness to stop
[21:52] <adamcunnington> k1l: "after all that drama" come on now :|
[21:52] <rohan> ikonia: why can't people crack jokes in a channel? what is your problem if people want to be funny?
[21:52] <ikonia> because it's not a jokes channel
[21:52] <ikonia> it's a busy support channel
[21:53] <rohan> i have been on #ubuntu for ages, and a year or so back, the channel was not this uptight
[21:53] <ikonia> however i'll step away as I'm clouding the coversation, too many cooks
[21:53] <adamcunnington> 17 minutes have passed, please can i have voice back now
[21:53] <adamcunnington> ikonia: ah, we see "too many captains of the boat" where i'm from
[21:53] <rohan> k1l: i don't give a shit about your stupid ban, you're obviously someone with nothing better to do than overuse your moderator powers
[21:53] <rohan> there HAS to be some kind of accountability for this behaviour
[21:53] <rohan> what about your whole ubuntu code of conduct?
[21:53] <rohan> does it say you can insult people for not listening to you?
[21:54] <rohan> k1l: you have been nothing but unreasonable and inconsiderate, and you banned me over doing *nothing* in #ubuntu?!
[21:54] <k1l> adamcunnington: this right now is the reason i asked you to stop that attitude and drama right away. and not let you make your point. if you need support ask in the ubuntuforums or askubuntu in the meantime. i will lift the mute tomorrow
[21:55] <adamcunnington> k1l: what's changed? We're here talking about your decision which is fair and the purpose of this channel, i will cause no further "drama" in #ubuntu and you'd have reason to remove me if i did, please just let me return to that channel so i can ask my question
[21:55] <rohan> is there someone with more consideration than you, k1l ? surely you can't be the final judge over what happens in #ubuntu
[21:55] <k1l> rohan: you proved  with your remarks in #ubuntu and the whole load of insults in here that you dont want to stick to the guidelines or CoC at all. come back in a week to talk about that ban
[21:56] <rohan> k1l: nothing about my comments in #ubuntu was offensive. NOTHING i said here was insulting, except when you did something provocative without any rhyme or reason
[21:56] <k1l> adamcunnington: justifying other users insults is in no way working with the !guidelines or the CodeofConduct.
[21:57] <adamcunnington> k1l: hmm? when did i justify other users insults?
[21:57] <rohan> k1l: and again, your ban means nothing to me, except that your actions are obviously unchecked
[21:57] <adamcunnington> k1l: oh i see!
[21:57] <adamcunnington> k1l: ok well in that case, i may as well say my piece seeing as you're being unreasonable
[21:57] <adamcunnington> i'd like to know who's more senior than you in #ubuntu-ops so i can make a reasoned defence
[21:58] <k1l> rohan: my job is not to be insulted by you. live with the reactions to your actions. come back in one week to talk about your ban
[21:58] <adamcunnington> what is your job out of interest?
[21:58] <adamcunnington> you smell like a brown noser...
[21:58] <rohan> k1l: your only job is to be a dick, at which it seems you're excelling
[21:58] <rohan> k1l: you had not a single reason to silence adamcunnington
[21:58] <rohan> k1l: and to ban me
[21:59] <k1l> *sigh*
[21:59] <ikonia> when you can talk to people without name calling, or insults - it would be worthwhile resuming discussion and resolving any issues, but not until the name calling and insults stop
[22:02] <ikonia> rohan: thank you for agreeing, mute removed
[22:02] <rohan> for the record, the agreement was to tone down the language, which is not unreasonable to ask of me
[22:02] <ikonia> sure sure, that's all I asked
[22:02] <ikonia> no abuse/bad language, and discussion is fine
[22:02] <rohan> k1l: to reiterate my point -- you had no reason to ban adamcunnington -- your only reason was that you don't like drama, which was instigated by two people
[22:03] <rohan> k1l: secondly, and even worse, you banned me from #ubuntu, where i did not even say a lot
[22:03] <rohan> k1l: it's obvious that you banning me from #ubuntu was for personal reasons
[22:03] <rohan> k1l: you probably did not like what i said about dictators, but sorry, that's what the word means
[22:04] <rohan> k1l: your personal issues with a word are not, and should never be, a reason to ban people for a week.
[22:05] <k1l> rohan: your only comments in #ubuntu were comments against operators and cheering up other users who start to join in the drama.
[22:05] <rohan> k1l: one comment. and it was obviously clear that i stopped the moment ikonia told me to discuss it in #ubuntu-ops
[22:05] <rohan> after joining this channel, i said or did nothing in #ubuntu
[22:06] <k1l> rohan: then you join in here to complain about a operators action (which is fine) but ise wording that is offensive and just switch over to insulting. so that is clearly not the topic and the wording that stick to the guidelines or the COde of Conduct
[22:07] <k1l> as you both may have noticed: your action activated other users (trolls) to keep the drama going
[22:07] <k1l> all while other users come to the channel and try to get technical help. there were even users complaining that no one answered their technical questions because the drama spoils the channel
[22:08] <rohan> k1l: you take offence too easily -- i called you a baby because that is exactly how you were (and are) behaving -- you are throwing a fit because people don't follow your arbitrary rules. that's what babies do.
[22:08] <rohan> i am not sure how to word it more politely
[22:08] <k1l> so the main focus is to get a warm climate in #ubuntu so users get help for their technical support. its not  to make "his point in a personal disagreement" or to make several remarks about operators trying to calm down the situation
[22:09] <rohan> k1l: also, while my objection was originally against you overreaching and silencing adamcunnington , it's now against an unmitigated ban of myself
[22:10] <rohan> k1l: it's obvious you banned me in a separate channel because of what i said here, which is completely unreasonable
[22:10] <rohan> had i did continuously did something displeasing in #ubuntu, i would totally understand the ban
[22:10] <rohan> but i didn't say a single word since ikonia directed me to join this channel
[22:10] <k1l_> and especiall rohan there is _no_ way to compare my self to Hitler. _no_ way! not talking about the other insults but joining in here and  calling my action a "blitzkrieg" is way out of the line
[22:11] <k1l_> rohan: the backlog in here shows quite obvious why i dont think you will stick to the guidelines and the codeofconduct in the near future
[22:12] <rohan> k1l_: again, this is another instance of you being biased by your personal judgement (maybe you're from Germany and hence this sensitivity)
[22:12] <rohan> blitzkrieg has now become a very commonly used term, with no implication or reference to any historical character
[22:13] <rohan> k1l_: the backlog in here is my outrage against your actions -- it's not against #ubuntu or continuously derailing the support provided there
[22:13] <rohan> k1l_: i don't think it's ok to ban people for any personal issues you may have, for whatever reason
[22:13] <k1l_> rohan: its not a personal issue
[22:15] <rohan> k1l_: it most certainly is. the word "blitzkrieg" is used everywhere, no one was remotely comparing you to Hitler
[22:15] <k1l_> its a "user that makes remarks against ops to stirr up more drama and after that insults and brings offensive language to the ops channel" not matching the guidelines or the Code of Conduct
[22:15] <rohan> https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=blitzkrieg&oq=blitzkrieg&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j43i53.959.2982.0.3127.12.3.1.8.9.0.69.183.3.3.0...0.0...1ac.1.ktwfft2_2Xw
[22:16] <k1l_> rohan: no. you talk about ops are dicators, then joining here talking about blitzkrieg and again about dictators.
[22:16] <rohan> so? what you did *was* dictatorial, but nothing about it was related to Hitler
[22:17] <rohan> Shuttleworth calls himself a dictator, i don't know what riled you up so much
[22:18] <rohan> nothing anywhere says i can't speak up against the mods if they are being unreasonable
[22:18] <rohan> which is exactly what you were being, k1l_
[22:18] <k1l_> rohan: i dont see a point in discussing any more. you still dont see that your behaviour is not ok with the guidelines or the CoC. so come back in a week to talk about the ban to get it lifted
[22:19] <rohan> k1l_: you are just continuing to be unreasonable, without any kind of understanding or consideration of your own mistake
[22:19] <rohan> k1l_: you can't ban people willy-nilly, especially in another channel
[22:20] <rohan> can someone else tell me what the appeals process is like? for a channel that has so many mods, there has to be a proper appeals process.
[22:20] <k1l_> i explained my action (mute) to adamcunnington and to you. but you still dont see that its not my personal hobby to ban people but to keep drama away from #ubuntu. so i dont see a chance at the moment that you will not start to stirr up drama in #ubuntu. so please come back in a week
[22:21] <k1l_> !appeals
[22:21] <rohan> thank you, k1l_ , the first useful thing you have said in a while.
[22:32] <ikonia> rohan:
[22:32] <ikonia> oops
[22:32] <ikonia> sorry
[22:33] <rohan> ikonia: about to say something? :)
[22:34] <ikonia> no, balancing a laptop and my hand slipped, second time in the last hour
[22:34] <ikonia> sorry
[22:34] <rohan> ikonia: heh, ok
[22:36] <ikonia> rohan: although is there anything more you need from us ?
[22:36] <ikonia> rather than leave you hanging
[22:36] <ikonia> (us as in any of the team)
[22:38] <rohan> ikonia: i don't know, i am not sure how to proceed.
[22:39] <rohan> writing an email to some list seems much less realtime than asking a 3rd party to step in and judge here
[22:39] <ikonia> rohan: how do you want to proceed ?
[22:39] <ikonia> lete see if we can get you a bit happier and resolved
[22:39] <rohan> if someone other than the 3 of us can confirm that my actions were out of line and the ban is reasonable, i will shut up :)
[22:40] <ikonia> well, the language and abuse wasn't great, so I can see why you got banned to stop that spilling over into #ubuntu, that said, that doesn't mean it has to stay that way
[22:40] <ikonia> I was pretty happy that I asked you to stop with the abuse/language and you did
[22:40] <ikonia> so if I say "please don't do that in #ubuntu" and you say yes, I'm confident you'll do that
[22:41] <rohan> i am fine with still being banned in #ubuntu (if deserved) -- i am more of a lurker there anyway. my main problem was that there were no signs of anything i said spilling over into #ubuntu
[22:41] <rohan> ikonia: after you told me to take it up in #ubuntu-ops, i did stop speaking in #ubuntu
[22:41] <rohan> which is why i am even more upset that i was banned in that channel
[22:41] <ikonia> rohan: yeah, and that's great but you where not really great in your interactions in here
[22:41] <ikonia> so I can sort of see why it escalated,
[22:41] <ikonia> but as I said, things do get heated and that's understandable
[22:41] <ikonia> and it doesn't hav eo stay that way
[22:42] <ikonia> have to
[22:42] <ikonia> easy to get riled up on both sides
[22:43] <ikonia> if you'd rather talk to someone else though too, that can be arranged
[22:43] <CarlFK> rohan: I caught the tail of this - I'll be the 3rd you are looking for
[22:43] <ikonia> as you said there are more people available
[22:43] <ikonia> thank you CarlFK
[22:43] <ikonia> hope you can work it out
[22:43] <rohan> to justify, had i known about this channel in advance, i would never have said what i did in #ubuntu
[22:44] <rohan> thank you, CarlFK
[22:44] <CarlFK> rohan: you seem to have some ideas that are good ideas, but also are not exactly how things work
[22:45] <rohan> CarlFK: which ones were good and which ones don't work? :)
[22:45] <CarlFK> ops have to make judgment calls.   which basically means they do get to ban people if they feel the should be banned.
[22:45] <CarlFK> I don't want to debate ideas, I think you will get the point quick enough
[22:46] <rohan> CarlFK: ok, taking a step back, my main issue is that adamcunnington was silenced the way he was without actually having done a lot wrong
[22:46] <rohan> i understand mods have to make judgement calls, but not at the expense of stifling discussion
[22:46] <CarlFK> meh, even at that expense
[22:47] <CarlFK> keep in mind we are all volunteers
[22:47] <rohan> sorry, then i have to disagree, CarlFK -- if you see the history, adamcunnington was clearly about to stop, silencing him was overstepping in my opinion
[22:47] <CarlFK> we don't have do do anything.  we could all walk away and leave #ubuntu to whatever happens
[22:48] <rohan> CarlFK: i am not at all trying to undermine the work you and other mods do
[22:48] <rohan> my only problem is overstepping the bounds of when a mod should step in
[22:49] <rohan> CarlFK: if silencing was the only option k1l had, the fair thing to do would have been to silence *both* adamcunnington and the other person who said incendiary things
[22:49] <valorie> rohan: you have to realize that #ubuntu is a huge channel
[22:49] <valorie> it's a big responsibility to be an op there
[22:49] <valorie> and a lot of work
[22:49]  * valorie is not willing to do that much work
[22:50] <rohan> valorie: i agree, and which is why i am even more eager to see that ops are doing the right thing (bearing in mind that i can be wrong in my thinking too)
[22:50] <valorie> I've talked to you in #kubuntu and you've been reasonable
[22:50] <CarlFK> rohan: again, it is a judgement call, and ops have been given the power to make the call.
[22:50]  * valorie agrees with CarlFK
[22:51] <rohan> valorie: thanks :) i would like to think i am.
[22:51] <valorie> we would welcome your help in all the freenode channels as a catalyst
[22:51] <valorie> !catalyst
[22:51] <valorie> what? we have no catalyst factoid?
[22:51] <valorie> how sad
[22:52] <valorie> freenode.net/catalysts.shtml
[22:52] <rohan> CarlFK: correct, but this judgement call was at the expense of someone's question going possibly unanswered -- what if adam had more questions?
[22:52] <rohan> CarlFK: this is the kind of "mothering" he was concerned about, and it's definitely an issue
[22:52] <valorie> rohan: there were other questions going unanswered because of the drama
[22:52] <valorie> it's always a judgement call
[22:53] <CarlFK> rohan: the sad truth is, not everyone gets what they want.
[22:53] <rohan> CarlFK, valorie -- ok, while i still disagree with the silencing, i agree that i don't have a good point to make about it :)
[22:54] <rohan> the other thing that was (imo) uncalled for was to ban me in a separate channel because of discussion here
[22:55] <rohan> while i understand that anyone (k1l in this case) can get offended by terms like blitzkrieg and dictator, it would have been worth clarifying the intention instead of just blanket banning me
[22:56] <CarlFK> maybe.  but the reality is the ops make the call, and even when they are wrong, no puppies die.
[22:56] <rohan> CarlFK: maybe i am getting it wrong.. but if the answer to everything is "ops can make the call", what are we discussing about here? :)
[22:57] <valorie> rohan: my point here is for you to have such a clear understanding of what ops do, that you want to be one, and become so helpful in the chans that you are eventually asked to be an op
[22:57] <CarlFK> trying to take the sting off of what might seem like an inhuman machine
[22:58] <valorie> we're not inhuman, just human
[22:58] <valorie> like everyone else
[22:58] <rohan> i understand ,and that's exactly why i am discussing this much -- trying to make a fellow human understand my point. if it were just a machine, i wouldn't have bothered this much :)
[22:59] <valorie> seriously, read the catalyst page
[23:00] <valorie> it is so great
[23:00] <valorie> the world needs more behavior like that
[23:00] <valorie> we'd have world peace
[23:03] <CarlFK> hockey players get sent to the box.  they may not agree, but generally they just go sit out their time in the box.
[23:04] <rohan> CarlFK: one thing though, your end of "no puppies die" seems to imply that there is no accountability of being a mod
[23:04] <rohan> CarlFK: yes, i don't mind sitting out my time in the box
[23:05] <valorie> of course there is
[23:05] <CarlFK> there is some accountability, but a mod has to get pretty nutty before anything official happen
[23:05] <valorie> we're accountable to the IRC Council
[23:05] <valorie> and to freenode itself
[23:05] <valorie> and to one another
[23:05] <rohan> valorie: how so? everything here seems to sound like "it's the mods call, no puppies die"
[23:06] <ikonia> rohan: what do you actually want as an outcome ?
[23:06] <rohan> CarlFK: i am not looking for vengeance here .. i understand this is not a court trial and "anything official" is not my end goal
[23:06] <ikonia> (to this discussion/conversation)
[23:06] <rohan> ikonia: ^^
[23:07] <valorie> if adamcunnington or you had been kickbanned, I would see your point
[23:07] <ikonia> ok, so what is your end goal ? what do you want ?
[23:07] <rohan> valorie: i was, wasn't i?
[23:07] <valorie> you were just asked to be quiet
[23:07] <valorie> I'm not in #ubuntu
[23:07] <rohan> valorie: i was (and still am, i think) banned from #ubuntu
[23:07] <valorie> dunno
[23:07] <valorie> ok
[23:07] <valorie> I thought you had been quieted
[23:07] <ikonia> that was the other guy
[23:08] <ikonia> he was just quieted to be spoken to by k1l
[23:08] <valorie> ok
[23:08] <rohan> ikonia: someone to either tell me that i am totally wrong and out of line, or for someone to say that k1l_ was out of line
[23:08] <valorie> rohan: you WERE out of line
[23:08] <valorie> here
[23:08] <ikonia> rohan: ok, your behaviour was totally wrong and out of line as soon as you started name calling an insults
[23:08] <ikonia> however the discussion you wanted to have was most welcome
[23:09] <valorie> k1l_ was not, IMO
[23:09] <ikonia> so if you want to have discussions in the future, keep out of the name calling/insult zone and in the discussion zone
[23:09] <ikonia> and I'm sure there will be zero issue
[23:09] <valorie> thank you ikonia
[23:09] <ikonia> people get things wrong from time to time, so discussion is never intended to be turned away
[23:09] <rohan> ikonia: all i did was call k1l_ a baby, and that's exactly how he behaved.
[23:09] <ikonia> no, you didn't
[23:09] <ikonia> you made a lot of other comments
[23:09] <rohan> ikonia: nothing in "blitzkrieg" is name calling
[23:10] <ikonia> calling him a dick
[23:10] <ikonia> and other things
[23:10] <rohan> ikonia: correct, after i was banned for no apparent reason
[23:10] <ikonia> right - so lets be honest here
[23:10] <ikonia> you where abusive
[23:10] <ikonia> at that point the discussion stops
[23:10] <rohan> ikonia: that was *after* the silly kickban, not before
[23:10] <ikonia> however, don't be abusive and the disucssion is welcome
[23:10] <ikonia> rohan: so ?
[23:10] <ikonia> you where still abusive, that stops the discussion
[23:10] <rohan> if discussion is all that was there to be had, then why kickban me?
[23:10] <ikonia> as I said people get things wrong - maybe the kick ban was wrong
[23:10] <ikonia> however you can't discuss it while your being insluting
[23:11] <k1l_> ok, to draw the picture: i muted a user who was going into a "but i need to make another point and have the last word" thing with another user who stopped. i planned to give the user a 15min mute and told the user in a pm. after that time to calm down all could have been good
[23:11] <rohan> and that, i think, is wrong, k1l_
[23:11] <ikonia> that was correct
[23:11] <ikonia> as the user showed he could not stop making comments
[23:11] <ikonia> he pm'd me to make comments
[23:11] <ikonia> he joined here to make comment
[23:11] <ikonia> he kept making comments when being asked - and then told to stop
[23:12] <rohan> ikonia: that's *not* how IRC works -- you can't ban/silence people when discussion doesn't work the way you want
[23:12] <k1l_> but the user rohan did start to make remarks about "the dictators" which rilled other users to start the typical troll war.
[23:12] <ikonia> yes, you can
[23:12] <ikonia> rohan: you can stop people making offtopic/pointless comments in the channel
[23:12] <k1l_> after beeing asked by ikonia rohan joined here  right attacking me and calling my intentions blitzkrieg.
[23:12] <valorie> rohan: sorry, today you are simply wrong
[23:12] <valorie> please admit it and move on
[23:12] <ikonia> no need to admit it
[23:12]  * valorie has other things to do
[23:13] <ikonia> people can have differeing views
[23:13] <ikonia> but I don't see much point in repeating the same discussion over and over
[23:13] <ikonia> it's a disagreement of view points,
[23:13] <rohan> :-/ well if that's how the channel wants to work, so be it.
[23:13] <ikonia> so unless there is an end goal/outcome that is desired, I think it's been covered
[23:13] <k1l_> after that we have 30min. of insulting me and then 45min discussion.
[23:13] <rohan> it's not a good model, in my opinion
[23:13] <ikonia> rohan: noted
[23:13] <k1l_> rohan: dont you see what you did in #ubuntu?
[23:14] <rohan> k1l_: no, because i was discussing here, as ikonia directed me to.
[23:14] <valorie> :(
[23:14] <rohan> k1l_: also, "dictators" was not a word i used (iirc), it was a word someone else used, who ikonia banned
[23:14] <k1l_> rohan: did you see the other user geting kicked and then ban evading some more to make more drama?
[23:14] <rohan> (which also was incorrect)
[23:15] <ikonia> rohan: ok, you've made your opinion known
[23:15] <k1l_> didnt you see other users complaining, that their support questions were not answered because of the drama?
[23:15] <ikonia> rohan: is there anything else you want ?
[23:15] <rohan> k1l_: unfortunately no. but if i did cause it, i am sorry, and that was not my intention
[23:15] <ikonia> as we are just repeating the fact over and over that you disagree
[23:15] <ikonia> rohan: mistakes happen, don' sweat it, as I said, no-one is perfect,
[23:15] <rohan> k1l_: like i said earlier, had i known there was a separate channel to talk about mod issues, i would never have talked in #ubuntu
[23:16] <rohan> ikonia: correct, but with the attitude that "shit happens, puppies don't die", there is no chance that anyone will correct their mistakes
[23:16] <ikonia> rohan: that isn't the attitude
[23:16] <ikonia> we discuss and pear review all the time
[23:16] <k1l_> rohan: so you dont know what a big channel like #ubuntu gets rilled up that easy and yet you judge the operators in their actions?
[23:16] <ikonia> people are human and don't get it right all the time
[23:16] <ikonia> there are often disagreements
[23:16] <ikonia> rohan: so there is discussion and reviews and often questions over actions
[23:17] <ikonia> it's not a black hole
[23:17] <k1l_> rohan: all i intended was to calm the situation down (temp mute adam for 15min) to have a climate where every user can get the support they need.
[23:17] <CarlFK> rohan: often people get asked to come in here, apologize for causing a fus, agree to follow the CoC, and the whole thing is settled in a few minutes.
[23:18] <k1l_> but instead you start you persoal vendetta to revenge the users from the bad dictators.
[23:18] <rohan> CarlFK: if you're saying that users are the only ones who should be apologising, then the attitude is clearly in line with what i descrbied
[23:19] <ikonia> rohan: ops often apologies
[23:19] <ikonia> rohan: I've messaged people when I've either made a bad call, or kicked them by accident
[23:19] <k1l_> rohan: and still you dont see any possible change you did something wrong but still say i am a dictator and missused my power.
[23:19] <ikonia> rohan: people are human, and we do make mistakes/bad calls
[23:19] <rohan> k1l_: sorry, but dictator was never a word i started using :) it was someone else who used that word
[23:20] <rohan> then again, i don't disagree with that word being used.
[23:20] <ikonia> rohan: I think we are just repeatig the same stuff over and over
[23:20] <ikonia> what's the actual outcome you want ?
[23:20] <ikonia> or the end goal
[23:20] <rohan> ikonia: by the attitude here, i guess nothing. if no one sees it was wrong to ban me in a different channel for whatever i said here, there's nothing more to be discussed.
[23:21] <k1l_> if you still dont understand after i explained (again) what i intended and how the plan could have worked out i just cant repeat that i dont think you can stick to the guidelines.
[23:21] <ikonia> rohan: I think it was questionable, as I've said approx 3 times I can see why, but I can also resolve it for you in a moment
[23:21] <rohan> k1l_: if guidelines and oft-repeated lines are all you're going to use, you'll never see my point
[23:21] <ikonia> rohan: I must have offered 3 times by now to resolve it as things can get clouded when they are heated
[23:21] <rohan> it's like k1l_ is my manager at work, and if i questioned his throw at a game off-work, he fires me at work.
[23:21] <k1l_> rohan: "its right if you are called  a dictator" is in no way aceptable
[23:21] <ikonia> hence why I'm trying to understand the outcome you want
[23:22] <valorie> this channel is not "off work"
[23:22] <ikonia> rohan: put your cards on the table, what do you actually want ?
[23:22] <valorie> this is the op chan for ALL the Ubuntu channels
[23:22] <rohan> ikonia: i don't know, you tell me -- what are the usual outcomes of an arbitration? the user apologises or gives up?
[23:22] <k1l_> rohan: a user instulting in here is not making the ops believe he will be a fair user in #ubuntu.
[23:22] <valorie> your point about this being a "different channel" is moot
[23:23] <ikonia> rohan: I've said I'll remove the ban in ubuntu for you as I believed you when we discussed no problems in #ubuntu
[23:23] <ikonia> but you didn't seem to want that and wanted more discussion/complaint
[23:23] <ikonia> hence why I don't understand what you want/try to clarify the end goal you want
[23:24] <rohan> ikonia: because the general attitude is not going to change -- the ban will be lifted, people will move on, and then there will be more instabans for unjustified things
[23:24] <ikonia> rohan: there will be yes, mistakes will happen
[23:24] <ikonia> rohan: and there will be many drawn out discussions that should be an instaban
[23:24] <ikonia> mistakes will happen
[23:24] <ikonia> and they will be resolved
[23:24] <ikonia> people are human
[23:24] <rohan> ikonia: correct, and just unbanning me is not a resolution -- it's a way of kicking things under the carpet
[23:24] <ikonia> rohan: no, it's not
[23:25] <ikonia> it's trying to put you in a position to use the channel you want to use
[23:25] <rohan> ikonia: if i really were that desperate to be in #ubuntu, i could have just joined under a different nick.
[23:25] <rohan> it obviously isn't
[23:25] <ikonia> rohan: ok, so what do you want then ?
[23:25] <ikonia> nothing more, no hiding anything, we are talking openly
[23:25] <ikonia> we are just saying words, what is the resolution you want
[23:26] <rohan> k1l_: your tolerance to insults is probably biased by your background, but the action is certainly not banning people in other places
[23:26] <ikonia> rohan: stop for a moment
[23:26] <ikonia> no more discussion
[23:26] <ikonia> what do you actually want ?
[23:26] <ikonia> I think we've covered the two sides quite clearly
[23:26] <ikonia> what is the outcome you want
[23:26] <ikonia> or we are just repeating the same topic over and over
[23:27] <valorie> rohan: be aware that ban evading is serious
[23:27] <ikonia> we get it - you think k1l_ was harsh, k1l_ things he was justified
[23:27] <ikonia> so what's the outcome you want
[23:27] <rohan> valorie: valorie: but it is a different channel -- imagine if all the above discussion happened in #ubuntu, how much disruptive that would've been.
[23:27] <valorie> NO
[23:27] <valorie> this is not a "different channel"
[23:27] <ikonia> I want to get a resolution rather than just keep the same conversation on loop
[23:28] <valorie> rohan: that would NEVER have been allowed
[23:28] <valorie> that is the whole reason for ops!
[23:28] <valorie> good grief
[23:28] <rohan> valorie: correct, and that's why i should have NEVER been banned in #ubuntu :)
[23:28] <valorie> no
[23:28] <ikonia> rohan: ok, so what's the end goal ?
[23:28] <valorie> sorry, you are wrong
[23:28] <ikonia> lets try to get to a resolution
[23:28] <ikonia> we are just on loop
[23:28] <rohan> valorie: correct, and in this case, i have to sadly say that you are wrong as well :(
[23:29] <rohan> ikonia: 1) k1l_'s op being taken away for 1 week -- if i am sent to the box in hockey, so should he 2) some policy in place that prevents this kind of "ban since i can" behaviour
[23:29] <CarlFK> rohan: I think you are looking for a change - so do this:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcTeam/OperatorGuidelines  "When to ban/kick someone  ...  Please do not change this list before discussing on the mailinglist"
[23:29]  * valorie withdraws from this conversation
[23:29] <ikonia> rohan: ok, so 1.) that's not going to happen - that's just petty, we are adults and can talk / review ourselved
[23:29] <ikonia> 2.) there is no ban since I can behaviour
[23:29] <rohan> valorie: sorry, you're a great person, i hope this doesn't affect our conversations otherwise :(
[23:29] <ikonia> it was at best justified, at worse a bad call
[23:29] <ikonia> it wasn't "because I can"
[23:29] <ikonia> no-one does that
[23:29] <rohan> ikonia: banning me was also petty, just so we're on the same page
[23:30] <ikonia> I don't think it was petty,
[23:30] <ikonia> I don't think it was needed, but not petty
[23:30] <ikonia> and as I said, we do talk about things
[23:30] <ikonia> so it's not like "thats the end of it"
[23:30] <rohan> it certainly was -- if discussions are what are the holy grail ,why not have one instead of banning me?
[23:30] <ikonia> because you where getting abusive
[23:31] <ikonia> that's not a discussion
[23:31] <rohan> ikonia: no less than k1l_ and you originally were
[23:31] <ikonia> rohan: how was I abusive ?
[23:31] <ikonia> I was nothing but polite
[23:31] <rohan> ikonia: if i was abusive with words, the two of you were abusive with your mod powers
[23:31] <ikonia> ok, this is getting pathetic now
[23:31] <rohan> ikonia: you by banning the guy who cracked that joke
[23:31] <ikonia> rohan: no, I didn't
[23:31] <ikonia> and I'm tired of repeating the same thing over and over
[23:32] <rohan> as am i, and yet it's clear neither of us are going to see the other's points
[23:32] <ikonia> rohan: I suggest you follow the appeals proces to the council to lodge your complaint, that said I think we can remove the ban if you've ok with keeping "this" sort of discussion in here
[23:32] <ikonia> would that be an acceptable resolution
[23:32] <ikonia> you get to lodge your complaint formally so it's reviewed and discussed
[23:32] <ikonia> but you also don't need to wait to get unbanned for the review
[23:33] <ikonia> as now you now abou thtis channel I'm sure you won't raise it in #ubuntu
[23:33] <rohan> CarlFK: yes, i am looking for a change, but i am not sure how to even start going about it with the kind of attitude and lack of accountability in here
[23:33] <ikonia> there is accountablility
[23:33] <ikonia> I've explained this to you
[23:33] <ikonia> we peer review and discuss things like this,
[23:33] <rohan> ikonia: people telling me "it's the ops judgement" is not accountability!
[23:33] <ikonia> people are critiqued
[23:33] <ikonia> rohan: no, I'm not saying that
[23:33] <ikonia> you're cutting out the bits you don't want to hear
[23:33] <rohan> ikonia: the only person being critiqued here is me
[23:33] <ikonia> no they are not
[23:33] <ikonia> I've just said I disagreeed with banning you
[23:34] <CarlFK> rohan:   "And if you want to change it, please don't hesitate to come to our list. "
[23:34] <rohan> ikonia: that's only after i started this shitstorm -- not before then
[23:34] <ikonia> I've just said 3 times that this sort of ban is reviewed and discussed amongst the team and critiqued
[23:34] <rohan> ikonia: and do i have any kind of visibility in that review process?
[23:34] <ikonia> rohan: I wasn't watching the discussion
[23:34] <ikonia> rohan: yes, the IRC council
[23:34] <ikonia> I stepped away
[23:34] <ikonia> rohan: you're welcome to query it with the council
[23:34] <ikonia> and they will feed back
[23:35] <rohan> ok.
[23:35] <ikonia> that's why I said you can still lodge your complaint, but rather than treat it as an appeal against a ban, I'll un ban you , but you can still lodge your complaint
[23:35] <rohan> and till then, i guess it's fair to keep the ban on because there is disagreement about who is right
[23:35] <ikonia> no
[23:35] <ikonia> it's not about right/wrong
[23:35] <ikonia> it's about not disrupting the channel
[23:35] <ikonia> which as Iv'e said I'm happy you won't do
[23:35] <ikonia> so I'd be happy to remove the ban
[23:35] <rohan> ikonia: it's about whether k1l_'s actions are right or wrong
[23:36] <ikonia> fine, the ban can stay then if you don't want it removed
[23:36] <rohan> no, i am not saying that -- i would certainly appreciate the removal
[23:36] <ikonia> but what do you wnat to actually happen ?
[23:36] <ikonia> sorry, I don't understand
[23:36] <rohan> .. appreciate removal of the ban
[23:36] <ikonia> I'm offering to remove the ban as it's not about right/wrong it's about keeping the channel flowing
[23:36] <ikonia> but you seem uninterested unless k1l_ is punished
[23:36] <ikonia> in some way
[23:37] <rohan> yes
[23:37] <rohan> that's what accountability means
[23:37] <ikonia> well, lets be honest, it's not going to happen
[23:37] <ikonia> "punished"
[23:37] <ikonia> at worst it will be reviewed, and talked about and people will learn from it
[23:37] <rohan> then what is the point of lodging a complaint against the council?
[23:37] <ikonia> because what you want as a punishment isn't realistic
[23:37] <ikonia> what is realistic is that it's reviewed and people learn if a bad call has been made
[23:37] <ikonia> to help not make it in the future
[23:38] <rohan> ok
[23:38] <rohan> if that's all that's going to happen, so be it
[23:38] <rohan> it would still be better than nothing
[23:38] <ikonia> that's not a bad thing
[23:38] <rohan> i agree
[23:38] <ikonia> if anything the comments made here are enough to review
[23:38] <ikonia> people are talking about it now,
[23:38] <ikonia> (and will continue to do so)
[23:38] <ikonia> but you are of course free to make your additional complaint
[23:38] <ikonia> it depends if you want discussion on it and people to learn, or you want punishment
[23:39] <ikonia> if you want punishment you'll be dissapointed, if you want discussion, well, it's being had now
[23:40] <rohan> ikonia: so an op can punish someone by banning for what they think is the correct reason, but a user can never expect any kind of punishment against an op?
[23:40] <rohan> do you see the disconnect here?
[23:40] <ikonia> no
[23:41] <ikonia> what do you want as punishment ?
[23:41] <ikonia> do you want him to learn from the bad call, or do you want him to be flogged ?
[23:41] <CarlFK> rohan: there are lots of things you can do with your time.  (me too)  spending more of it on this is probably not going to make much of a difference.  I strongly suggest finding something productive that you enjoy.
[23:43] <rohan> ikonia: if the commensurate punishment for a user is to be banned, and why not have something similar for an op?
[23:43] <CarlFK> rohan: if you are determined to make IRC a better place, start here https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcTeam  follow all the links, become involved.
[23:43] <rohan> CarlFK: that is incredibly insulting
[23:44] <ikonia> rohan: because thats an op who can't help and it's a busy channel
[23:44] <ikonia> and it adds no value other than to appease you
[23:44] <rohan> CarlFK: i could have just not talked about this at all -- i had no reason to support adamcunnington
[23:44] <ikonia> surly more value would be for the operator to learn why it was a bad call and not make it again if possible
[23:44] <ikonia> rather than cause a problem by removing an active helper from the team
[23:45] <tsimpson> rohan: I haven't read all of the context of the discussion here, but there is a process in place for people to appeal against operator decisions which I believe you've been told about. there's also the public mailing list if you want to start a debate in public
[23:45] <rohan> ikonia: an op who instabans people is surely worse than having one less op to help in a busy channel
[23:45] <ikonia> rohan: not if he's learnt that it wasn't a good move
[23:45] <ikonia> and as I said, people make mistakes
[23:45] <ikonia> a ban from being an op for a week won't stop that
[23:45] <ikonia> I've hit people too quick
[23:45] <ikonia> stopping my ops for a weeks wouldn't stop that mistake
[23:46] <ikonia> it was wrong - but the right intention, it's a busy channel
[23:46] <rohan> ikonia: but you are speaking for his behalf -- k1l_ never said he has learnt from his mistake (he's not even accepted that it was a mistake, neither has anyone else, definitively)
[23:46] <ikonia> however as much as I disagree with it, the other team members pointing out why they thought I was too harsh, was of more benifit
[23:46] <ikonia> ok, well, I suggest you follow the appeals process then
[23:46] <rohan> tsimpson: is your implied point to tell me stop my discussion here? :)
[23:46] <ikonia> it's going nowhere
[23:46] <ikonia> thats why
[23:47] <ikonia> you want a flogging, I want a resolution
[23:47] <rohan> ikonia: i agree it's going nowhere, yes.
[23:47] <ikonia> ok, so follow the appeals process then and lets park it there
[23:47] <tsimpson> rohan: no, my point is that there are avenues for "users" start discussions and debates about actions taken by operators
[23:47] <rohan> tsimpson: i thought this was one?
[23:48] <rww> holy scrollback batman
[23:48] <bazhang> ikr
[23:48] <rohan> rww: heh.. more volume than this channel generally sees?
[23:48] <rww> rohan: yep
[23:48] <tsimpson> rohan: from my point of view the discussion here isn't getting anywhere fruitful, so changing media to email may be better
[23:48] <tsimpson> let more people get involved over a greater time period
[23:49] <rohan> ok, thank you for your inputs, k1l_ , ikonia , CarlFK , valorie , tsimpson
[23:49] <rohan> i will leave this channel right after i finish the email (as directed by the topic)
[23:49] <ikonia> you don't need to wait to finish your email
[23:49] <ikonia> we can't see you type so it no difference to us
[23:50] <rohan> ikonia: why don't you kick me then, that seems to be the normal way of doing things around here?
[23:50] <ikonia> I have no intetion of kicking you
[23:50] <valorie> hmmm, I've never seen kickbanning or quieting as a punishment
[23:50] <ikonia> and there is no need for snide marks
[23:50] <rohan> there has got to be a limit to insulting people :-/
[23:50] <valorie> perhaps that's at the base of this disagreement
[23:50] <ikonia> no-one is insulting you ??
[23:50] <ikonia> what are you on about
[23:51] <rohan> someone telling me to get a life (carlfk), someone telling me to leave the channel already
[23:51] <ikonia> no-one is telling you to leave
[23:51] <ikonia> I said you don't need to wait to type your email
[23:51] <rohan> valorie: i am interested to know your perspective of what it is then :)
[23:51] <ikonia> we know you're going to complain, fully acknowledged
[23:51] <ikonia> you can leave / take your time, compose an email
[23:51] <ikonia> rather than rushing one while your in the channel,
[23:51] <valorie> it is a tool to protect the channel from drama
[23:52] <rohan> valorie: at the cost of penalising someone though, right?
[23:52] <valorie> I've been "banforwarded" before
[23:52] <valorie> no one was punishing me
[23:52] <rww> I thought we were moving this to email, folks?
[23:53] <valorie> I wasn't penilised -- but it stopped my bad connection from hurting the channel(s)
[23:53] <valorie> penalised
[23:53] <valorie> heh
[23:55] <CarlFK> rohan: You know what to do now, you are going to stay banned, thus your issue has been dealt with.  Please part the channel.
[23:55] <valorie> rww: I don't think i'm on the list
[23:56] <valorie> I guess i should sub
[23:56] <rww> Is it going to ubuntu-irc or the ircc list?
[23:56] <rww> anyways, chores time
[23:57]  * rww wanders off
[23:57] <rohan> rww: appeals process seems to suggest ircc@ubottu.com
[23:57] <rohan> CarlFK: i thought ikonia told i could be unbanned?
[23:57] <rohan> or has that stance changed?
[23:58] <CarlFK> from what i see, you chose not to take that offer.
[23:58] <tsimpson> rohan: you can email that address to contact the IRC council, and/or you can use ubuntu-irc@lists.ubuntu.com for a public email
[23:59] <rohan> CarlFK: er, i clearly said i would appreciate being unbanned
[23:59] <CarlFK> rohan: you have had more than one opportunity to get unbanned, you chose not to take any of them.
 no, i am not saying that -- i would certainly appreciate the removal  <rohan> .. appreciate removal of the ban