[06:55] <MooDoo> hello al
[07:07] <Cyric> hi
[07:08] <Cyric> i have one noob question on linux packages... I need some clarification there... in particular to the TAR.GZ packages
[07:08] <Cyric> those are preinstalled version...so i just extract them in usr/local and that is it right?
[15:41] <MosesEX> https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+17%3A23-34
[15:41] <MosesEX> !ops | repent https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+17%3A23-34
[15:41] <MosesEX> rww, nooo waaaa
[15:41] <MosesEX> rww, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+17%3A23-34
[15:45] <ubot2> MosesEX called the ops in #ubuntu-kernel ()
[15:49] <teward> when's the next IRC Council meeting...?
[15:51] <rww> the next IRC Team meeting is November 19th
[15:51] <teward> rww: thanks - the wiki page isn't updated hence my asking :0
[15:51] <teward> :) *
[15:51] <rww> if you plan on using this information somehow, I recommend letting ubuntu-irc@ know so people actually show up
[15:51] <rww> yes, the wiki page is kind of unmaintained ;s
[15:52] <teward> rww: indeed.  i'll email the list, probably.
[15:53] <teward> AFTER I regenerate my ability to write coherently :P
[15:53] <rww> out of interest, what's up?
[15:54] <teward> rww: look up at who you sniped, and see where else they showed up - idea: a shared "global bans" channel where known multichannel spammers who have no other goal than to disrupt can be banned in, which would then trickle down to all the related channels which have a $j ban which refers back to the 'global bans' channel - see https://blog.freenode.net/2014/06/new-extban-j/
[15:54] <teward> granted, it's just an idea at this point
[15:55] <rww> What's the actual lag time on $j taking effect? That blog post or something somewhere said it has one.
[15:55] <teward> but judging by the volume of the channels and the rising frequency of cross-channel, wide-range spammers/disruptors I've seen...
[15:55] <rww> like, when you ban in the channel it might not propagate to channels using $j immediately
[15:55] <teward> rww: not certain, I'd have to poke #freenode
[15:55] <rww> or test it :P
[15:55] <rww> (i'm too lazy)
[15:55] <teward> i'm just poking #freenode - CBA to test things
[16:02] <rww> permissions to add bans would be interesting too
[16:02] <rww> can't make it too restricted or people won't be around to set them when hfsplus is bored. can't make it too wide because it applies in all core (presumably) channels
[16:42] <teward> rww: the problem then becomes off hours - when nobody is around with any operator permissions in $CHANNELNAMEHERE
[16:45] <rww> oh, true, it would be strictly additive to the current set of available ops
[16:53] <teward> rww: this begs further discussion - how do we handle when ops are not around, during those "off hours"?
[16:53] <teward> rww: while this has been discussed all the time, it's definitely still a valid discussion
[16:54] <rww> if there aren't any ops around, no opping happens, unless it's an emergency and IRCC or freenode staff are around and the relevant ACLs are set
[16:54] <teward> (and by 'we' i mean the irc team, not you and me)
[16:54] <rww> if it's a regular problem, they solicit more op applications. not much else you can do, really
[16:54] <teward> *shrugs*
[16:55] <rww> well, unless you add another level to the hierarchy and have some core-core-ops who have op access in all core channels but aren't supposed to use it unless needed
[16:55] <rww> but that seems a bit overwrought
[17:28] <Pici> freenode staff should be on all the access lists and will intervene if you can find one in #freenode.  Otherwise theres not much to do except what rww has already stated.
[17:28] <rww> s/will intervene/may intervene if it's suitably emergencyish
[17:28] <Pici> aye