[01:57] <Unit193> Empyrium: Hello anything we can do for you?
[08:42] <ikonia> hello an3k
[08:42] <ikonia> welcome back
[08:42] <an3k> Hi ikonia
[08:43] <ikonia> what's up ? / what do you need
[08:45] <an3k> Oh, I wanted to talk about the issue I mentioned some days ago.
[08:45] <ikonia> ok
[09:17] <ikonia> an3k: so what do you want to talk about ?
[09:18] <an3k> ikonia: Definitely no offense but I don't know if you're the right op to process the issue.
[09:18] <ikonia> thats fine, I don't know who else is available
[09:19] <an3k> Actually I wouldn't care about it because I'm not resentful but since the redirection is still active ...
[09:19] <ikonia> ?
[09:19] <ikonia> sorry, not sure what that means
[09:20] <ikonia> it doesn't look like any one else is in the team is active (looking at other channls too)
[09:22] <an3k> Well, the issue is that you in fact violated the Ubuntu channel guidelines and that is the issue I want to talk about since the redirection from #ubuntu to #ubuntu-ops is still active. As I said normally I wouldn't care at all but since "[23:21:43] <Jordan_U> an3k: Everyone must follow these guidelines." it would be just fair to apply the guidelines equitable
[09:23] <an3k> If you want to talk about it, sure no problem. We can do that.
[09:23] <ikonia> what guidelines have I violated ?
[09:24] <ikonia> I'd certainly be interested to know personally
[09:24] <an3k> "Don't flood the channel with messages"
[09:26] <ikonia> you're on pretty pretty thin ground with that
[09:26] <an3k> I appreciate fast answers but even for me you wrote too much in a too short time and even I was like "hey, slow down"
[09:26] <ikonia> thats your whole response to the terrible attitude you showed in #ubuntu - "you put too many lines in #ubuntu"
[09:27] <ikonia> thats pretty weak
[09:27] <ikonia> you're right, I don't think I should engage this
[09:27] <ikonia> but I'll summerise for anyone who wants to take it on and check the logs
[09:27] <an3k> oh, please stop with this insulting responses ...
[09:27] <ikonia> there is nothing insulting in what I've said
[09:28] <ikonia> 1.) you attempted to give someone help in #ubuntu and their requirements where not clear
[09:28] <ikonia> 2.) I clarified the requirements and directed at some possible options for the user
[09:28] <ikonia> 3.) you turned to petty sniping and ego driven responses
[09:28] <an3k> ok, nevermind. lets ignore each other.
[09:28] <ikonia> 4.) you incorrectly called out multiple things as "bad advice" without being able to justify it in any way - with just "you wouldn't understand it" - again more petty sniping
[09:29] <ikonia> 5.) you joined here #ubuntu-ops after being ban forwarded due to this attitude
[09:29] <ikonia> 6.) you rage quit and stated you wouldn't be in #ubuntu
[09:29] <ikonia> 7.) you've now rejoined to try to justify that by stating that I've put too many lines in #ubuntu while helping
[09:29] <an3k> calm down
[09:30] <ikonia> when another operator is free to put that into context in the logs
[09:30] <ikonia> I am calm
[09:30] <an3k> then please stop flooding and give your counterpart some time to response
[09:30] <ikonia> I'm not flooding, I've just broken down the facts into clear simple statements
[09:31] <ikonia> this is not #ubuntu where the channel is scolling 20 lines ever 10 seconds,
[09:31] <an3k> ok, then just slow down
[09:31] <ikonia> the speed of my typing has no impact
[09:31] <an3k> "Sending many messages in a short amount of time is called "flooding" the channel."
[09:33] <an3k> I just wrote "[10:25:01] <an3k> "Don't flood the channel with messages"" and I immediately get http://pastebin.com/yRpwPckP
[09:35] <ikonia> good luck with using that as justification for your attitude
[09:35] <an3k> that is no justification for my attitude
[09:37] <an3k> Just think about what would YOU think/do when I would have written "thats pretty weak" to one of your messages. Ok, maybe it's not an insult but at least it's unfriendly
[09:41] <ikonia> you've behaved badly in #ubuntu, ended up getting ban forwarded here, rather than just deal with why you got ban forwarded you're coming to try to find loops holes such as "I've typed too many lines of text" - thats weak
[09:42] <ikonia> I've just reviewed the logs of the night you where banned, and it was far from flooding there was long breaks of time between lines and only one line at a time
[09:43] <Myrtti> tit-for-tat is a losing strategy, no matter which side you are on. also, as I've said for years, wrongdoings of others don't justify yours. if you thought that ikonia was at fault in the original situation, the solution isn't to take a snipe at everything he says after that. you must realise yourself it's not a constructive way of handling things
[09:45] <an3k> Myrtti: What especially ikonia has to understand is that the issue I wanted to talk calmy about has nothing to do with how I behaved. It is not my problem or even fault that he is continuously thinking so.
[09:45] <ikonia> ok - then I'm sorry you think I typed too fast, I'll try to make sure I don't type as fast in future when engaging with you
[09:46] <ikonia> if the issue is that I've typed too fast, I'll certainly be aware of that when talking to you and try not to.
[09:46] <an3k> Myrtti: I know that my behavior was wrong. full-stop. It resulted from how ikonia just overtook the conversation and helped a user who already got help while at the same ignoring a different user who didn't got help at all.
[09:46] <ikonia> now you're just making things up
[09:46] <ikonia> no-one got ignored.
[09:47] <ikonia> and the user got solid help and went away happy,
[09:48] <an3k> Myrtti: he told me that - when he entered the room - it looked like the user in question did not got the correct help. And this is the main reason why I wanted to raise the issue. ikonia joined in the middle of a conversation, had no clue what was said before (he said so) and didn't even looked where the convo was heading to but instead immediately overtook the convo.
[09:49] <ikonia> an3k: what do you want to get out of this conversation, it's been noted that you think I've flooded the channel and acknowledged, what else do you want
[09:50] <ikonia> I looked where the conversation was heading - and it was heading to a doomed solution of 3 VM's runing at the same time, with ROM based OS's etc, for what in essense was a file server
[09:51] <ikonia> people are allowed to join in conversations, it's a public channel,
[09:51] <ikonia> the user chose to work with the soution/suggestions I made because he liked them
[09:51] <ikonia> there isn't really a complaint that "you joined a conversation"
[09:51] <an3k> Myrtti: He said the convo was heading into the wrong direction, eg. me suggesting the user to use VM. The problem is that if he would have followed the convo a bit longer he would have seen that I never advised the user to use VMs but instead would have asked more questions to see what the user exactly wants. Just like ikonia did but because he had no clue what was said before he joined he
[09:51] <an3k> asked already stated and already answered questions again and again.
[09:51] <ikonia> so I'm not really sure what you want to gain from this discussion
[09:52] <an3k> Yes, I said I could help him (the user) with ESXi. But that doesn't mean that I advise him to use ESXi.
[09:53] <ikonia> an3k: what do you want to happen from this conversation ?
[10:02] <Myrtti> I've not pitched in because I've nothing to add to ikonias question. what are you ultimately waiting to happen as a result of this conversation?
[10:05] <an3k> Myrtti: Oh I'm sorry. I didn't read what he wrote since I was talking to you and his heckles were kind of confusing I temp-ignored him so I neither get distracted nor agitated.
[10:06] <Myrtti> That's an unfortunate strategy
[10:06] <an3k> One thing I've learned from more than 10 years of IRCing is not to interrupt convos
[10:07] <ikonia> this seems to be a personal issue with me because I provided help to someone you wanted to help
[10:07] <an3k> Myrtti: why? Because everybody here handles his own possible violations?
[10:10] <Myrtti> No, because you're putting your faith into ikonia not having anything worthwhile to the discussion about him. Things don't work like that in real life either
[10:10] <Myrtti> if you have an issue with his actions, he needs to be part of the discussion. end of.
[10:12] <Myrtti> #ubuntu isn't a competition, and people asking for help aren't given queue numbers
[10:12] <an3k> I never thought so
[10:12] <Myrtti> if more people help one person, it's not (necessarily) off the the of someone else
[10:13] <Myrtti> now, to return to the question posed earlier...
[10:14] <Myrtti> what do you ultimately want to achieve from this conversation? you didn't answer yet
[10:15] <Myrtti> nrb, need breakfast
[10:30] <Myrtti> nothing?
[10:31] <an3k> you were eating and I were writing
[10:33] <an3k> Myrtti: 1) Even in real life when two people have an issue and can't solve it by themselves a third-party takes over. Then one of the persons is given the word so he can make a statement. After that the second person is given the word so he can make his statement too. Not only common-sense, Netiquette or good form but also the common rules of a conciliation imply that nobody (should)
[10:33] <an3k> interrupt somebody else because that just leads to a discussion and anger and so on. And because of that I simply temp-ignored him so that I don't get distracted. It had nothing to do with "[11:10:21] <Myrtti> No, because you're putting your faith into ikonia not having anything worthwhile to the discussion about him. Things don't work like that in real life either"
[10:35] <Myrtti> and moving on from that, rehashing the question that has been asked a few times now, five times exactly, and this is the sixth time: What are you expecting to leave with from this conversation?
[10:38] <an3k> Myrtti: If I understood you correctly: Nothing
[10:38] <Myrtti> alright, let's rehash it once more then
[10:38] <Myrtti> what would you *LIKE* to gain from this conversation?
[10:39] <an3k> I did understood you correctly. Nothing.
[10:39] <Myrtti> nothing?
[10:39] <Myrtti> so this has just been the waste of three people's time?
[10:39] <Myrtti> with the intention to gain nothing?
[10:39] <an3k> Yeah, you're peeking at the redirection-ban but I'm not.
[10:40] <Myrtti> I actually wasn't looking at it
[10:40] <Myrtti> I was genuinely looking for any answer other than nothing
[10:40] <an3k> I had a good talk with Jordan and I thought I come back later to inform you about something negative I've noticed so that it can get improved if wanted
[10:41] <Myrtti> ok. Thanks for the input then.
[10:43] <IdleOne> an3k: Please part this channel now if there is nothing else.
[10:46] <an3k> ikonia: do you want to get the username of the one user who actually got ignored?
[10:46] <an3k> You wrote there was no one
[10:50] <an3k> Ah I see. Nobody gives a ... cares.
[10:50] <IdleOne> an3k: you can private message the info to ikonia or post it in here.
[10:54] <an3k> Tell me if I'm wrong but actually I think the more I write - regardless if it's plain stupid or intelligent and helpful - the less I get taken seriously.
[11:01] <IdleOne> an3k: People here have spent 2 hours speaking with you to ultimately find out you didn't really expect any results. That makes them feel like you wasted their time. I also took the time to answer your one question to ikonia and you are still here without any apparent reason. Please state an actual issue with #ubuntu or the Ubuntu ops and I will try to help you.
[11:01] <IdleOne> Otherwise, please part the channel and we thank you for your input
[11:03] <an3k> IdleOne: The question was "what would you *LIKE* to gain from this conversation?" I wanted to gain nothing from this convo but give feedback (how do I gain from that?).
[11:03] <IdleOne> ok well you gave the feedback
[11:03] <IdleOne> anything else?
[11:06] <an3k> Wow, definitely not if you ask like that. Feels more like "f*** off" than "Is there something else we can assist you with?".
[11:07] <an3k> oh btw. that was not a rage-quit. Just in case ...
[11:07] <Myrtti> Is there something else someone here can assist you with?
[11:09] <Myrtti> ...
[13:07] <bazhang> diego and bruno same ip it appears
[14:53] <DJones> Dealt with by Drone
[14:57] <Pici> yay
[16:02] <bcc> http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-2869-1/
[16:02] <bcc> CVE links are broken (at bottom)
[16:17] <rww> bcc: they work fine for me (but #ubuntu-ops doesn't handle USNs regardless)
[16:18] <bcc> fixed now >_>
[16:18] <bcc> okay :)
[16:18] <rww> :)
[16:18] <bcc> quite a nasty bug
[16:56] <hggdh> USNs are handled by the folks on #ubuntu-hardened
[17:06] <rww> ah, was wondering about that. thanks hggdh :)
[17:08] <hggdh> rww: my pleasure
[19:11] <k1l> as long as we dont have a working postinstall routine that removes old kernels the installer needs to increase /boot on install.
[19:36] <Pici> k1l: mariakaplovik was doing the same thing in #freenode, fyi.
[19:37] <k1l> oh well
[19:43] <popey> uh, apt now does the removing old kernels
[19:43] <popey> has done for a while now iirc
[19:43] <k1l> then the /boot size needs to be increased. there are a lot of users coming to #u with that issue
[19:44] <popey> yes, it was a bug in older releases, we should identify what release they're on
[19:44] <popey> because technically it's fixed
[19:44] <k1l> i think they were on 14.04
[19:45] <popey> yeah, i think it was fixed post 14.04
[19:45] <k1l> sounds like an important SRU then, imho
[19:46] <popey> yeah, should dig out the bug, I'm sure it's been considered
[19:49] <Unit193> popey: Removes old kernels, or does a much better job so that people can use  apt-get autoremove  now?
[19:50] <k1l> apt-get autoremove works.but the typical user doesnt use that.
[20:00] <Unit193> k1l: So?  You can keep bumping it up, but if you never remove old kernels you'll just delay the inevitable.
[20:01] <k1l> Unit193: i am not sure what the gui updater does. but the typical average joe will most probably not run terminal commands
[20:09] <popey> yeah, update manager should probably do it
[20:24] <k1l> uh, that is a good one for bazhang :) http://www.xkcd.com/1508/
[21:31] <k1l> Sebastien (seb@freenode.club)  another cloak. didnt know there was such a cloak.
[21:32] <Pici> k1l: thats not a cloak
[21:32] <k1l> uh, there is a .club tld?
[21:32] <Pici> yep. theres a .horse tld too
[21:33] <k1l> i wonder where the horse country is ;p
[21:34] <Unit193> These are the stupid gTLDs.
[21:35] <Pici> k1l: tracepath -m 50 bad.horse
[21:36] <k1l> hehe
[22:04] <k1l> zzxc: hi, how can we help you?