18:03 <AlanBell> #startmeeting IRC Operator team meeting 18:03 <meetingology> Meeting started Wed Mar 19 18:03:04 2014 UTC. The chair is AlanBell. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 18:03 <meetingology> 18:03 <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 18:03 <IdleOne> o/ 18:03 <AlanBell> agenda is over here https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcCouncil/MeetingAgenda 18:05 <AlanBell> not sure where the meetingology logs are for the last meeting, but here is the day log http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2014/01/22/%23ubuntu-meeting.html 18:05 <AlanBell> no specific ation items recoreded but we did quite a bit of assorted stuff since then :/ 18:05 <knome> http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2014/ubuntu-meeting.2014-01-22-18.01.log.html 18:06 <AlanBell> ah, silly me I was looking in the #meetingology channel not ubuntu-meeting 18:06 <AlanBell> ok, so moving on 18:06 <AlanBell> #topic Open items in the IRCC tracker 18:07 <AlanBell> just checking the tracker . . . 18:07 <AlanBell> no open tickets 18:08 <knome> what's the tracker URL, and is it publicly accessible 18:08 <AlanBell> for those that don't know, the tracker is an osticket instance running here http://ubottu.com/tickets 18:08 <AlanBell> tickets get created when people email the appeals address 18:08 <knome> ack 18:09 <AlanBell> it isn't publicly accessible, but every meeting we declare anything going on in it at a high level 18:09 <phunyguy> (here) 18:10 <AlanBell> #topic Review Bugs related to the Ubuntu IRC Council 18:10 <AlanBell> we have a bug though 18:10 <AlanBell> bug 892501 has been reopened, and we can discuss that in more detail in a later item on the agenda 18:10 <ubottu> bug 892501 in ubuntu-community "Floodbots - need a re-write to be under ubuntu operator team control" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/892501 18:11 <AlanBell> but first . . . 18:11 <AlanBell> #topic The IRCC going forward 18:11 <AlanBell> so, we have a newish IRCC, following the elections in December 18:12 <AlanBell> since then there have been rather a lot of stressful interactions and IdleOne has sent an email of resignation to the list 18:13 <AlanBell> so we are back down to 4 members, AlanBell Pici Tm_T hggdh 18:13 <AlanBell> there have also been other discussions and suggestions about the IRCC, whether it is right for the team and so on 18:14 <AlanBell> I would be interested in feedback from others on what we do from here 18:14 <not_rww> o/ 18:15 <hggdh> so would I... 18:15 * phunyguy ponders 18:15 <MooDoo> Has the resignation been accepted? 18:15 <AlanBell> all options are open, we could have a vote of confidence in the current IRCC, we could have a vote on whether there should be an IRCC, we could open an election to fill the seat, we could invite the CC to fill the remaining seat 18:15 <not_rww> AlanBell: in terms of immediate issues, I would prefer either IdleOne un-resigning and being not-chairperson, or sticking to 4 members. I don't think electing another person is a good idea at this time. 18:15 <hggdh> MooDoo: yes, it has 18:15 <AlanBell> MooDoo: good question 18:16 <phunyguy> I do not think it should go away. The IRCC has it's place in my eyes, and to do away with it would leave a giant hole. Just my two cents. 18:16 <knome> does the IRCC have the teams support and is it trusted to steer the team? 18:16 <IdleOne> I have already stated that I am willing to un-resign with the coditions that rww has mentioned. 18:16 <AlanBell> quite whether a resignation can be withdrawn, I have no idea, we don't have a procedural path for that as such, but if the CC agrees I would see no problem with it 18:17 <ikonia> I see a problem with it personally 18:17 <IdleOne> I think this might be something that the current four member, the CC, and myself might want to discuss. 18:17 <knome> i don't think you can force anybody to stay a member. 18:18 <ikonia> IdleOne: has resigned without notice or hand over - done, move on 18:18 <knome> if it's not accepted, the resigned memeber can just do nothing 18:18 <ikonia> you have 4 members - move on 18:18 <AlanBell> yeah, we can't "not accept" the resignation 18:18 <knome> and it is effectively the same as "accepting" the resignal 18:18 <MooDoo> I don't think it's as simple as that 18:18 <ikonia> it is as simple as that 18:18 <phunyguy> I agree that flipflopping resignations is probably not a good idea.... 18:18 <AlanBell> whether it can be withdrawn is an open question 18:19 <MooDoo> imo if it's been 5 members, then it needs to be 5 members 18:19 <AlanBell> we don't neccessarily need to do anything about it 18:19 <knome> whether it can be withdrawn is up for the whole teams' approval, not the IRCC only 18:19 <ikonia> MooDoo: why ? why does it need to be 5 members 18:19 <ikonia> why the magic of 5 18:19 <AlanBell> we had 4 members for some time, we gave the casting vote to the CC 18:19 <IdleOne> knome: why? the whole team didn't get a vote on who got elected 18:19 <ikonia> someone doesn't want to do the job - thats fine, they have left, thats fine too, why make an issue out of them coming and going 18:19 <phunyguy> ^ yes the odd number is what needs to be. Not even. 18:20 <MooDoo> what phunyguy said :) 18:20 <ikonia> I'm sure 4 people can manage to work out a judgment 18:20 <AlanBell> ikonia: I am not really, but it would be a failure not to have this agenda item 18:20 <ikonia> and it can go to the CC if someone feels a real deal breaker is needed 18:20 <ikonia> AlanBell: it's good that it's on the agenda 18:20 <knome> "Members of the Ubuntu IRC Members Team are eligible to vote." 18:21 <IdleOne> knome: not all those members got to vote afaik 18:21 <MooDoo> ikonia: but going to the CC just drags things out surely when it can be sorted by the power of 5? just my two cents :) 18:21 <AlanBell> knome: yes, that is the voting group, which isn't quite a lineup with the operator team 18:21 <ikonia> MooDoo: it can be sorted by the power of 4 quite easy 18:21 <cprofitt> I would prefer not to have the CC have to get involved just to break a tie 18:21 <AlanBell> IdleOne: all that group did, just not all operators are in that groups 18:21 <ikonia> these aren't life and deather changes, a "hung" issue has pretty much never happened 18:22 <knome> IdleOne, that's a shortcoming of the voting procedure, and does by no means mean that it's okay for the IRCC to withdraw a resignation 18:22 <AlanBell> cprofitt: mostly an accademic issue, we have never had a tie 18:22 <ikonia> exactly 18:22 * cprofitt nods 18:22 <ikonia> so 4 members, move on, 18:22 <cprofitt> on the subject of resignation and withdrawl 18:22 <IdleOne> anyway, not a big deal for me. I resigned and I'll stick to my choice. I offered to help if the need was there but I don't want to cause more problems. So I am fine with not being on the IRCC. 18:22 <elfy> cprofitt: I'd agree with that 18:22 <cprofitt> I think the question is less about the resignation and more about what it implies 18:22 <ikonia> IdleOne: if you want to do it - do it, if you don't thats fine too, it's just the limbo state that seems pointless to drag out 18:22 <knome> if the irc members team isn't up-to-date, update it 18:22 <IdleOne> I suggest we consider this matter closed. 18:23 <not_rww> with 4 people, majority is 3. with 5 people, majority is 3. shouldn't make much of a difference in reality, especially since everyone's usually on the same page 18:23 <cprofitt> I can certainly appreciate that the resignation was done in the heat of the moment while emotions were running high 18:23 <not_rww> especially since IdleOne doesn't seem the sort of person to avoid giving input just because he's not on IRCC *ducks* 18:23 <cprofitt> I can understand not wanting to alow a person to un-resign... 18:24 <IdleOne> not_rww: I'm not one to hold my tongue that is for sure 18:24 <ikonia> in fairness there was a real short list of candidates and people got pushed into doing it because no-one wanted to do it 18:24 <cprofitt> the question, for me, is if IdleOne can do the job or if allowing him to come back would negatively impact the team in the future 18:24 <cprofitt> +1 ikonia 18:24 <AlanBell> I think my view is that withdrawing a resignation is a rule we don't have, and probably don't want to have 18:24 <cprofitt> I think that is the larger issue -- not many candidates 18:24 <cprofitt> AlanBell: I agree... 18:24 <cprofitt> accept the resignation 18:24 <AlanBell> regardless of the circumstances of this one 18:25 <phunyguy> this is why I don't agree that this should be brushed off as "it happened, move on" 18:25 <ikonia> cprofitt: that is how I see it, IdleOne pretty much stuck his name in the hat due to lack of people coming forward 18:25 <knome> nobody answered my first question: 18:25 <knome> 20:16 knome: does the IRCC have the teams support and is it trusted to steer the team? 18:25 <cprofitt> that does not exclude a person from serving again in the future though does it? 18:25 <knome> which is definitely related to the IRCC going forward... 18:25 <hggdh> cprofitt: no, it does not exclude 18:25 <AlanBell> cprofitt: no, it certainly doesn't 18:25 <cprofitt> good question knome 18:25 <hggdh> but knome's question is, I think, important 18:25 <ikonia> knome: the last IRCC term was the best there has been, the new one is made up of mostly the same people, I have no reason to doubt the individuals 18:26 <AlanBell> so if we decided to fill the seat at the end of the term or before then IdleOne would be most welcome to stand 18:26 <cprofitt> so if it does not exclude a person from serving again... use your normal procedure to fill the fifth slot 18:26 <phunyguy> I can agree with that. 18:26 <knome> ikonia, i'm not doubting anything either, but i want to raise the question up 18:26 <phunyguy> put it up to another vote... the same way the IRCC is voted upon today? 18:26 <IdleOne> cprofitt: I agree wit not_rww another election now is just going to cause more problems. The IRCC can effectively do the job with 4 members 18:27 <phunyguy> oh. 18:27 <MooDoo> so basically stick with 4 until the next election? 18:27 <cprofitt> then we can go with 4... just follow the established procedure for restaffing 18:27 <phunyguy> I just don't think it should be vacant if it dosn't have to be. 18:27 <AlanBell> yeah, so are we agreed, carry on with 4, fill the 5th seat at some point when it seems like a good idea, but no urgency to that 18:27 <hggdh> +1 18:27 <IdleOne> not to mention I doubt there will be any more volunteers this time around especially with all that has been going on 18:27 <cprofitt> I would agree with focusing on getting the team healthy 18:27 <phunyguy> I would volunteer, but not a member, etc. 18:28 <MooDoo> phunyguy: snap! 18:28 <ikonia> IdleOne: that is a real concern, especially based on the last time 18:28 <not_rww> phunyguy: I think it has to be. Another election would be distracting and add another person to an already-confusing dynamic. 18:28 <MooDoo> I would stick with 4 until the next election go to CC if needed and let IdleOne stand if he wants to? 18:28 * MooDoo shuts up 18:28 <AlanBell> part of the issue was the timing of the open letter, which was just before the call for candidates 18:29 <AlanBell> (I actually delayed the call for candidates by a few days as a result) 18:29 <phunyguy> OK I can agree with it staying 4 members then. We can revisit later. 18:29 <AlanBell> but anyhow, I think we have a route forward which is what I wanted from this agenda item 18:30 <Tm_T> hi 18:30 * phunyguy looks at his watch and taps foot at Tm_T 18:30 <not_rww> I'm interested in discussing knome's question next, personally. 18:30 <knome> if nobody "wants" to be on the IRCC, and only do it because "nobody else does", can *i* trust that the IRCC actually does their job well, and in the best intents for the team? 18:30 <IdleOne> yes you can 18:30 <knome> because? 18:30 <phunyguy> knome: that's a loaded question. 18:30 <AlanBell> #agreed stick with 4 people on the IRCC until further notice 18:30 <phunyguy> knome: because that person may have the ability, but not the confidence. 18:30 <ikonia> before we go any futher would it be possible to have a meeting without any more "jokey" comments 18:31 <ikonia> and actually disuss things without these off track comments 18:31 <knome> phunyguy, of course it's a loaded question, everything is. 18:31 <IdleOne> The four members on the IRCC are most trustworthy and in all my time on this team they have always acted in the best interest of the community 18:31 <knome> if somebody doesn't have the confidence, can i trust they are able to deliver their best? 18:32 <AlanBell> knome: there were more candidates than places 18:32 <phunyguy> knome: in most cases, yes, because they are judging themselves and put more time into their decision. 18:32 <ikonia> knome: I suggest anyone who isn't confident mails the team 18:32 <hggdh> knome: you mean the team's confidence, right? 18:32 <ikonia> rather than call it out in public 18:32 <ikonia> then their individual issues can be addressed 18:32 <AlanBell> ikonia: calling it out in public is fine, as I said, all options are on the table 18:32 <ikonia> (team = council ) 18:32 <not_rww> My main concern with IRCC (not the current iteration, this has been a general thing) is that issues tend to take forever to get resolved. I don't know if that's just me being impatient and/or expecting too much for people in charge of real-time chat, or a genuine problem. 18:32 <knome> sure. 18:32 <ikonia> AlanBell: it's not really going to go anywhere is it 18:33 <ikonia> I have confidence / I don't - discuss 18:33 <not_rww> So I have the habit of not having confidence that issues are going to get sorted out promptly. 18:33 <ikonia> the issue is with $user / IRC Council 18:33 <knome> what not_rww said is also my concern as well 18:33 <AlanBell> not_rww: got a specific example? 18:33 <not_rww> But that's an institutional issue. In terms of the specific people we have right now, I have confidence that they will do the position to the best of their abilities, while hampered by institutional issues. 18:33 <AlanBell> it probably is fair that we try to slow things down sometimes 18:34 <knome> floodbots? 18:34 <AlanBell> and sometimes we are slow due to availablility and reluctance to deal with things 18:34 <not_rww> AlanBell: LjL comes to mind. I think he's stated, and I strongly agree, that that took way too long. 18:34 <cprofitt> not_rww: I think in many cases when you have a group of people that are tasked with making a decision that delay is part of the process. 18:34 <not_rww> AlanBell: FloodBots should have had a decision ages ago. 18:34 <cprofitt> I would assume 'easy topics' do not get elevated to the IRCC 18:34 <knome> AlanBell, reluctance... well said. 18:34 <cprofitt> it is the difficult ones that do 18:34 <ikonia> not_rww: who actually are you ? is not_rww your normal nick name ? 18:34 <ikonia> are you rww ? 18:34 <not_rww> ikonia: yes 18:34 <ikonia> ok, cool 18:35 <knome> AlanBell, so if the IRCC is "reluctant" to act on things, should i trust them doing their best for the team? 18:35 <knome> how can we deal with that reluctancy? 18:35 <not_rww> I could think of others that are also, as cprofitt said, difficult decisions. But the standard IRCC response in the past has tended to be inaction, and that needs to stop. 18:35 <cprofitt> knome - reluctant does not mean unwilling... 18:35 <AlanBell> there are quite a few things that we did reluctantly recently, we did them though 18:36 <cprofitt> reluctant means a realization that they need to take things slowly... 18:36 <knome> cprofitt, i acknowledge 18:36 <cprofitt> to take caution and care with them 18:36 <hggdh> I think there is merit to both sides 18:36 <ikonia> the time lag to have a discussion between the members can cause delay, thats frustrating, but I don't see how that can be improved. 18:36 <ikonia> thats not peoples fault they are in different time zone, or have to work, or look after a child 18:36 <knome> disclaimer: i'm not trying to cause drama and confrontation here... 18:36 <cprofitt> I agree that, at times, delay causes issues... just like quick action can 18:37 <hggdh> I cannot speak about previous IRCCs, but I can state that the current one had some quite difficult decisions to make -- and they did get made 18:37 <cprofitt> I do have faith that everyone on the IRCC is trying to do their best... quick action or delayed action 18:37 <knome> hggdh, i appreciate that 18:37 <AlanBell> shall we move on? 18:37 <cprofitt> with complex issues there is often a need to gather facts as well... which takes time 18:38 <knome> would it be fair to ask the IRCC to publicly response to any issue raised within some specified time, like a week? 18:38 <knome> and follow up weekly or beweekly about the status 18:38 <not_rww> Even if the public response is "we are looking into this" 18:38 <knome> *bi-weekly 18:38 <ikonia> knome: that sadly doesn't work 18:38 <AlanBell> hmm, if it is a defined item somewhere 18:38 <knome> ikonia, because? 18:38 <AlanBell> !appeals 18:38 <ubottu> If you disagree with a decision by an operator, please first pay #ubuntu-ops a visit. If you are still unhappy, please see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/AppealProcess for the steps you should take. If you feel the need to discuss the channel rules, please contact the ops on IRC or via the email address on the aforementioned page. 18:38 <AlanBell> ^ email it there and create a ticket \o/ 18:38 <ikonia> knome: they tried this with an issue for me - but the delay was down to people not talking to each other, so when I got an update they had not spoken to each other and the update was wrong 18:39 <knome> ikonia, ok.. so what you are saying is that "it hasn't worked in the past" 18:39 <cprofitt> knome: it would be fair to expect a response... as in 'we are looking at this' ... but not a decision 18:39 <knome> cprofitt, i'm not asking for a decision 18:39 <ikonia> knome: totally, yes, thats the correct wording 18:39 <ikonia> knome: if there is a delay doing $something it normally seems to be because people are away, in which case the update is either "nothing done yet" or "wrong" becauyse the guy giving the update is out of the loop 18:39 <ikonia> they have tried that 18:39 <knome> AlanBell, so should all issues raised to the IRCC go through the appeals email then? 18:40 <hggdh> cprofitt: that is not enough, I think. "We are working on it" is nice as a boilerplate, but updates are also necessary, with more details 18:40 <knome> if the IRCC give weekly notices and all of them are "nothing is done", maybe the team can question if the IRCC is fit in that situation 18:40 <AlanBell> knome: nope, just talk to us 18:40 <AlanBell> but if you want SLAs on it, then use the tracker 18:40 <not_rww> is IRCC/IrcTeam subject to Team Reporting? i forget 18:40 <knome> AlanBell, then how do i get weekly notices how things are going, since it's not a specified item? 18:40 <knome> SLA? 18:40 <cprofitt> hggdh: I agree it is nice to have more,... but I am not sure a one week period of time is enough to expect more 18:40 <AlanBell> service level agreement 18:40 <knome> not_rww, all teams should be 18:41 <knome> well, i just think the IRCC should give periodic reports on *all* issues they are working on. 18:41 <ikonia> keep in mind these people are giving up their time 18:41 <AlanBell> not_rww: we did that for a while, can do it again, I have no idea who reads them, nothing happened when we stopped doing them 18:41 <knome> if that's not happening, the rest of the team can't know if there is any progress 18:41 <Tm_T> knome: periodic report like, uh, these meetings? 18:41 <not_rww> then I'd suggest perhaps weekly/every two week interim team reports that get rolled into the monthly one 18:41 <MooDoo> I think a simple. hello $person, thanks for your $communication, we'll get back to you shortly, please bear with us is enought right? 18:41 <ikonia> knome: could it be put o the individual to chase up with the council / 18:41 <ikonia> eg: I raise the issue, I chase it up with them 18:41 <not_rww> and actually doing the monthly one ;) 18:41 <knome> not_rww, AlanBell: the team reporting sucks pretty much for all teams atm, but all teams are "subject" to it 18:42 <not_rww> and private issues that aren't suitable for there can be status-checked over the ticket thing 18:42 <knome> Tm_T, for example, but a report every month tends to just delay and delay 18:42 <AlanBell> so what is an "issue" that we are working on? 18:42 <Tm_T> knome: I know, I remember when we had monthly reports 18:43 <Tm_T> adding more bureaucracy doesn't sound a good way to go though 18:43 <ikonia> AlanBell: if you skip forward to the councils function, this query may go away 18:43 <knome> AlanBell, anything that an operator has raised and that needs IRCC intervention or decision that isn't acted on. 18:43 <knome> i'm not proposing to add bureaucracy... 18:43 <knome> i'm proposing to add communication to both direction 18:44 <Tm_T> knome: communication can be done in many ways 18:44 <knome> if an operator raises an issue for the IRCC, it would be nice to get reports back 18:44 <Tm_T> yes I totally agree with that 18:44 <knome> if it's an informal mail to the mailing list, cool 18:44 <knome> that would be completely okay 18:44 <knome> again, EVEN IF the report was "we're still working on this" 18:45 <hggdh> indeed. And I think this is doable, and should be done 18:45 <jussi> depends on the issue no, arent the issues raised with the ircc meant to be private/confidential ? 18:45 <knome> but if that reporting happens once a month in a team meeting, you only need to postpone it twice and by that time, quarter of a year has passed 18:45 <not_rww> jussi: and those would go over the ticketing system instead 18:45 <knome> jussi, obviously, if it's a private issue, report to concerned parties only 18:45 <AlanBell> most issues we just deal with them 18:45 <Tm_T> not_rww: all issues could go to ticketing if it requires followup 18:46 <hggdh> (an email to the ML, I mean. And, of course, private/confidential issues would have to be sanitised.) 18:46 <AlanBell> like someone asks for a cloak, someone needs to get access to a channel etc 18:46 <knome> AlanBell, that's good, in that case you obviously do not need to report 18:46 <knome> AlanBell, because the issue has been taken care of 18:46 <knome> i'm talking about open issues 18:46 <AlanBell> and some are not operator specific, like we need to clean up expired cloaks 18:46 <AlanBell> and those go on the meeting agenda 18:47 <Tm_T> I really recommend people to use the ticketing system more actively if there is something they really see important and isn't for irc team meeting or something that can be done in #ubuntu-irc 18:47 <AlanBell> anyhow, I think we need to move along . . so 18:47 <knome> i'm all in for that... 18:47 <AlanBell> #topic Paste and attack prevention in the main channels 18:47 <knome> but i would think the tickets should be public for the team to view at all times 18:48 <knome> not only if you know the ticket number 18:48 <AlanBell> so we had the floodbots for many years, and now they are gone 18:48 <knome> AlanBell, so no promise? 18:48 <knome> AlanBell, no response? 18:48 <tsimpson> knome: you can use LP for that 18:48 <knome> AlanBell, no action item? 18:48 <knome> tsimpson, that works for me, if the IRCC doesn't think that's too much bureucracy 18:48 <AlanBell> knome: I will follow up with something 18:48 <knome> thanks. 18:48 <Tm_T> knome: I promise to focus on communicating better, happy? (: 18:49 <knome> #action AlanBell to follow up with IRCC reporting back to community 18:49 * meetingology AlanBell to follow up with IRCC reporting back to community 18:49 <tsimpson> knome: it already exists https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-irc-council 18:49 <IdleOne> regarding expired cloaks. I think after two weeks that a member has expired and has not requested to be added back on the team, the cloaks should be automatically removed. Membership is for life anyway (rare cases do happen), the ex-member can always request a cloak again later. 18:49 <knome> #action Tm_T to focus on communication 18:49 * meetingology Tm_T to focus on communication 18:49 <AlanBell> we have launchpad bugs, the ticket tracker, the mailing list, the meeting logs and you can *talk to us* 18:49 <AlanBell> IdleOne: yeah, we just have to do it, time consuming stuff 18:49 <knome> tsimpson, yes, i'm okay with that, as long as it's okay for the IRCC, and there is actually responses. 18:49 <knome> but cheers, i'm happy with this. 18:49 <AlanBell> so, attack prevention 18:49 <tsimpson> well reporting on the LP bugs is part of the regular meeting agenda 18:50 <AlanBell> we had the floodbots, jolly convenient they were too, but they are gone. We said we would put together some kind of tool for preventing accidental pastes, which we did 18:50 <AlanBell> we put a supybot instance together, running a modified AttackProtector plugin 18:51 <AlanBell> code is https://github.com/AlanBell/Supybot-plugins 18:51 <IdleOne> source is ? 18:51 <IdleOne> there it is 18:51 <Tm_T> AlanBell: are they verbose of their doings in some monitoring channel? 18:51 <AlanBell> the modification is to allow auto reversal of mode changes 18:51 <AlanBell> Tm_T: nope 18:51 <Tm_T> allright 18:51 <not_rww> I think it using NOTICE is already on your todo list, right? 18:52 <not_rww> b/c I don't care, but some people presumably do (and AntiSpamMeta does, amusingly) 18:52 <AlanBell> this bot was sat in the #unopaste channel for some time for a bit of testing 18:52 <AlanBell> not_rww: it is using notice 18:52 <IdleOne> AlanBell: it shouldn't be 18:52 <not_rww> AlanBell: right, i think people were saying it /shouldn't/ be noticing channels? 18:52 <IdleOne> was the point :) 18:52 * AlanBell thinks it was rww that asked for it to be a notice 18:52 <not_rww> I didn't ask for it to be a notice... 18:52 <AlanBell> but sure, it can not be a notice 18:52 <AlanBell> someone did, I wouldn't just make that up ;) 18:53 <not_rww> I don't care what it is, but some/most people have crap IRC clients that care a lot about channel notices 18:53 <IdleOne> AlanBell: only because some clients send notices to server tab. New users might not know to look there. 18:53 <tsimpson> I really don't think it should notice the channel 18:53 <AlanBell> ok, I will change that later 18:53 <tsimpson> it should either notice the user, or /msg the user, or just use a normal channel message 18:53 <Tm_T> I agree no notice 18:53 <Tm_T> in channel that is 18:53 <not_rww> what tsimpson said. in decreasing preference order for me 18:54 <AlanBell> oh, maybe you said to notice the user 18:54 <IdleOne> channel message is best because that is where the user is looking when the are pasting mulitple lines 18:54 <not_rww> AlanBell: that sounds more like something I'd say 18:54 <AlanBell> what does that even do? 18:54 <Tm_T> not_rww: you mean rww would say? 18:54 <phunyguy> noticing the user is like a PM, but they see it everywhere... right? 18:55 <AlanBell> go on, notice me :) 18:55 <IdleOne> phunyguy: not in all clients 18:55 <phunyguy> oh. 18:55 <not_rww> depends on the client 18:55 <not_rww> what it does is send an RFC-compliant message to the user 18:55 <phunyguy> mine has settings to put it where you want. 18:55 <not_rww> some clients choose to display that in stupid ways, some don't 18:55 * AlanBell sees nothing, anyone noticed me? 18:56 <hggdh> /invite #ubuntu-br-ops 18:56 <tsimpson> AlanBell: you have a notice 18:56 <knome> AlanBell, i just did. 18:56 <AlanBell> hmm 18:56 <IdleOne> phunyguy: You are an experienced IRC user though. The best solution is the one that covers all the bases. A channel message would be it 18:56 <AlanBell> less than totally effective 18:56 <phunyguy> yep. I agree there 18:56 <AlanBell> oh, there they are in a status window, not hilighting me 18:56 <IdleOne> see 18:57 <AlanBell> I would never notice those notices 18:57 <tsimpson> the only problem with a normal channel message is that it can (theoretically) be exploited to ironically flood the channel, adding to the noise 18:57 <IdleOne> first time irc user in #ubuntu gets a notice, doesn't see it and is now upset about getting Can't send to channel messages from the server 18:57 * Tm_T notices AlanBell not noticing notice 18:57 <tsimpson> but it's not something I see as likely 18:57 <not_rww> so use PM? 18:57 <IdleOne> not_rww: same problem 18:57 <knome> time limit the notice to one per 30 secs. 18:57 <IdleOne> new users might not see the new tab 18:57 <AlanBell> PM is less of a problem 18:58 <knome> or one per 1 minute. 18:58 <phunyguy> I am horrible at noticing PMs and I am an experienced user. 18:58 <MooDoo> AlanBell: but more intrusive? 18:58 <not_rww> presumably you'd have more chance to notice when you see you can't talk :P 18:58 <phunyguy> ask IdleOne, chu, and everyone else that PMs me 18:58 <AlanBell> anyhow we don't like the notice to the channel so I can change that 18:58 <knome> how commonly are there several floodpastes in 1 minute? 18:58 <knome> (from different users?) 18:58 <AlanBell> in principal though we can get it to do different things, message the monitor channel and other stuff 18:59 <IdleOne> A channel message is most effective because that is where the users attention is at the time they would get a message about pasting to the channel 18:59 <knome> or even in 5 minutes 18:59 <AlanBell> knome: really rare 18:59 <knome> see. 18:59 <phunyguy> not_rww: I thought when you are +q, it still sends to the channel on your end? Or is that only if +z is set? 18:59 <knome> just time limit the notice message to N minutes 18:59 <not_rww> phunyguy: only if +z is set, you get a server error if it's not 18:59 <phunyguy> so some may not realize... 18:59 <phunyguy> oh ok. 18:59 <phunyguy> well +z can be set at any point in time. 18:59 <phunyguy> (or unset) 18:59 <not_rww> anyways, apart from that bikeshedding, I think the bot is working fine as a starting point, and we can do more complicated stuff iff need be 18:59 <AlanBell> I made the bot some time ago (17 days ago) but the general opinion was to not send it in to the channel and see how we got on without it 19:00 <AlanBell> couple of days ago there was a bit of a complaint about the lack of floodbots so I sent it in and it has prevented a couple of problems 19:00 <not_rww> i'll be back in 5 minutes 19:00 <knome> AlanBell, is the code available and can you link to it 19:00 <AlanBell> knome: of course, and I did :) 19:00 <AlanBell> https://github.com/AlanBell/Supybot-plugins 19:01 <AlanBell> pull requests welcome 19:01 <knome> just missed that. thanks. 19:01 <AlanBell> so I think unopaste is staying, I am not hearing howls of anquish 19:01 <AlanBell> it isn't another eir ;) 19:02 <knome> AlanBell, AttackProtector is the right subdir, right? 19:02 <AlanBell> knome: yeah 19:02 <knome> cheers. 19:02 <AlanBell> oh, I need to push up the /notice bit 19:02 <AlanBell> that just isn't something to push upstream 19:03 <AlanBell> so, a few items to improve on that, but there we are for now 19:03 <knome> AlanBell, i've asked lderan to look at the code and come up with a time-limiter 19:03 <tsimpson> it could go upstream, if it was a configuration option 19:04 <Tm_T> good starting point and possibility to improve is all we need now 19:04 <knome> can ask him to look at that as well, if you want 19:04 <AlanBell> tsimpson: yeah, I just hard coded the text for now, if done properly then it might be worth contributing 19:04 <knome> AlanBell, asked for the conf option as well. 19:05 <knome> AlanBell, lderan will most probably be in touch with you. 19:05 <AlanBell> knome: sure, lderan can have all access required, no problem 19:05 <knome> AlanBell, yeah, i'm just *reporting back* on progress ;) 19:06 <knome> and noticing that somebody is actually looking at it. 19:06 * rww reappears 19:06 <lderan> hello there 19:06 <AlanBell> we are not committed to this path, if there is a different anti-paste solution that anyone preferes, then we can totally switch 19:06 <AlanBell> hi lderan 19:06 <AlanBell> anyhow, lets trot along to the factoid review \o/ 19:06 <AlanBell> #topic Factoid Review 19:06 <rww> thank you for taking lead on pastebot by the way AlanBell. was good work :) 19:07 <AlanBell> so we have a bunch of factoids and one of the issues raised in the open letter and then again in assorted bits of drama, was the over-use or inappropriate use of factoids by the team and users 19:07 <knome> http://pad.ubuntu.com/factoids 19:07 <AlanBell> so we thought we would have a look at what factoids might be in scope for that, and put the list on the pad that knome linked to :) 19:08 <AlanBell> so, lets go through them now, everyone should have access to the pad where comments have been left 19:08 <DJones> Evening 19:09 <MooDoo> hi DJones 19:09 <AlanBell> so, from the top :) 19:09 <AlanBell> !language 19:09 <ubottu> Please watch your language and topic to help keep this channel family-friendly, polite, and professional. 19:09 <knome> that has -5 +2 (for new merging with !english) 19:09 <AlanBell> we had a number of people not liking this factoid and an alternative proposal 19:10 <AlanBell> The main Ubuntu channels require that you speak in calm, polite English. For other languages, please visit https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/ChannelList 19:10 <AlanBell> !english 19:10 <ubottu> The #ubuntu, #kubuntu and #xubuntu channels are English only. For a complete list of channels in other languages, please visit https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/ChannelList 19:10 <knome> AlanBell, since the factoids are in the pad, do we need to copy/paste? 19:10 <AlanBell> so the proposal was to make both of them different 19:11 <Tm_T> AlanBell: I would prefer to see them merged 19:11 <AlanBell> knome: I am going to call them one by one, doesn't matter if we have extra text here, just makes the minutes look clearer 19:11 <AlanBell> ok, so we like the new text for both english and language? 19:11 <Tm_T> I'm ok with it 19:12 <AlanBell> !no language is <reply> The main Ubuntu channels require that you speak in calm, polite English. For other languages, please visit https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/ChannelList 19:12 <ubottu> I'll remember that AlanBell 19:12 <AlanBell> !english is alias language 19:12 <ubottu> But english already means something else! 19:12 <AlanBell> !forget english 19:12 <ubottu> I'll forget that, AlanBell 19:12 <AlanBell> !english is alias language 19:12 <ubottu> english has been forgotten, use '!unforget english' to edit it again 19:12 <AlanBell> bah 19:13 <DJones> The only issue I can see with that will be disagreements on what constitutes "the main ubuntu channels" 19:13 <AlanBell> someone know how to do it? 19:13 <tsimpson> unforget it, then use <alias> 19:13 <knome> !unforget english 19:13 <ubottu> I suddenly remember english again, knome 19:13 <knome> !no, english is <alias> language 19:13 <ubottu> I'll remember that knome 19:13 <AlanBell> ah, angle brackets 19:13 <AlanBell> !english 19:13 <ubottu> The main Ubuntu channels require that you speak in calm, polite English. For other languages, please visit https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/ChannelList 19:13 <AlanBell> hah 19:13 * tsimpson mumbles something about the documentation 19:13 <AlanBell> yeah, I read it once 19:13 <knome> tsimpson, documentation, BOOORIING and TL;DR ;) 19:13 <AlanBell> in one eye, out the other 19:14 <AlanBell> !ohmy 19:14 <ubottu> Please remember that all Ubuntu IRC channels share the same attitude of providing friendly and polite interaction with all users of all ages and cultures. Basically, this means no foul language and no abuse towards others. 19:14 * phunyguy is running out of time :( 19:14 <knome> could actually made a alias of language now. 19:14 <AlanBell> so, for this one several people didn't like it at all 19:15 <phunyguy> yeah, these types of factoids should be more humanly conveyed. As in, not a bot trigger 19:15 <AlanBell> !no ohmy is <alias> language 19:15 <ubottu> I'll remember that AlanBell 19:15 <AlanBell> phunyguy: so we can forget things altogether, that is fine 19:15 <AlanBell> but there was a proposal to reword it that had some support 19:15 <phunyguy> ahh I haven't checked recently. 19:16 <AlanBell> !enter 19:16 <ubottu> Please try to keep your questions/responses on one line. Don't use the "Enter" key as punctuation! 19:16 <AlanBell> several forgets on this one 19:16 <AlanBell> !forget enter 19:16 <ubottu> I'll forget that, AlanBell 19:16 <AlanBell> !repeat 19:16 <ubottu> Don't feel ignored and repeat your question quickly; if nobody knows your answer, nobody will answer you. While you wait, try searching https://help.ubuntu.com or http://ubuntuforums.org or http://askubuntu.com/ 19:16 <AlanBell> lots of people liked this one 19:16 <AlanBell> !anyone 19:16 <ubottu> A high percentage of the first questions asked in this channel start with "Does anyone/anybody..." Why not ask your next question (the real one) and find out? See also !details, !gq, and !poll. 19:16 <rww> kill with fire 19:16 <AlanBell> !forget anyone 19:16 <ubottu> I'll forget that, AlanBell 19:16 <phunyguy> ^ yes 19:17 <AlanBell> !behavior 19:17 <ubottu> The people here are volunteers, your attitude should reflect that. Answers are not always available. See http://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/Guidelines 19:17 <rww> people were abusing the hell out of that factoid :< 19:17 <rww> i like !behavior 19:17 <AlanBell> seems fine to me 19:17 <AlanBell> !etiquette 19:17 <ubottu> Unsure how you should behave on this channel? See (in a private message with the bot, /msg ubottu <keyword>): !AskTheBot, !CoC, !Guidelines, !Offtopic, !Language, !Attitude, !Repeat, !Enter, !Paste, !Caps, !NickSpam, !PM, !English - And most importantly, use common sense... 19:17 <AlanBell> for people who can spell etiquette 19:17 <jussi> I dont like behaviour. it feels very bossy 19:17 <rww> !behaviour =~ s/,/;/ 19:17 <ubottu> I'll remember that rww 19:18 <knome> jussi, and a bit too direct, "Answers are not always available." 19:18 <rww> jussi: it's usually a response in kind to people getting complainy about not getting answered 19:18 <jussi> knome: yes "short" 19:18 <tsimpson> too !many !see !also !keywords 19:18 <rww> could be reworded tho, but the intent needs to stay 19:18 <knome> why not merge with guidelines, +3 for that. 19:18 <knome> !guidelines 19:18 <ubottu> The guidelines for using the Ubuntu channels can be found here: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/Guidelines 19:18 <jussi> yep 19:18 <AlanBell> knome: merge which one with guidelines? 19:19 <jussi> ettiquette 19:19 <knome> actually both 19:19 <jussi> which I cant spell 19:19 <knome> both have +3 for merging 19:19 <AlanBell> !no etiquette is <alias> guidelines 19:19 <ubottu> I'll remember that AlanBell 19:19 <AlanBell> !no behavior is <alias> guidelines 19:19 <ubottu> You are editing an alias. Please repeat the edit command within the next 10 seconds to confirm 19:19 <knome> reword behavior or merge it 19:19 <rww> AlanBell: behaviour, not behavior 19:20 <AlanBell> !no behaviour is <alias> guidelines 19:20 <ubottu> I'll remember that AlanBell 19:20 <AlanBell> spelling, I fail 19:20 <AlanBell> !best 19:20 <ubottu> Usually, there is no single "best" application to perform a given task. It's up to you to choose, depending on your preferences, features you require, and other factors. Do NOT take polls in the channel. 19:20 <knome> !behavior 19:20 <ubottu> The guidelines for using the Ubuntu channels can be found here: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/Guidelines 19:20 <knome> forget !best 19:20 <jussi> I like best. 19:20 <rww> i dislike best 19:21 <rww> also, I just remembered that !patience covers what I wanted !behavior to cover, so yay 19:21 <tsimpson> let's have a poll! 19:21 <jussi> haha 19:21 <knome> no, 19:21 <AlanBell> what is the best factoid? 19:21 <knome> there was a poll already 19:21 <rww> i vote for !best is <alias> worst-#ubuntu-offtopic 19:21 <knome> and if you must take polls, take them in #ubuntu-polls :P 19:21 <jussi> knome: serious face off for a min :P 19:21 <AlanBell> !worst-#ubuntu-offtopic 19:21 <ubottu> This factoid is supposed to be pretty terrible. Please contact rodserling if you find a factoid worse than this, in order to improve, I mean pejorate, this useless conglomerate of words, thank you, well not really. Worst is also the dutch word for sausage. 19:22 <AlanBell> yeah, that is pretty bad 19:22 <jussi> just needs an update that one 19:22 <rww> not as bad as !ettiquette 19:22 <IdleOne> no, it's the worst 19:22 <jussi> I think we just change roserling and IdleOne and its all good 19:22 <knome> i think we must stop joking 19:22 <knome> we're discussing !best 19:23 <AlanBell> I don't think we need a best factoid, if someone asks what the best virtualisation system is or whatever then people can ask them what their requirements are 19:23 <jussi> yeah, back to it 19:23 <knome> (i don't want to sit in IRC the whole evening talking about IRC) 19:23 <knome> !forget best 19:23 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:23 <AlanBell> yay 19:23 <AlanBell> !who 19:23 <ubottu> As you can see, this is a large channel. If you're speaking to someone in particular, please put their nickname in what you say (use !tab), or else messages get lost and it becomes confusing :) 19:23 <knome> has +4 19:23 <AlanBell> that looks kinda handy 19:23 <knome> keep and move along 19:23 <knome> !away 19:24 <ubottu> Please do not use noisy away messages and nicks in Ubuntu channels. It is annoying and unnecessary. Use the command "/away <reason>" to set your client away silently. See also «/msg ubottu Guidelines» 19:24 <AlanBell> !away 19:24 <knome> -4 +1 19:24 <knome> probably better to notice personally about that. 19:24 <rww> "a simple PM to the user can help this", yes, !away > user 19:24 <AlanBell> good point, works well with > 19:24 <rww> it's not like it's something that really needs discussion, and people who get hit with it generally have heard about how awaynicks suck from elsewhere 19:25 <AlanBell> ok, keeping for now 19:25 <AlanBell> !pm 19:25 <ubottu> Please ask your questions in the channel so that other people can help you, benefit from your questions and answers, and ensure that you're not getting bad advice. Please note that some people find it rude to be sent a PM without being asked for permission to do so first. 19:25 <knome> can we keep !away, but edit !away-#ubuntu to give no response? 19:25 <phunyguy> yeah I just still hold firm that factoids like this should be more human and not a bot trigger, even if it is an !away > user 19:25 <AlanBell> knome: sure, go ahead 19:25 <phunyguy> just my opinion 19:25 <rww> "no response" don't think so 19:25 <knome> AlanBell, i mean, is that technically possible... and what do i set !away-#channel to? 19:25 <knome> !pm has -1 +4 19:25 <ubottu> knome: I am only a bot, please don't think I'm intelligent :) 19:26 <knome> ubottu, quiet! 19:26 <AlanBell> didn't I do that for !ops-#ubuntu-ops 19:26 <AlanBell> oh, not quite, no 19:26 * knome shrugs 19:26 <knome> i can file a LP bug ;P 19:26 <AlanBell> knome: ok, sounds like a good idea, if we can do it, lets move on :) 19:26 <knome> yep. 19:27 <AlanBell> so for pm, people don't like the last sentence 19:27 <phunyguy> I have to go to another meeting. Farewell all for now. 19:27 <AlanBell> I don't think it needs to be there in that context 19:28 <AlanBell> !no pm is <reply> Please ask your questions in the channel so that other people can help you, benefit from your questions and answers, and ensure that you're not getting bad advice. 19:28 <ubottu> I'll remember that AlanBell 19:28 <AlanBell> !details 19:28 <ubottu> Please give us full details. For example: "I have a problem with ..., I'm running Ubuntu version .... When I try to do ..., I get the following output: ..., but I expected it to do ..." 19:28 <AlanBell> !work 19:28 <ubottu> Doesn't work is a strong statement. Does it sit on the couch all day? Does it want more money? Is it on IRC all the time? Please be specific! Examples of what doesn't work tend to help too. 19:28 <rww> . !work is funny and pisses users off, !details is fine but a bit overused 19:28 <AlanBell> I like details, not sure why you would want to merge it with work 19:29 <AlanBell> so lets move on from details for now 19:29 <AlanBell> !shout 19:29 <ubottu> PLEASE DON'T SHOUT! We can read lowercase too. 19:29 <knome> !forget shout 19:29 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:29 <knome> thanks! 19:29 <rww> \o/ 19:30 <AlanBell> OK, WHAT IS NEXT? 19:30 <rww> oh 19:30 <rww> so 19:30 <rww> you guys have a bunch of dangling aliases now 19:30 <rww> !caps 19:30 <ubottu> Error: unresolvable <alias> to shout 19:30 <knome> AlanBell, I CAN'T HEAR YOU 19:30 <rww> i call not it on fixing those 19:30 <knome> rww, aww for not being able to do that... 19:30 <knome> rww, i mean, understanding that 19:30 <AlanBell> rww: ok, fine, we can go through those later 19:30 <rww> can just remove as we find, i guess 19:30 <rww> !forget caps 19:30 <ubottu> I'll forget that, rww 19:31 <knome> !forget scrolling 19:31 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:31 <AlanBell> well I can go through what we forget in this meeting and fix them 19:31 <knome> !forget return 19:31 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:31 <knome> !forget anybody 19:31 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:31 <rww> next up, !o4o 19:31 <AlanBell> !o4o 19:31 <ubottu> Some topics are controversial and often end in negativity. Take care on subjects like war, race, religion, politics, gender, sexuality, drugs, potentially illegal activities and suicide. The topics are not banned; stating your position is ok, but trolling, baiting, hostility or repetition are not. If you are asked to stop, do so politely. Disputes to !appeals, please adhere to !freenode Policy and the !CodeOfConduct 19:31 <knome> !forget somebody 19:31 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:31 <rww> strong keep on !o4o 19:31 <knome> !forget !someone 19:31 <ubottu> I know nothing about !someone yet, knome 19:31 <knome> !forget someone 19:31 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:31 <knome> !forget expert 19:31 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:32 <AlanBell> o4o seems worth keeping to me 19:32 <AlanBell> !stop 19:32 <ubottu> NOTICE - Please stop this discussion NOW. See !offtopic for things that are inappropriate to discuss in this channel. Continuing will result in action being taken. 19:32 <rww> and it's one of those factoids that has had iterations to remove bugs and is brushing up against the size limit, and I don't think it needs editing again 19:32 <knome> !forget good 19:32 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:32 <knome> !forget better 19:32 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:32 <rww> i'm on the fence about !stop 19:32 <knome> !forget preference 19:32 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:32 <knome> !forget ppolls 19:32 <ubottu> I know nothing about ppolls yet, knome 19:32 <rww> knome: (/msg ubottu plz) 19:32 <AlanBell> stop wasn't on the list, do we like it 19:33 <knome> rww, i thought for logs/history 19:33 <knome> but okay. 19:33 <knome> then i can't follow the discussion! 19:33 <rww> then do it later :P 19:33 <AlanBell> knome: lets bash the aliases at the end of the meeting 19:33 <knome> doing it now in PM 19:33 <AlanBell> so, !stop, do we like that? 19:33 <rww> iirc !stop's intended for operator use, not user use 19:34 <tsimpson> in which case, it's dumb 19:34 <rww> mainly been used in -ot that i've seen 19:34 <tsimpson> in which case, it's more dumb 19:34 <rww> agreed 19:34 <AlanBell> doesn't make sense there 19:34 <rww> discussions don't usually get to a point in #ubuntu where it'd be necessary to be so harsh 19:35 <AlanBell> and you could just mute people, or set +m if it was that bad 19:35 <tsimpson> and then 'forget' to unset it 19:35 <AlanBell> !forget stop 19:35 <ubottu> I'll forget that, AlanBell 19:35 <rww> in -ot, I'm more of a fan of using !o4o's "stop when asked" clause and asking for stop, in a different tone from !stop 19:36 <AlanBell> !netsplit 19:36 <ubottu> netsplit is when two IRC servers of the same network (like freenode) disconnect from each other, so users on one server stop seeing users on the other. If this is happening now, just relax and enjoy the show. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netsplit 19:36 <jussi> thats a good one 19:36 <AlanBell> !lol 19:36 <ubottu> Please don't use "LOL" and "OMG" and so forth on a regular basis. This is IRC, not IM, and using those lines on their own is not required, and it is rather annoying to the rest of the people in the channel; thanks. 19:36 <AlanBell> !forget lol 19:36 <ubottu> I'll forget that, AlanBell 19:36 <knome> !inappropriate 19:36 <ubottu> The current discussion topic is inappropriate for this channel. Please stop. 19:36 <AlanBell> !nickspam lol 19:36 <rww> !netsplit =~ s/^/<reply> A netsplit is / 19:36 <ubottu> I'll remember that rww 19:36 <knome> ^ 19:37 <AlanBell> !nickspam 19:37 <ubottu> You should avoid changing your nick in a busy channel like #ubuntu, or other Ubuntu channels; it causes excessive scrolling which is unfair to new users. Please set your preferred nick in your client's settings instead. See also « /msg ubottu Guidelines » 19:37 <rww> -1 on !inappropriate existing 19:37 <knome> !forget inappropriate 19:37 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:37 <jussi> good 19:37 <rww> i have the same opinion of !nickspam as of !away 19:37 <AlanBell> nickspam seems popular in the pad 19:37 <knome> yes, 19:37 <knome> same as away 19:37 <AlanBell> keep, but stop it working in-channel if we can 19:38 <knome> make it PM-only. 19:38 <AlanBell> !u 19:38 <ubottu> U is the 21st letter of the modern latin alphabet. Neither 'U' nor 'Ur' are words in the English language. Neither are 'R', 'Y', 'l8', 'ryt', 'Ne1' nor 'Bcuz'. Mangled English is hard for non-native English speakers. Please see http://geekosophical.net/random/abbreviations/ for more information. 19:38 <jussi> I dont like that one. feels short and grumpy. 19:38 <knome> !forget lolops 19:38 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:38 <knome> !forget lolcats 19:38 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:38 <tsimpson> you could just get rid of the first two sentences of !u 19:39 <rww> . !no, u is <reply> Shortened English is difficult for some non-native English speakers to read. Please use full words instead. Thanks! 19:39 <knome> or merge with !language. 19:39 <AlanBell> much better 19:39 <tsimpson> like that, yep 19:39 <knome> !language 19:39 <ubottu> The main Ubuntu channels require that you speak in calm, polite English. For other languages, please visit https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/ChannelList 19:39 <jussi> rww: ++ 19:39 <Pici> hi 19:39 <rww> !no, u is <reply> Shortened English is difficult for some non-native English speakers to read. Please use full words instead. Thanks! 19:39 <AlanBell> hi Pici 19:39 <ubottu> I'll remember that rww 19:39 <jussi> heya Pici 19:39 <knome> isn't mangled english essentially "other language" 19:39 <rww> knome: no, it r txt liek dis 19:39 <AlanBell> !piracy 19:39 <ubottu> piracy discussion and other questionably legal practices are not welcome in the Ubuntu channels. Please take this discussion elsewhere or abstain from it altogether. This includes linking to pirated software, music, and video. Also see !guidelines and !o4o 19:39 <knome> rww, yes... looks like other language to me :) 19:39 <AlanBell> popular one 19:40 <AlanBell> !noob 19:40 <ubottu> Acronyms or statements like noob, jfgi, stfu, or rtfm are not welcome in this channel. Period. 19:40 <rww> !-piracty 19:40 <rww> !-piracy 19:40 <ubottu> piracy aliases: warez, illegal, cracking - added by elkbuntu on 2007-03-11 14:52:32 - last edited by Pici on 2011-07-19 19:43:02 19:40 <rww> !-cracking 19:40 <ubottu> cracking is <alias> piracy - added by LjL on 2007-11-07 22:23:06 19:40 <knome> !forget noob 19:40 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:40 <rww> . !piracy doesn't cover cracking. Should it? 19:41 <rww> also, !noob was +2/-2, not really a forget-without-discussion 19:41 <AlanBell> rww: possibly, however penetration testing, wireshark and wifi stuff that is in the repos is entirely supportable 19:41 <rww> then !forget cracking 19:41 <AlanBell> yeah 19:41 <knome> rww, can reintroduce if people feel strongly. 19:41 <jussi> noob should go from my point of view, tipping it to +2/-3 19:42 <Pici> We historically do not support the actual use of things like aircrack-ng even if they claim they are using it for legal purposes 19:42 <rww> on second thought, all the *f* acronyms in !noob are covered by !language 19:42 <knome> i've already !forgot all the aliases for !noob 19:42 <knome> (but i can reintroduce) 19:42 <knome> but i think it's just misuse of the factoid system 19:42 <AlanBell> I think the policy remains, stfu and so on are not acceptable, we just don't need a bot factoid to say so 19:42 <knome> exactly 19:42 <jussi> exactly 19:42 <knome> basically, 19:42 <rww> alrighty, i'll go with that 19:42 <knome> all factoids that are "op use only" should go. 19:43 <knome> well 19:43 <knome> don't take that black and white :) 19:43 <rww> . !noob wasn't op-use-only, but I agree 19:43 <rww> !google 19:43 <ubottu> While Google is useful for helpers, many newer users don't have the google-fu yet. Please don't tell people to "google it" when they ask a question. 19:43 <Pici> There are op-only factoids? 19:43 <knome> but there are usually better ways to handle 19:43 <knome> Pici, !stop was mentioned as one 19:43 <knome> Pici, and not *technically* ops-only 19:43 <knome> which is why they also should be dropped... 19:44 <jussi> I think a lot of the factoids that tell/order users what they must or must not do are not that useful/somewhat rude 19:44 <knome> !piracy ? 19:44 <ubottu> knome: I am only a bot, please don't think I'm intelligent :) 19:44 <AlanBell> so !google had some support 19:44 <AlanBell> !work 19:44 <ubottu> Doesn't work is a strong statement. Does it sit on the couch all day? Does it want more money? Is it on IRC all the time? Please be specific! Examples of what doesn't work tend to help too. 19:44 <knome> what happened to !piracy 19:44 <knome> did we decide something? 19:44 <AlanBell> !piracy 19:44 <ubottu> piracy discussion and other questionably legal practices are not welcome in the Ubuntu channels. Please take this discussion elsewhere or abstain from it altogether. This includes linking to pirated software, music, and video. Also see !guidelines and !o4o 19:44 <knome> keep? 19:44 <Pici> yes 19:44 <knome> (i guess) 19:44 <knome> ok 19:44 <AlanBell> keeping it 19:44 <AlanBell> but !work is less popular 19:44 <knome> i'm actually thinking -1 !google 19:45 <AlanBell> !details 19:45 <ubottu> Please give us full details. For example: "I have a problem with ..., I'm running Ubuntu version .... When I try to do ..., I get the following output: ..., but I expected it to do ..." 19:45 <rww> Pici: re: aircrack and such, I'd appreciate some pondering from IRCC about that and perhaps clarification on if it is or isn't supportable, since different ops seem to disagree in the past about it 19:45 <AlanBell> so !work and !details are similar 19:45 <knome> it sounds like something an op or and experienced user would throw at a not-so-experienced helper 19:45 <rww> i dislike work 19:45 * phunyguy is back 19:45 <AlanBell> rww: that has previously been discussed, I will look it up, the CC was involved I think 19:46 <jussi> theres another one I dont remember that says something similar but better 19:46 <AlanBell> !no work is <alias> details 19:46 <ubottu> You are editing an alias. Please repeat the edit command within the next 10 seconds to confirm 19:46 <knome> !details | jussi 19:46 <ubottu> jussi: Please give us full details. For example: "I have a problem with ..., I'm running Ubuntu version .... When I try to do ..., I get the following output: ..., but I expected it to do ..." 19:46 <jussi> no 19:46 <rww> !-work 19:46 <ubottu> work is <alias> doesn't work - added by Seveas on 2006-06-18 16:49:49 - last edited by AlanBell on 2014-03-19 19:46:11 19:46 <rww> !-doesn't work 19:46 <ubottu> doesn't work aliases: work, doesntwork, doesnt work, didnotwork, didn't work, dontwork, works - added by Seveas on 2006-06-18 16:49:40 - last edited by Seveas on 2007-03-02 18:20:46 19:46 <jussi> it starts with e and is a long word 19:46 <Pici> I like work 19:46 <AlanBell> !no doesn't work is <alias> details 19:46 <ubottu> I'll remember that AlanBell 19:46 <rww> !elaborate 19:46 <ubottu> Please elaborate, your question or issue may not seem clear or detailed enough for people to help you. Please give more detailed information, errors, steps, and possibly configuration files (use the !pastebin to avoid flooding the channel) 19:46 <AlanBell> !work 19:46 <ubottu> Please give us full details. For example: "I have a problem with ..., I'm running Ubuntu version .... When I try to do ..., I get the following output: ..., but I expected it to do ..." 19:46 <jussi> rww: yup 19:46 <knome> yes! 19:47 <rww> i prefer !elaborate to !work 19:47 <jussi> yes, as do I 19:47 <knome> ¡no, details is <alias> elaborate 19:47 <knome> ^ 19:47 <rww> !-details 19:47 <ubottu> details aliases: doesn't work, example - added by LjL on 2008-11-06 23:26:49 19:47 <rww> knome: +1 19:47 <jussi> knome: also +1 19:47 <knome> and work too. 19:47 <knome> !no, details is <alias> elaborate 19:47 <ubottu> I'll remember that knome 19:47 <knome> !no, work is <alias> elaborate 19:47 <ubottu> You are editing an alias. Please repeat the edit command within the next 10 seconds to confirm 19:47 <AlanBell> !work 19:47 <rww> !work 19:47 <ubottu> Please elaborate, your question or issue may not seem clear or detailed enough for people to help you. Please give more detailed information, errors, steps, and possibly configuration files (use the !pastebin to avoid flooding the channel) 19:47 <knome> !no, work is <alias> elaborate 19:47 <ubottu> You are editing an alias. Please repeat the edit command within the next 10 seconds to confirm 19:47 <AlanBell> already done, it is a chain of aliases 19:47 <knome> what? 19:48 <knome> stupid. 19:48 <rww> knome: it's fine :P 19:48 <knome> :) 19:48 <AlanBell> knome: relax 19:48 <rww> !elaborate =~ s/,/;/ 19:48 <ubottu> I'll remember that rww 19:48 <knome> NEVAR! 19:48 <AlanBell> !please 19:48 <ubottu> Avoid following your questions with a trail of "Please, help me", "Can nobody help me?", "I really need this!", and so on. This just contributes to making the channel unreadable. If you are not answered, ask again later; but see also !repeat and !attitude 19:48 <AlanBell> !forget please 19:48 <ubottu> I'll forget that, AlanBell 19:48 <rww> !repeat 19:48 <ubottu> Don't feel ignored and repeat your question quickly; if nobody knows your answer, nobody will answer you. While you wait, try searching https://help.ubuntu.com or http://ubuntuforums.org or http://askubuntu.com/ 19:48 <rww> !attitude 19:48 <ubottu> The guidelines for using the Ubuntu channels can be found here: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/Guidelines 19:48 <jussi> that one gets abused... (repeat) 19:49 <knome> #action knome to edit !repeat-#xubuntu to be more exact on xubuntu-specific links 19:49 * meetingology knome to edit !repeat-#xubuntu to be more exact on xubuntu-specific links 19:49 <AlanBell> it does, someone pastes a question, repeats hours later and someone tells them off for repeating :) 19:49 <Pici> I'm a little confused as to where the decision to remove some of these is coming from... like !please 19:49 <AlanBell> Pici: the pad 19:49 <knome> ¡no, repeat is <alias> elaborate 19:49 <rww> knome: -1 19:50 <rww> knome: they're different issues 19:50 <AlanBell> if there is overwhelming -1s on the pad or +1s then I wassn't discussing in great depth 19:50 <Pici> -1 19:50 <knome> mmh, yeah, i acknowledge that.. 19:50 <knome> just an idea 19:50 <rww> AlanBell: !please was +4... 19:50 <rww> oh no it wasn't 19:50 * rww searches better 19:50 <AlanBell> rww: no, it wasn't 19:50 <Pici> sorry, I missed that on the pad 19:50 <knome> would !forget repeat 19:50 <rww> yeah, ignore me, I failed at ctrl-f 19:50 <Pici> no 19:50 <Pici> repeat is used a lot. 19:50 <Pici> repeatedly 19:51 <AlanBell> is that good or bad? 19:51 <knome> i guess that proves my point. :) 19:51 <rww> I think it's fine if it's not abused. 19:51 <Pici> Well, I was making a joke. It is used when it is necessary. 19:51 <phunyguy> jokes are not allowed here. 19:51 <knome> hmm, 19:51 <Pici> Remember that some people prefer to see things that ubottu says as 'official' despite other users telling them the same thing. 19:51 <knome> drop anything off !repeat except the last sentence? 19:52 <knome> While you wait... 19:52 <rww> hrm? 19:52 <knome> dunno 19:52 <knome> i'm just throwing ideas. 19:52 <AlanBell> if we can't decide now, lets move on 19:52 <AlanBell> !punctuation 19:52 <ubottu> Punctuation is good, but its overuse hurts readability. Please refrain from adding many ?'s or !'s to the end of your sentences. See also !enter 19:52 <Pici> k 19:53 <knome> forget... 19:53 <Pici> we got rid of enter :/ 19:53 <knome> proves we should drop punctuation as well :P 19:53 <Pici> but then I can't do things like 19:53 <Pici> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!punctuation 19:53 <ubottu> Punctuation is good, but its overuse hurts readability. Please refrain from adding many ?'s or !'s to the end of your sentences. See also !enter 19:53 <rww> +1 Pici 19:54 <knome> punctuation is requested 141 times 19:54 <rww> i changed my mind, kill it 19:54 <knome> approximately 100 of those is Pici playing with the bot 19:54 <Pici> punctuation can probably go, I just liked !enter 19:54 <Pici> knome: probably :P 19:54 <knome> !forget punctuation 19:54 <ubottu> I'll forget that, knome 19:54 <jussi> yup 19:54 <AlanBell> !coc 19:54 <ubottu> The Ubuntu Code of Conduct is the document that spells out etiquette in the Ubuntu community | http://www.ubuntu.com/project/about-ubuntu/conduct | For information on how to electronically sign the CoC, see https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SigningCodeofConduct | Watch http://static.screencasts.ubuntu.com/videos/2010/12/22/004-SigningCoC.ogv 19:54 <AlanBell> keep that one 19:54 <Pici> keep 19:54 <phunyguy> this is a good one 19:54 <AlanBell> !canibeanop 19:54 <ubottu> If you are interested in joining the Ubuntu IRC Team, take a look at both http://www.siltala.net/2010/03/24/ops-teams-applications-announcement/ and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcTeam/OperatorRequirements for info on the process and requirements. You can also learn about what the job entails from people in #ubuntu-irc. 19:54 <rww> !coc =~ s/ / / 19:54 <ubottu> I'll remember that rww 19:55 <Pici> keep 19:55 <phunyguy> also a good one 19:55 <Pici> beanop 19:55 <rww> !canibeanop =~ s/ / / 19:55 <ubottu> I'll remember that rww 19:55 <knome> !meta 19:55 <ubottu> If you would like to help in #*ubuntu* but it just goes too fast to spot interesting questions, try joining #ubuntu-meta and watching for questions there (note that it is NOT a support channel, however, and questions should still be answered in #*ubuntu*) 19:55 <tsimpson> may be a good idea to move the blog link to the wiki somewhere 19:55 <AlanBell> yeah, I will move the content to the wiki 19:55 <knome> +1 for tsimpson's idea 19:55 <Pici> aye 19:55 <rww> #action Alanbell to move !canibeanop link content to wiki 19:55 * meetingology Alanbell to move !canibeanop link content to wiki 19:55 <rww> :3 19:55 <AlanBell> ok, that concludes the factoid review \o/ 19:55 <knome> meta? 19:56 <phunyguy> phew 19:56 <rww> no it doesn't there is !meta :P 19:56 <tsimpson> -meta is dead 19:56 <rww> !forget meta 19:56 <ubottu> I'll forget that, rww 19:56 <knome> !forget meta 19:56 <ubottu> I know nothing about meta yet, knome 19:56 <AlanBell> knome: coming up next . . 19:56 <rww> I WIN 19:56 <knome> boo! 19:56 <AlanBell> I will send a summary of what has changed to the list later 19:56 <AlanBell> I will extract it from the minutes 19:56 <rww> #action AlanBell to send a summary of factoid changes to ubuntu-irc@ 19:56 * meetingology AlanBell to send a summary of factoid changes to ubuntu-irc@ 19:56 <AlanBell> #topic Metabot and Bestbot - clean up, or re-implement 19:56 <knome> hmm, please 19:56 <knome> one more 19:56 <knome> !ask 19:56 <ubottu> Please don't ask to ask a question, simply ask the question (all on ONE line and in the channel, so that others can read and follow it easily). If anyone knows the answer they will most likely reply. :-) See also !patience 19:57 <phunyguy> that one is beat to hell also 19:57 <rww> alias to !elaborate 19:57 <Pici> I'd like to shorten that one up 19:57 <knome> rww, not quite the same issue... :)= 19:57 <rww> . !elaborate is my new favorite thing 19:57 <Pici> It used to be just "Don't ask to ask, just ask" 19:57 <knome> sounds alike to "someone" 19:57 <rww> brb on alt 19:57 <knome> just different wording 19:58 <knome> and !someone was dropped 19:58 <MooDoo> sorry guys brb little one playing up 19:58 <tsimpson> I don't see the relevance to !patience either 19:58 <knome> !no, patience is <alias> repeat 19:58 <ubottu> I'll remember that knome 19:58 <AlanBell> I think !ask is OK 19:58 <jussi> I say we keep ask in some form - Ive seen many channels using similar wording and its quite a well known/said thing. maybe a link to how to ask wiki is good 19:59 <knome> (it *was* the same factoid) 19:59 <phunyguy> While this factoid is probably OK, it just gets used a lot 19:59 <phunyguy> more than it should. 19:59 <AlanBell> people are hesitant to ask sometimes 19:59 <knome> does throwing a factoid help their thresold to ask? 19:59 <phunyguy> example, "anyone here use $someapplication?" 20:00 <phunyguy> about 4 people slam them with the bot factoid 20:00 <tsimpson> I'd remove everything in parentheses and the see also 20:00 <knome> i vote -1 to !ask 20:00 <phunyguy> same, -1 20:00 <Pici> I'd keep the words in the parens and remove the second and 3rd sentences 20:00 <knome> it is essentially the same as !someone 20:00 <knome> and all the reasons why we decided to drop that applies to !ask 20:00 <knome> wasn't the goal to reduce bot usage? 20:00 <knome> if we really miss the factoid, then reintroduce it. 20:00 <phunyguy> ^ 20:01 <knome> </rant> 20:01 <AlanBell> the goal is to have a more human atmosphere 20:01 <not_rww> o/ 20:01 <Pici> humans :( 20:01 <knome_webchat> i have lag. 20:01 <knome> i have lag. 20:01 <AlanBell> I read about humans in a book once, I am an expert now \o/ 20:01 <tsimpson> !lag 20:01 <ubottu> You have lag, I don't have lag 20:02 <Pici> How long until helpers complain that ubottu isn't working because we removed a bunch of factoids? 20:02 <knome> tsimpson, was lag between my irc shell and freenode. 20:02 <phunyguy> Pici: good question... and that question can be answered pretty easily 20:02 <phunyguy> (their question I mean) 20:03 <MooDoo> back sorry about that 20:03 <Pici> phunyguy: yep. And as always, I always tell them to suggest a factoid if they think it should exist. 20:03 <knome> so can people express their thoughts on !ask with -1 +1 -+0 20:03 <phunyguy> yes, I agree 20:03 <knome> i'm not sure what the general opinion is. 20:04 <phunyguy> in case it was missed, -1 20:04 <knome> -1 from me too 20:04 <knome> i need to go really soon. 20:05 <knome> anybody +1's !ask? 20:05 <phunyguy> yeah this has been an exceptionally long, but productive meeting so far. 20:05 <AlanBell> as always this stuff is reversable, if we get complaints we can undo it 20:05 <knome> so forget? 20:05 <AlanBell> I don't have a strong opinion on ask 20:05 <knome> ok, mind if i forget that and the aliases then? 20:06 <IdleOne> !ask 20:06 <ubottu> Please don't ask to ask a question, simply ask the question (all on ONE line and in the channel, so that others can read and follow it easily). If anyone knows the answer they will most likely reply. :-) See also !patience 20:06 <knome> ask, help, justask, metaquestion, problem, questions, question 20:06 <IdleOne> keep 20:06 <Pici> ask and help are useful. 20:06 <Pici> +1 on ask 20:06 <AlanBell> ok, lets keep it, now for this topic item :) 20:06 <phunyguy> ok, so keep it 20:06 <knome> ask == help 20:06 <knome> ok, i'm off 20:07 <phunyguy> \o 20:07 <AlanBell> as well as the floodbots we no longer have the use of metabot and bestbot 20:07 <AlanBell> we have the option of trying to reimplement the functionality, or cleaning up the channels and wiki pages and factoids 20:08 <AlanBell> any thoughts? 20:08 <IdleOne> clean up 20:08 <phunyguy> +1 to clean up 20:08 <AlanBell> my view is to clean up 20:09 <AlanBell> ok, in the absence of any strong support for reimplementing . . . 20:09 <not_rww> +1 clean up 20:09 <AlanBell> #action ircc to clean up behind bestbot and metabot 20:09 * meetingology ircc to clean up behind bestbot and metabot 20:09 <AlanBell> #topic Review #ubuntu-ops-team and how we as a team use the various communication channels 20:09 <AlanBell> we touched on this earlier 20:09 <AlanBell> how the IRCC and team in general should use communication tools available 20:10 <AlanBell> there has been some suggestion that we should use the -ops-team channel less and use -irc more for topics that are appropriate there 20:10 <AlanBell> we could close -ops-team if people want it to not exist 20:11 <phunyguy> well I like -ops-team, but I can live without it. 20:11 <IdleOne> -ops-team is useful when trying to resolve and ban with a user and I'm not sure what to do 20:11 <phunyguy> yes, I agree there 20:11 <Pici> +1 20:12 <IdleOne> I say we keep the channel, but try and move much of the discussion as possible to -irc 20:12 <Pici> and a place for other ops to chime in without having to try to talk over the proceedigns in -ops 20:12 <IdleOne> ^ 20:12 <phunyguy> right, purely for operator issues/assistance that need to be private. 20:12 <phunyguy> but discussing things related to the IRC team should be in -irc imo 20:13 <phunyguy> recent events being a good example. 20:13 <not_rww> +1 all above 20:13 <AlanBell> ok, I can reflect that in the minutes, a general preference to use -irc more 20:13 <AlanBell> #topic Operator Applicants 20:14 <AlanBell> next item is operator applicants, now we were doing this on a per-cycle basis after UDS 20:14 <AlanBell> then UDS got a bit confusing, but we have just had one, so lets process some queues 20:14 <AlanBell> http://paste.ubuntu.com/7121828/ 20:14 <IdleOne> I think this should be tabled for now. I would like to discuss letting the channel ops pick and chose their own ops for the channels. IRCC can keep a veto power just in case it is needed. 20:14 <AlanBell> that is the list of all the channel groups on launchpad and the people who have applied to join 20:15 <Pici> what are the numbers? 20:15 <AlanBell> Pici: launchpad karma I think, for no particular reason 20:15 <Pici> o 20:15 <IdleOne> channels should be viewed as individual sub-teams to the irc-team. 20:15 <phunyguy> I picked #ubuntu-ops by accident, that can be removed. 20:16 <AlanBell> phunyguy: sure, will do 20:16 <phunyguy> I have not been an op long enough for that 20:17 <phunyguy> wait, I did apply for #ubuntu... am I missing it in there? 20:17 <not_rww> you're not in the proposed list for https://launchpad.net/~irc-ubuntu-ops 20:18 <AlanBell> IdleOne: channels are individual subteams on launchpad, and we do invite people to comment on applicants, I think for now we have to follow the process we have, which isn't completely incompatible with what you are saying 20:18 <not_rww> also, I'd like to postpone this topic until next meeting because I have input on some applicants that I want to express in private, and didn't realize it was coming up today 20:18 <not_rww> i am aware that this is my fault for failing at reading 20:18 <IdleOne> AlanBell: understood. I'll propose for next meeting perhaps. 20:18 <phunyguy> :( 20:19 <phunyguy> I am 99.9% sure I applied in #ubuntu. Oh well. I will reapply. 20:19 <AlanBell> ok, so I need to clarify where we are right now :) 20:19 <AlanBell> the process is that at some point (now) we put out a call for operators, and look at who is already in the queue 20:20 <AlanBell> at that point we sort out any administrative errors in the queues, like that phunyguy in the wrong one, and that deactivated account 20:20 <AlanBell> then we have a feedback period 20:20 <jussi> there is a clause there (iirc) that the ircc can just "approve" people if it wants 20:20 <IdleOne> AlanBell: I think that the IRCC voting on who should be an op in which channels is a little bit too much micromanaging. Let the channel ops decide who they think is best for their channel. I know many of us have ops over a lot of the same channels, but I think the channel ops are best placed to know who will be a good fit. 20:21 <AlanBell> !canibeanop 20:21 <ubottu> If you are interested in joining the Ubuntu IRC Team, take a look at both http://www.siltala.net/2010/03/24/ops-teams-applications-announcement/ and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IRC/IrcTeam/OperatorRequirements for info on the process and requirements. You can also learn about what the job entails from people in #ubuntu-irc. 20:21 <AlanBell> Apply to join the appropriate operator team(s) on Launchpad. For example, if you wish to become an #ubuntu-devel operator, you should apply to join ~irc-ubuntu-devel-ops on Launchpad. 20:22 <IdleOne> anyway, I'll drop it for now and propose something for a later meeting. 20:22 <AlanBell> When the Ubuntu IRC Council notices the need to have more operators in a particular channel or channels, they will send an email to the ubuntu-irc mailing list. After this email is sent, there will be a one week period for any last minute applications and/or for applicants to finish updating their wiki pages. During this time Testimonials and concerns can be emailed direct to the Ubuntu IRC Council mailing list, or listed on the ... 20:22 <AlanBell> ... applicants wiki page. 20:22 <AlanBell> ^ that is where we are now 20:22 <AlanBell> so, I am letting people know who is in the queue right now, and going to send a mail to the list opening the one week period 20:23 <phunyguy> please include me in #ubuntu on that email, I hit the button on LP. 20:23 <AlanBell> the channel ops are best placed to give feedback 20:23 <jussi> ahh the clause was about dropping applicants, not approving them 20:24 <MooDoo> ok sorry all, my little one is playing up, i'm gonna have to bail. 20:24 <AlanBell> yup, we can remove applicants from the list if they are not appropriate 20:24 <AlanBell> no problem MooDoo o/ 20:24 <MooDoo> thanks all 20:25 <IdleOne> I'm out too. Good meeting thanks all. 20:25 <AlanBell> so, yes, operators in a channel are well placed to give feedback on the applicants, I will try and stress that 20:25 <IdleOne> oh, one more thing. idoru can go bye bye. 20:26 <AlanBell> we just don't have a channel operator voting process at the moment, but sure, one could be proposed and thought through 20:26 <AlanBell> in practice I would be surprised if the IRCC in any way ever "overruled" feedback from a channel operator 20:27 <AlanBell> though actually, it probably has happened that channel operators didn't give any feedback and were later surprised that someone was appointed 20:28 <AlanBell> anyhow, that is where we are, and I will be mailing the list accordingly 20:28 <AlanBell> #topic Membership applications 20:29 <AlanBell> no membership applications on the agenda, but pretty much anyone who is an op would find it easy to demonstrate a significant and sustained contribution if they applied 20:29 <AlanBell> #topic Remove idoru from #ubuntu-offtopic and keep it out of there - rww 20:29 <AlanBell> so, idoru, any support for keeping it? anyone know why it is there? 20:29 <not_rww> because we used to get spambots in there, probably 20:29 <not_rww> i very much want it gone 20:29 <phunyguy> I fear teh spambots will come back and then we will want idoru back 20:29 <phunyguy> the* 20:30 <jussi> not_rww: why? 20:30 <AlanBell> the fun things about decisions on IRC is that nothing is final 20:30 <tsimpson> what's the problem with it being there anyway? 20:30 <AlanBell> so is it randomly klining people? 20:30 <not_rww> jussi: because it has not killed a spambot in a long while and has killed legitimate users, and freenode is bad at keeping an eye on klines it sets to make sure they're legit 20:31 <AlanBell> on a technical level, what do we have to do, ask staff to get it to part? 20:31 <not_rww> please refer to the comments I made when it got removed from #ubuntu, they apply to #ubuntu-offtopic too except more strongly 20:31 <not_rww> AlanBell: yes 20:31 <phunyguy> or kickban it 20:31 <not_rww> phunyguy: it's not affected by bans 20:32 <phunyguy> o. 20:32 <AlanBell> ok, anyone actively want to keep it? 20:33 <jussi> nope 20:33 <AlanBell> #agreed idoru to be removed from -offtopic 20:33 <AlanBell> #topic Any Other Business 20:33 <phunyguy> it can be added back again 20:33 <AlanBell> it can 20:33 <not_rww> i have an AOB item 20:33 <AlanBell> so, anyone else want to discuss anything else 20:33 <AlanBell> go ahead not_rww 20:34 <not_rww> I was pondering ways of making #ubuntu less broken recently and thought that perhaps adapting the 5-a-day bug system to support would be interesting. I'm curious if anyone else has thoughts / thinks this is a good idea. 20:34 <phunyguy> I don't know what that is. 20:34 <knome> adapting in what way? 20:34 <not_rww> i.e., trying to cultivate sustained contribution to #ubuntu by encouraging people to answer/participate in 5 support questions a day 20:35 <AlanBell> interesting 20:35 <phunyguy> eehhh 20:35 <not_rww> knome: one component of 5-a-day is tracking success over time, and I'm not sure how one would do that on IRC 20:35 <AlanBell> bit of gamification 20:35 <knome> not_rww, yep. 20:35 <phunyguy> I have a bad feeling abotu it, but I am also new. 20:35 <not_rww> AlanBell: indeed, which is good or bad depending on your opinion of gamification 20:35 <knome> i don't think it's a bad thing to come up with new ways to motivate people to help 20:36 <knome> but what's the "reward", since not_rww said, there's not really an easy way to track it 20:36 <not_rww> (or is there...) 20:36 <knome> sounds like either manual work or, ugh, pushing all questions through a bot 20:36 <phunyguy> I am not saying that coming up with ideas is bad 20:36 <phunyguy> I was actually talking about the idea. 20:36 <knome> phunyguy, so what's bad with the ideA? 20:36 <AlanBell> knome: not neccessarily 20:36 <jussi> metabot used to identify questions... 20:36 <not_rww> or just voluntary reporting to a bot when you answer/participate in a question 20:37 <phunyguy> knome, I don't really know, I just get a weird feeling about it. 20:37 <not_rww> since it's not like gaming it is going to get you much, and you're limited to getting "points" for five a day 20:37 <knome> jussi, but not if they were answered/who answered them, and if that was succesful or not 20:37 <phunyguy> like it won't last. 20:37 <phunyguy> Stuff like that works on forums, not sure it would work on IRC 20:37 <not_rww> "if that was successful" i don't think that's possible/useful to track anyway. not all bug reports are successful either, but they still counted 20:38 <not_rww> anyways, was just one of my random thoughts. but if it's not a good idea, we probably should ponder what /is/, since i have bad feelings about the quality of #ubuntu support right now 20:38 <knome> i think it would be fair to shout out to people that "you can do 5-a-day with irc support too, though you won't get rewarded points for that" 20:38 <phunyguy> not_rww: I do agree that support has been a bit terrible there. 20:39 <AlanBell> it would be possible to have a points system and leaderboard type thing 20:39 <knome> #xubuntu has lately went into a factoid-bashing mode too 20:39 <phunyguy> 9 times out of 10, I go in there to ask a question, then spend 3 hours helping others when I get no answer 20:39 <knome> maybe we should have a "IRC supporter day" 20:39 <knome> with some sessions on how to be helpful, or something 20:39 <knome> could also do sessions about bot usage etc. 20:40 <knome> just award points per lines said per day, and kick unhelpful/offtopic people :P 20:40 <AlanBell> grep for "thanks knome" or something 20:40 <knome> hmpf, 20:40 <not_rww> AlanBell: thankbot! 20:40 <not_rww> "lines said per day" encourages bad behavior, unfortunately 20:40 <knome> haven't heard that too much... 20:40 <not_rww> ( http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/08/24/articulating-irc-contributions-concisely/ ) 20:40 <knome> not_rww, sure... but that's why i said kick unhelpful/offtopic people 20:41 <not_rww> knome: yep, but I prefer systems that don't encourage such things, much easier than working around such encouragement 20:41 <AlanBell> not_rww: yeah, thankbot, but more seamless 20:41 <knome> a thankbot would be manual rewarding 20:41 <not_rww> ( I've dealt with this problem a lot with public pisg stats tracking in various channels ) 20:41 <knome> doing it automatically is hard 20:41 <phunyguy> so, this has gone an hour and 41 minutes over schedule already. 20:42 <phunyguy> just throwing that out there 20:42 <not_rww> yeah, we should probably table this and ponder it for future 20:42 <AlanBell> phunyguy: yes, it has, I know 20:42 <knome> phunyguy, at least things get dicussed 20:42 <tsimpson> perhaps start a ML discussion 20:42 <AlanBell> any other AOB? 20:42 <phunyguy> yes this is true. 20:42 <jussi> yes 20:42 <AlanBell> go ahead jussi 20:42 <jussi> the ircc hasnt actioned my expiring from teams, why not? 20:43 <AlanBell> not got round to it yet, wasn't on the top of the priority pile :) 20:43 <AlanBell> and I wasn't sure if you had finished expiring from thigns 20:44 <knome> jussi, file a bug. 20:44 <jussi> also, on the incentive thing, perhaps even takng nominations for quarterly "helper of #ubuntu" or somethign? 20:44 <not_rww> jussi: i note you can remove your own flags in ChanServ 20:44 <not_rww> not that you should have to, but it's an option 20:44 <jussi> not_rww: unfortunately when I tried I wouldnt let me. why? 20:45 <not_rww> jussi: /msg chanserv flags #channelname jussi -* 20:45 <not_rww> erm, jussi01 ** 20:45 <jussi> [11:38:49] [ChanServ] You are not authorized to execute this command. 20:45 <not_rww> if you use the correct nick? 20:45 <jussi> anyway, lets not fill up meeting with this 20:45 <AlanBell> we have quite a lot of expiries to catch up on, I have a launchpad script that I compare with chanserv lists, it just takes quite a lot of hours to do 20:46 <AlanBell> any other AOB 20:46 <AlanBell> #endmeeting