August

  • IRC Council meeting, 14 August 2010

    • Attendance: nhandler, Pici, topyli, jussi (for ~4 minutes)
    • [TOPIC] Support channel bug parsing
      • No technical reason to have bug info fetching disabled in #ubuntu, #kubuntu, and #xubuntu
      • Some concern about the added noise that the bug info will create and about the possibility of the bug info leading to off-topic discussion in the support channels.
      • [AGREED] Enable bug info retrieval in #xubuntu and #kubuntu for a trial period and re-evaluate the issue at our next meeting. If sucessful, expand trial to #ubuntu. If not, disable feature in #k and #x.
      • [ACTION] topyli to grep the logs of #k and #x before the next meeting to try and analyze the effect of having the bug info enabled
      • [ACTION] Pici to get bug info enabled in #kubuntu and #xubuntu
    • [TOPIC] Enabling Bot Features without discussion

      • Pici felt that the change to ubottu to send a ntoice to #ubuntu-ops asking OPs to review bans set by FloodBots should have been discussed on the mailing list and possibly at an IRC Council meeting

      • There was general agreement among the council that more communication about changes being made to the bots would be nice
      • [ACTION] topyli to contact the bot devel team about better communication
    • [TOPIC] bshellz
      • Briefly discussed the topic of bshellz blanket bans to deal with troublesome users since the bshellz admins are not keen on "policing" their users
      • [ACTION] nhandler to poke ikonia about sending an email to the ML about the bshellz issue
    • [ACTION] nhandler to do post-meeting tasks

  • IRC Council meeting, 29 August 2010

    • Attendance: jussi, Pici, topyli
    • [TOPIC] Legitimacy of discussing policies and op actions by people not directly affected
      • LjL presented, citing a recent even where he was asked to leave -ops after disagreeing with the ban placed on another user.
      • Present parties agreed that it was unhelpful for third parties to be allowed to act as another's attorney.
      • We discussed the current appeals process and how that could be modified. We would explicitly mention this particular use-case in the wiki page.
      • [AGREED] We shall slightly revise the appeals wiki entry to clarify that users may dispute operator actions even when they were not the user affected by such actions.
      • [ACTION] nhandler to revise wiki page

IRCCouncil/TeamReports/10/August (last edited 2010-09-05 21:21:40 by vtelinet-66-220-248-1)