<Vorian>       Welcome to Forum Council Meeting one and all
 <Vorian>       jdong forumsmatthew MikeB-, you guys ready?
 <forumsmatthew>        ready
 <jdong>        ready
 <MikeB->       ready
 <SD-Plissken>  As al bundy would say lets rock..
 <Vorian>       ok AX team here?
 <Vorian>       hello arnieboy 
 <arnieboy>     I am here Vorian
 <Vorian>       hey
 <arnieboy>     hey
 <Vorian>       1st up
 <Vorian>       Concerns Expressed By Automatix
 <Vorian>       Discussion between Automatix Team and Ubuntu Forums staff to help resolve recent miscommunications. https//wiki.ubuntu.com/ForumCouncilAgenda/Discussion
 <arnieboy>     mstlyevil is here as well from my team
 <Vorian>       we'll start with you if that's ok?
 <arnieboy>     sure no problem
 <Vorian>       as the agenda states... 
 <Vorian>       Discussion between Automatix Team and Ubuntu Forums staff to help resolve recent miscommunications
 <MikeB->       arnieboy please explain your concerns
 <popey>        are they not explained fully enough on that page?
 <compiledkernel>       I have to aggree popey
 <compiledkernel>       it clearly is
 <arnieboy>     MikeB-, as I have tried to outline in the Forum agenda.. there seems to have been a bit of misunderstanding in terms of where we (as the AX team) stand in the Ubuntu community
 <jdong>        this is for arnieboy to express his concerns and for us to address them..
 <arnieboy>     Some attempts have been made to project us as separate from the community which I think is a mistake
 <arnieboy>     Also, there is a bit of misunderstanding about support for Automatix on UF.. some people seem to have been suggesting of late that "UF will not support AX in any shape or form"
 <MikeB->       arnieboy but some of that separation was requested at your end
 <arnieboy>     This we think is a little extreme
 <arnieboy>     yes I admit that MikeB-
 <arnieboy>     I asked for the AX support forum to be closed
 <arnieboy>     and then moved our support to our own forums
 <MikeB->       arnieboy but we do not push off people needing AX support, we send them to you, which is probably best for the user
 <arnieboy>     This however did not imply, that any AX user who was asking for support on UF should be told that "AX is not supported on UF"
 <arnieboy>     Many third party software do not have sub-forums on UF
 <arnieboy>     and the UF community seems to support those softwares just fine
 <jdong>        the difference is that you asked for support to be given at your forum
 <arnieboy>     MikeB-, we really appreciate that.. in fact as I also mentioned in the agenda, the best support will probably come from us at AX forums
 <arnieboy>     However, many AX users would surely be capable of answering support questions on UF
 <arnieboy>     in fact till the day I was banned from UF, I used to answer many support questions on AX on UF
 <arnieboy>     the same can be verified at your end
 <compiledkernel>       Admittedly, even say as Vmware is supported on the ubuntuforums, the most direct path for clear and represented information is on Vmware's officially stood resources. It would seem to me that the drive over what automatix does and does not do, breakage or not, should be directed in the most viable path....To you directly.
 <popey>        I fail to see why AX should be singled out (history ignored for a moment) as "not supported" yet some binary only stuff like vmware and google earth is?
 <arnieboy>     popey that is exactly my point
 <jdong>        it is not being singled out
 <arnieboy>     atleast one of my points
 <jdong>        the only singling out we've done is at the request of arnieboy
 <jdong>        we are happy to change that now
 <popey>        cool jdong
 <MikeB->       popey AX is not singled, all installation helper scriipts are treated the same
 <popey>        that's good
 <arnieboy>     jdong I havent requested that
 <arnieboy>     I havent requested for any singling out
 <PriceChild>   The official stance of these forums on installation scripts http//ubuntuforums.org/announcement.php?f=
 <popey>        so one way forward is for arnieboy to request re-opening of some AX forums and you guys obliging?
 <Daviey>       all 3rd party software support requests should come with a 'health warning'
  *     avoine (n=avoine@69.70.0.) has joined #ubuntu-meeting
  <compiledkernel>      popey, that defies 3rd party rules, he has his own forum
  <PriceChild>  popey, we have a policy not to have a subforum on our site when the project has their own
  <popey>       ah, didn't realise that, thanks
  <compiledkernel>      no problem popey
  <MikeB->      popey no, but we may consider making a link to his forum
  <arnieboy>    About the phrase "helper script"
  <popey>       arnieboy lets deal with that after?
  <arnieboy>    alright popey
  <popey>       lets figure out what you want in the way of support, then figure out what you call it?
  <popey>       )
  <earobinson>  why not just link to the ax forums in the 3rd party projects section
  <compiledkernel>      As long as the user has a direct and obvious path, linked or not, to the getautomatix site where concerns can be addressed, I dont see an issue of support elsewise in this arena.
  <popey>       would you be happy for a link from uf to ax forums and the wording to be slightly less "offensive" / "derogatory" / "negative" about AX?
  <earobinson>  that way it comes with the warning "Projects related to the Ubuntu community that are not sponsored by Canonical, Ubuntu or the Ubuntu Forums. Please only post questions related to these projects here." like all other 3rd party projects
  <arnieboy>    All I want is UF staff members stop spreading misleading information about Automatix and hijacking every support thread
  <popey>       arnieboy thats an education thing
  <PriceChild>  arnieboy, I don't agree with that last sentence.
  <arnieboy>    popey I do not concur with you on that
  <PriceChild>  arnieboy, when people are hijacking threads to say you need automatix to install wine for example... I think there is reason to prevent that.
  Adri afflux ajmitch AlexLatchford AndrewB arnieboy asac asw avoine 
  <popey>       arnieboy possibly some history - maybe been burned with an old broken version of AX in the distant past, and dont want to see people use it now? perhaps?
  <compiledkernel>      thats very clearly the case and a bit more popey
  <arnieboy>    popey I have no issues discussing bugs in a version of AX  years old
  <popey>       PriceChild AX _is_ a legitimate way of installing WINE though right? It's not necessarily the best way or the only way, but it's certainly _a_ way?
  <jdong>       PriceChild +1; it is perfectly legitimate to offer alternate advice
  <MikeB->      arnieboy the forum staff is still allowed to have a opinion on a subject
  <jdong>       popey people have the right to suggest that way, along with any other way
  <PriceChild>  popey, it is _a_ way.... however wine is in the _official_ ubuntu repositories
  <arnieboy>    what I do not like is strongly worded opinions from UF staff without proof
  <Daviey>      AX is quite loudly unsupported by #ubuntu - check with ubotu
  <popey>       PriceChild so what?
  <compiledkernel>      censorship of opinion is not a likely course in this case.
  <arnieboy>    MikeB-, I agree
  <mstlyevil>   PriceChild, there is no problem with some one telling a person wanting wine for example how to do it manually even if they are asking how to do it with AX
  <arnieboy>    However there has been a distinct pattern of hatred against Automatix
  <popey>       PriceChild i was not commenting on where the application comes from, merely how it is installed
  <arnieboy>    and its team members
  <popey>       arnieboy this is true
  <PriceChild>  If someone wants to install wine... you tell them the official ubuntu way first.
  <PriceChild>  It is very wrong to give them unsupported advice
  <PriceChild>  first off
  <compiledkernel>      I have to aggree PriceChild
  <popey>       PriceChild that is your perogative, it is also perfectly fine for someone to suggest to use AX
  <arnieboy>    PriceChild, let users recommend what they want to recommend
  <popey>       I disagree PriceChild
  <popey>       if someone is happy using AX, let them
  <arnieboy>    why do you want to dictate what they want to recommend
  <arnieboy>    ?
  <popey>       its their system
  <MikeB->      arnieboy I think the best solution is for the UF to link to the AX forums, and maybe you should talk to the Tech board and maybe make AX more part of the Ubuntu community
  <compiledkernel>      Why do you want to censor what can and cannot be said Arnav
  <PriceChild>  !worksforme
  <ubotu>       Common Sense Just because you can, does not mean you should (and especially recommend to others). Think before you do. "Works for me" does not mean it is ok. The latest version of everything is not always useful if you aim for stability.
  <racarr>      I agree. If someone made a post asking how to install a Fedora RPM of Wine through alien or someone else recommended that, I don't see a problem with someone posting "You should do this through universe instead"
  <frodon>      PriceChild has a point here, devs works hard to improve things, the minimum is to push users to use add/remove apps or synaptic
  <Daviey>      popey, he's saying - "how can i install wine" - shouldn't get the automatix2 as first response
  <popey>       PriceChild who are you aiming that at?
  <PriceChild>  just because it works for me doesn't mean it is a good thing to give for others
  <racarr>      and automatix is the same thing
  <arnieboy>    hey we all work hard
  <arnieboy>    Automatix is a lot of hard work as well
  <compiledkernel>      I think censorship over the issue is more apparent here than hatred
  <jdong>       we aren't saying it isn't a lot of work for you, arnieboy
  <compiledkernel>      should a user , moderator or admin
  <arnieboy>    Please do not disregard that fact
  <compiledkernel>      have the right to express their opinion
  <compiledkernel>      in a support thread or not
  <compiledkernel>      about Automatix
  <PriceChild>  If someone goes to the official ubuntu forums for advice on a thing like that. They are a new user who doesn't know what they are doing. If someone gives them advice that will give them packages _unsupported_ by ubuntu then that is wrong unless they exlpain so.
  <jdong>       One core issue here is the "inaccurate facts" about automatix -- there is a lot of disagreeing opinion about the safety of automatix
  <popey>       PriceChild you do know that universe and multiverse are on by default in feisty?
  <PriceChild>  popey, they are at least community supported
  <popey>       so its very easy to install "unsupported" software
  <PriceChild>  which is one step better than 3rd party apps
  <popey>       I think the assertion that AX does evil stuff should be toned down a bit
  <jdong>       #ubuntu-motu has been one of the more colorful voices in stating that Automatix does dangerous things
  <popey>       it is PriceChild I agree
  <arnieboy>    Most of the paranoia about Automatix stems from the Dapper to Edgy upgrade fiasco
  <arnieboy>    which many experienced users have noted was because of Edgy itself
  <arnieboy>    not Automatix
  <MikeB->      back on track people
  <jdong>       arnieboy recent uncoverings of killall -9 dpkg does not help either
  <PriceChild>  My point was.... that we mostly hijack already hijacked threads.
  <jdong>       there is at least some level of fact and some level of myth in statements about Automatix
  <SD-Plissken> Why not educate the user of your program.
  <jdong>       but I fear that settling the safety aspect is outside the skillset of the Froum Council
  <compiledkernel>      that goes back to a documentation issue SD-Plissken
  <popey>       i agree compiledkernel
  <compiledkernel>      and why we should provide the user a direct path
  <Vorian>      lets keep to the topic at hand please
  <compiledkernel>      back to automatix
  <jdong>       as I said from the beginning, I think the Tech Board needs to get involved with that aspect of the issue
  <Daviey>      What about if we start a wiki page about Automatix - then we can put the 'fact's about it (agreed by both party's)
  <forumsmatthew>       can I just give a short thought on what precipitated all this?
  <arnieboy>    SD-Plissken, we are an Open Source GPL-ed program.. any curious user is more than welcome to unpack the package and study the code and see how it works
  <compiledkernel>      rather than try to haphazardly guess at supporting it
  <compiledkernel>      on the forums
  <compiledkernel>      as long as a direct path is given and used
  <arnieboy>    Does synaptic explain how it works?
  <forumsmatthew>       the issue has only rarely been about the software.
  <popey>       back to the points?
  <compiledkernel>      then there should be no issue, correct popey
  <Vorian>      yes popey )
  <SD-Plissken> This not about the code this about giving the user a man page to read. not just some click on this click on that.
  <mstlyevil>   Jdong, that command is only used after a previous ax installation option has run because dpkg stays in system memory for up to 2 minuyes
  <forumsmatthew>       this all started because someone made a pretty snazzy little script to help people install stuff they wanted that wasn't included in the default repos
  <forumsmatthew>       but
  <jdong>       mstlyevil nontheless, forcibly killing dpkg is potentially an extremely risky option
  <forumsmatthew>       that person had some relational difficulties
  <popey>       jdong please, this isn't the place for this
  <forumsmatthew>       berating everyone who dared to even moderately disagree with him or question him
  <popey>       we should _not_ be analysing the ax codebase here and now!
  <arnieboy>    forumsmatthew, you are attacking me directly
  <forumsmatthew>       the forums got tired of arnieboy attacking people
  <arnieboy>    Do you want me to do the same?
  <forumsmatthew>       we banned him for that reason
  <forumsmatthew>       this has little to do with his script, regardless of what language it is in
  <SD-Plissken> You AX guys built this and put it out there like crack, and theres no manual. users dont understand the things that can go wrong how to recover if something happens.
  <forumsmatthew>       it works for most people, not for some others
  <Daviey>      ***************************** Not relevant to agenda
  <popey>       SD-Plissken steady on
  <forumsmatthew>       it has everything to do with his consistent poor treatment of forums users
  <arnieboy>    ok.. Discussing why I was banned wasnt on the meeting agenda
  <forumsmatthew>       that's all I have to say
  <compiledkernel>      i have to aggree with forumsmatthew
  <arnieboy>    though I am open to discussing that as well
  <compiledkernel>      any disaggrement with the application has lead to
  <popey>       this is mostly irrelavent
  <compiledkernel>      numerous subservise attempts
  <compiledkernel>      to stop them from occuring
  <popey>       if there is not going to be an AX forum at UF
  <popey>       but a link to UF
  <PriceChild>  popey, definitely isn't
  <popey>       s/UF/AX
  <arnieboy>    compiledkernel, does saphira agree as well? and Kingbahamut?
  <compiledkernel>      and yes
  <PriceChild>  popey, One of the staff's main concerns is his attitude towards us.
  <compiledkernel>      I DO
  <arnieboy>    and not saphira? compiledkernel ?
  <jdong>       popey the automatix issue has a highly complicated history that makes all of these points relevant.
  <popey>       PriceChild sort the first issue out the others follow
  <popey>       jdong i am aware of it
  <compiledkernel>      Saphira is sitting right next to me , you can ask her herself
  <mstlyevil>   Lets all cool down here
  <popey>       i am saying its irrelavent now and here
  <popey>       this discussion is tired
  <compiledkernel>      Arnieboy, does a God need validation?
  <popey>       all parties have heard this
  <popey>       compiledkernel is that necessary?
  <popey>       really?
  <arnieboy>    Why does one user create 3 nicks and attack Automatix with 3 different nicks and why does the UF administration condone that?
  <compiledkernel>      no
  <compiledkernel>      its isnt
  <popey>       so lets get back on track
  <popey>       lets stop with the personal attacks
  <compiledkernel>      Why does a user claim to be a God
  <popey>       it will NOT help
  <compiledkernel>      and attack people personallly
  <Daviey>      compiledkernel, shhh
  <popey>       compiledkernel seriously, stop
  <compiledkernel>      threatening in manner
  <popey>       this isn't helping
  <earobinson>  popey +1
  <forumsmatthew>       okay, look
  <arnieboy>    The UF administration cannot control its own staff
  <MikeB->      lets please calm down and get back to discussion and not bickering, or we will move the meeting to a different channel
  <forumsmatthew>       let's get to the issue
  <arnieboy>    This is disgracefuk
  <arnieboy>    disgraceful*
  <Crane_>      Can I make a comment if I am not on the staff
  <forumsmatthew>       do we want arnieboy back on the forums--why or why not?
  <popey>       arnieboy these are just people - not staff who are controled by a borg like entity )
  <forumsmatthew>       lots of others are...
  <Daviey>      arnieboy, lets be constructive - what would you like to see changed?
  <ubuntugeek>  popey I think you need to chill out
  <popey>       !
  <PriceChild>  Crane_, of course
  <popey>       *I* need to chill out!?
  <popey>       heh
  <jdong>       I would be willing to consider allowing Arnieboy back on the forums, provided that he exhibits professional behavior
  <forumsmatthew>       jdong +1
  <arnieboy>    Daviey, I am sorry.. this is getting into a bashfest.. I did mention my points
  <compiledkernel>      forumsmatthew, +1
  <arnieboy>    jdong thats another attack
  <jdong>       pardon?
  <forumsmatthew>       arnieboy, ???
  <arnieboy>    You are4 directly saying I havent been professional
  <Daviey>      arnieboy, can you just re-clarify?
  <MikeB->      +1 if he agree to follow the CoC and FCoC guidelines
  <forumsmatthew>       attack?
  <mstlyevil>   forumsmatthew, can I say something in arnieboy's defense?
  <forumsmatthew>       you have been unprofessional
  <arnieboy>    What if I say the same about you?
  <forumsmatthew>       that's a fact, not an attack
  <popey>       guys
  <popey>       enough with the bashing
  <frodon>      I think that PriceChild previous point is important, when a user ask how to install things official way should be adviced first then if 3rd party helper scripts are proposed it shoud be associated with the due warnings and explanation, that's my main concern. because this don't benefit the user
  <compiledkernel>      yes arnieboy, you havent
  <forumsmatthew>       mstlyevil, yes, of course you may
  <forumsmatthew>       popey, what bashing? and how did you end up moderating this meeting?
  <mstlyevil>   I just want to say that some peole in the past have purposely provoked arnieboy
  <MikeB->      forumsmatthew I did ask
  <arnieboy>    and you have been an extremely opinionated and hot headed individual who deserves no place in an administrative position forumsmatthew
  <mstlyevil>   people
  <forumsmatthew>       arnieboy, ???
  <jdong>       arnieboy that is a personal attack
  <Crane_>      this looks like a pissing match and not a disscussion,
  <popey>       i believe arnieboy should be let back onto the forums with no other provisos other than he act like any other forum person
  <Daviey>      I think PriceChild's point should be clarified on a wiki page that forum users can be refereed to - rather than just saying it's 'dangerous'
  <MikeB->      both side need to chill out some
  <LjL> frodon full +1 from me on that (i'm however not associated with the forums)
  <popey>       no person attacks, no extra requirements
  <Crane_>      if AX is not supported by  UF then there should be no comment made in the forums when it is stated.
  <mstlyevil>   arnieboy, had previously provided a lot of support to people on UF that were not AX related
  <arnieboy>    What is actually supported by UF?
  <Crane_>       These battles are not helping the community
  <arnieboy>    can anyone clarify?
  <forumsmatthew>       I wouldn't ask arnieboy to do anything that I wouldn't expect of any other forums member, abide by the CoC and the Forums CoC
  <popey>       exactly forumsmatthew
  <PriceChild>  arnieboy, software in the ubuntu repositories
  <Daviey>      arnieboy, http//ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=  ,- 3rd party support
  <arnieboy>    which repositories PriceChild ?
  <Crane_>      I would refer someone looking for support for AX to the AX forums and also tell them the way to install without AX.
  <forumsmatthew>       it was violating those forum rules that got arnieboy banned
  <Bonzodog>    Software in the *sanctioned, official* ubuntu repositories, as signed off by Mark Shuttlworth
  <PriceChild>  arnieboy, main, restricted, universe, multiverse. If you get support for software outside of this then cool.
  <compiledkernel>      this issue is not about prior bad acts
  <compiledkernel>      thats already been maintained
  <arnieboy>    WEhat got me banned was your personal hatred for me forumsmatthew
  <PriceChild>  arnieboy, No
  <jdong>       arnieboy that is not true
  <forumsmatthew>       if we let him back, then we get to revisit every situation for every user that has been banned as well
  <PriceChild>  arnieboy, you broke the guidelines
  <forumsmatthew>       arnieboy, no, not true
  <forumsmatthew>       I do not hate you
  <forumsmatthew>       I don't even know you
  <MikeB->      ops, please remove all voice for a minute for people can calm down
  <Daviey>      arnieboy, be constructive!
  <Crane_>      It appears that AX is just mad becasue Ubuntu will not  put it int the repos and support it.
  <popey>       Crane_ i don't believe that is the case
  <arnieboy>    That does not mean we want to stay separate
  *     PriceChild scratches head
  <arnieboy>    That only means we do things the way It works best for most people
  <arnieboy>    which includes users, Ubuntu MOTU and Ubut Core Team
  <Daviey>      arnieboy, do you want support to be provided for AX on UF?
  <Crane_>      That is a skewed statement
  <compiledkernel>      Big and Independent, but not seperate
  <compiledkernel>      then put AX back on launchpad
  <Crane_>      you do things the way YOU think is best for people
  <compiledkernel>      contribute code
  <compiledkernel>      file bugs
  <compiledkernel>      talk with devs
  <arnieboy>    Ubuntu*
  <compiledkernel>      go to UDS
  <arnieboy>    I totally suck at typing.. I hope I am excused for my typos
  <popey>       heh
  <arnieboy>    OK will compiledkernel continue attacking me?
  <mstlyevil>   compiledkernel, we already are talking to some Ubuntu devs for your information
  <forumsmatthew>       arnieboy, no one types perfectly...the meaning is what's important
  <MikeB->      ok, lets see what the FC can vote on
  <Daviey>      arnieboy, do you want support to be provided for AX on UF?    UF admins - do you mind if people want to support AX on UF?
  <arnieboy>    I am getting a little tired here
  <popey>       so can the forums guys agree to be less negative about AX and arnieboy in particular, but instead point people at the "standard" way of doing things without disparaging AX?
  <arnieboy>    Daviey, sure I would personally want to support AX on UF
  <PriceChild>  popey, we have a set of guidelines already which we are following
  <arnieboy>    I want to do it myself
  <PriceChild>  popey, I don't think we need to change them?
  <MikeB->      popey the forum people are allow to have their own opinion
  <popey>       PriceChild well arnieboy is clearly annoyed at the way people talk about his product
  <MikeB->      popey but we have not blocking support of AX
  <popey>       which is understandable to some degree
  <popey>       MikeB- I am not saying block or not, just don't be so -ve
  <forumsmatthew>       if arnieboy can conduct himself in the same manner in which we expect all forums members to conduct themselves, I don't have a problem with him having a presence on the forums
  <popey>       forumsmatthew +1
  <compiledkernel>      forumsmatthew, +1
  <popey>       just like any other user
  <PriceChild>  popey, that is no longer happenning apart from the point i made earlier about "better" advice.
  <jdong>       popey we are not a criticism sheild. people have the right to make comments about software in compliance with the Code of Conduct -- positive or negative
  <forumsmatthew>       if he can't, he shouldn't be allowed there, just like anyone else who cant
  <popey>       PriceChild its all in the wording
  <popey>       jdong sure, but i meant the forums admins themselves
  <popey>       because there is clearly history between the two parties
  <popey>       things need to proceed in a gentlemanly way
  <popey>       i.e. no animosity shown in posts on the forums
  <popey>       simply post the facts
  <jdong>       popey forum staff should be held up to the same set of codes and guidelines.
  <compiledkernel>      jdong, +1
  <arnieboy>    If Forum staff promise to treate me with due respect, I do not see myself acting in any way which may be deemed inappropriate
  *     LoudMouthMan (n=nik@ubuntu/member/loudmouthman) has joined #ubuntu-meeting
  <popey>       _should_ or _are_ ?
  <arnieboy>    treat*
  <arnieboy>    If they do what compiledkernel is doing here
  <arnieboy>    then its a no-win situation
  <jdong>       popey they are
  <popey>       excellent
  <mstlyevil>   popey, I am against silencing the opinion of induvidual staff members
  <popey>       then arnieboy is happy
  <popey>       mstlyevil opinion is different
  <compiledkernel>      I promise you arnieboy, never to attack you personally again
  <compiledkernel>      if that will make you happy and proper
  <popey>       there is "recommended policy" and "my opinion" - which are not the same
  <mstlyevil>   right
  <arnieboy>    hey we want opinions.. Please give opinions like "I do not like Automatix. I prefer doing things the manual way"
  <arnieboy>    Thats fine
  <arnieboy>    but dont spread FUD
  <Daviey>      It's not a case of silencing them - but forum staff members _have_ to act professionally - and not just slate projected because the disagree with them
  <frodon>      what is needed IMO, is to warn the user about the drawback of 3rd party helper scripts when advicing them, this would help a lot. Denying problems related to 3rd party helper script don't help but give the due warning to the user while advicing them do help
  <compiledkernel>      But I refuse to censor my opinion because you dont aggree with it.
  <arnieboy>    thats what I really cannot stand
  <popey>       arnieboy would you be willing to accept help in getting the documentation for AX improved?
  <ubuntugeek>  popey are you on the FC?
  <popey>       ubuntugeek no
  <arnieboy>    Some forum staff are making a concerted effort to attack Automatix, hijack threads and spread FUD
  <arnieboy>    That has to stop
  <popey>       improve the documentation to counter the FUD then )
  <jdong>       arnieboy can you point to some examples of what you consider to be attacks, hijacks, or FUD?
  <PriceChild>  arnieboy, as far as I am aware. All staff are following the guidelines we have.
  <Daviey>      Make a wiki page - with agreed 'truth'
  <racarr>      Speaking as someone from a project that takes a LOT of slagging. I don't see how that's anyones problem except yours /
  <arnieboy>    popey we will write more documentation on Automatix if that helps
  <compiledkernel>      certainly it would arnieboy
  <popey>       arnieboy I'll gladly help
  <arnieboy>    Our wiki already has a lot of information but I can promise we can add more
  <popey>       (installed for only the second time today)
  <frodon>      arnieboy, would you accept to tell the users that 3rd party helper scripts (like automatix) create problems (often because that the user don't understand what he do) that may lead to upgrade nightmares when advicing automatix ?
  <ubuntugeek>  personally i see nothing wrong with referring people with AX issues to the AX forum. We had a AX section and arnav asked for it to be closed. Pretty simple really.
  <compiledkernel>      as long as the user has I direct
  <compiledkernel>      and open path
  <compiledkernel>      to AX
  <compiledkernel>      support shouldnt be an issue
  <MikeB->      there is some bad blood between the two teams
  <arnieboy>    frodon I can write documentation to prove that what you are asking me makes no sense at all because your understanding of how Automatix works is thoroughly limited
  <compiledkernel>      put it on the front page for the love of <insert your god here>
  <jdong>       one comment if I may....
  <jdong>       the forum council is not here to make tehcnical judgements on software
  <MikeB->      I want both side to take a minute and ask if you can get past it or not, answer truthfully
  <Vorian>      jdong, +1
  <jdong>       I would advise switching to focus more on support _accountability_
  <compiledkernel>      MikeB-, +1 bad blood or not, yes.
  <jdong>       i.e. who is the responsible party when something "goes wrong"
  <frodon>      arnieboy, this is a different topic
  <arnieboy>    I told you guys
  <mstlyevil>   jdong, +1
  <arnieboy>    I am ready to give support
  <jdong>       that is the main distinction between "third part script" and "official repositories"
  <arnieboy>    Treat us with due respect
  <arnieboy>    and stop the vendetta
  <SD-Plissken> Support on your own forum?
  <arnieboy>    thats all
  <arnieboy>    no
  <arnieboy>    support on AX forums
  <jdong>       i.e. official repository problems go to Launchpad or the developers
  <arnieboy>    sorry
  <arnieboy>    UF
  <arnieboy>    support on UF
  <MikeB->      arnieboy I think having UF pointing to your forums is the best idea, and please start working with the rest of the Ubuntu community
  <jdong>       third party scripts go to the authors, ultimately
  <arnieboy>    thats what we are ready to provide
  <ubuntugeek>  Directing support to your forums is fine. You had a section on UF and wanted it closed
  <arnieboy>    every software goes to the authors
  <arnieboy>    even the kernel
  <compiledkernel>      Direct Path for the user is the best possible solution
  <jdong>       arnieboy yes, but Ubuntu developers is not the immediate higher hierarchy for Automatix support
  <Vorian>      +1 compiledkernel 
  <mstlyevil>   Direct Path is fine with us
  <MikeB->      to get AX working with some of the core developers
  <arnieboy>    ubuntugeek, we dont need a thirs party forum.. we can provide support as such
  <ubuntugeek>  My point is you didnt want support on UF
  <arnieboy>    all it takes is a search
  <ubuntugeek>  now you do?
  <arnieboy>    I will be more than happy to provide support
  <earobinson>  Why not just link to the AX forums in the 3rd party section, that way it is treated with the same warning as all other 3rd party projects
  <SD-Plissken> So send every AX user that post on the UF the AX forums. then.
  <compiledkernel>      aggreed SD-Plissken
  <jdong>       anyone object to having Automatix questions mixed with general support problems in the general areas of the forum?
  <arnieboy>    I did not ever say "I do not want support on UF".. I said I want the third party forum closed thats all
  <compiledkernel>      Link on the front page and direct all users there
  <arnieboy>    and as I pointed out earlier
  <compiledkernel>      whats the issue with that?
  <jdong>       if I understand correctly, that is arnieboy's desire
  <arnieboy>    even after the sub-forum was closed
  <arnieboy>    I continued answering AX related questions on UF till I was banned
  <PriceChild>  But the subforum was for support?
  <arnieboy>    Everyone is free to verify that
  <compiledkernel>      jdong, I still think its better to forward the user to AX forums itself
  <compiledkernel>      specifically where a bug or other such problem exists
  <compiledkernel>      say if a user drops a thread called "automatix2 problems"
  <arnieboy>    NO it was not only for support it was for a lot of other things such as announcements, feature requests, documentation etc
  <mstlyevil>   PriceChild, we have posted everywhere on UF to go to the AX forums yet we get several support threads on UF daily
  <SD-Plissken> You can have it both way
  <compiledkernel>      I dont think it should really go there, I think the AX forums should have the advantage of that
  <SD-Plissken> cant*
  <arnieboy>    Automatix needed a dedicated server of its own
  <arnieboy>    Currently it gets an average of  million hits a month
  <jdong>       compiledkernel right now, arnieboy is pledging to comb through the general forum for Automatix questions and his team will respond to them
  <arnieboy>    It had to go its own server
  <arnieboy>    go to*
  <jdong>       compiledkernel if he can handle that, I see no reason to segregate Automatix to a particular server
  <MikeB->      may I make a suggestion?
  <SD-Plissken> You can't have us do your support, and you offer limited if any support
  <mstlyevil>   All we are asking is if arnieboy can return so he can provide support to those that post a question on UF
  <jdong>       there will be members of our community that would like to try to offer Automatix support
  <SD-Plissken> I feel all AX posters should be sent to the AX forums, and their irc room.
  <compiledkernel>      jdong is right, there is no way for us to control what users will or will not do
  <arnieboy>    SD-Plissken, what is this "you and us" Ubuntu and Linux is all about the community as a whole remember??
  <jdong>       ok, can we first finalize a decision on arnieboy's status at the forums?
  <compiledkernel>       jdong +1
  <compiledkernel>      I concur
  <jdong>       as I said earlier, I am fine in welcoming arnieboy back to the forums
  <Vorian>      jdong, +1
  <frodon>      mstlyevil, the problem is that there's no 3rd party automatix forum for this support
  <forumsmatthew>       jdong, +1 please
  <arnieboy>    We dont need a third party forum
  <SD-Plissken> Community i understand that concept, however. the way your laying it out makes it so that UF does all of the support.
  <Daviey>      frodon, at arnieboy's request
  <arnieboy>    why cant people understand that?
  <Vorian>      arnieboy, no one said you were getting one
  <Stemp>       EasyUbuntu ?
  <mstlyevil>   frodon, that is what a forum search functionj is for
  <compiledkernel>      because you are asking for the right to be treated like a 3rd party project arnieboy , yet you have not a 3rd party forum
  <compiledkernel>      there are rules for and against such
  <compiledkernel>      thats why there is this issue still standing
  <jdong>       MikeB-, ubuntugeek , any objections to restoring arnieboy's forum access?
  <arnieboy>    I dont want one either Vorian
  <arnieboy>    all I am saying is I will continue supporting AX on UF
  <arnieboy>    if I am allowed to
  <frodon>      mstlyevil, i mean support for third party helper script should remain out of global support area
  <PriceChild>  and if you abide by the guidelines.
  <MikeB->      jdong i think it is a bad idea, since I don't see both sides in agreement yet
  <mstlyevil>   frodon, AX is not unlike any other third party software and should be treated no different
  <arnieboy>    Who are the two sides here?
  <arnieboy>    I am confused about that
  <PriceChild>  us and you?
  <ubuntugeek>  Well problem is we dont allow 3rd party sections who already have forums
  <forumsmatthew>       what two sides? arnieboy gets access in the forums and acts human and life is good
  <arnieboy>    and who constitutes "you" PriceChild ?
  <compiledkernel>      lol
  <frodon>      mstlyevil, it's the same for all helper scripts which have their 3rd party forum
  <MikeB->      but +1, let try and see what happens
  <forumsmatthew>       didn't mean that as an insult
  <SD-Plissken> So what is being asked here. That either your allowed to support AX on UF or the others third artyapps should go?
  <forumsmatthew>       linux for human beings and all
  <ubuntugeek>  as far as to allow arnieboy to come back..  I dont think it will last but +1 to give it a try
  <jdong>       alright, that is a full vote.
  <jdong>       Vorian let the records show that arnieboy's forum access will be restored
  j_ack JanC jdong jenda Jozo Ju 
  <Vorian>      jdong, done
  <jdong>       thanks
  <jdong>       now, let's discuss support logistics
  <arnieboy>    alright thanks for the vote of confidence
  <jdong>       arnieboy and his team would like AX support questions to be handled generally with the rest of the support questions
  <SD-Plissken> I don't agree with it. now you open the door for others to ask that their account be reactivated.
  <jdong>       and they would like to use the forum search feature to identify and answer automatix questions
  <arnieboy>    yes thats correct jdong
  <jdong>       are there any objections to this approach?
  <bapoumba>    jdong, not good idea
  <bapoumba>    info will be scattered all over the place
  <SD-Plissken> I said what i felt.
  <compiledkernel>      can we just tag all AX threads
  <compiledkernel>      as AX
  <mstlyevil>   bapoumba, I am already doing this for people that fail to go to AX forums for support
  <compiledkernel>      and supply a nessecary link to them?
  <arnieboy>    bapoumba, isnt info about Vmware-server scattered all over the place?
  <arnieboy>    what about mplayer?
  <arnieboy>    and say apache?
  <arnieboy>    or azureus?
  <arnieboy>    do they have distinct support forums on UF?
  <bapoumba>    nope
  <jdong>       "automatix" is unique enough a term that forum search would do fine
  <Bonzodog>    I agree with compiledkernel, use the tags for AX threads
  <jdong>       I think arnieboy's approach will work out
  <arnieboy>    so I think scattered support for AX will work just fine
  <jdong>       with or without tagging
  <PriceChild>  vmware, mplayer apache and azureus are all int he repos
  <jdong>       we do allow general questions in the support areas
  <jdong>       i.e. people trying to compile their own software
  <jdong>       or installing limewire from their site
  <jdong>       etc
  <jdong>       I don't see how automatix is any different
  <popey>       jdong +1
  <ubuntugeek>  We are not going to customize searches for specific content.. searching is already a pain to maintain.
  <arnieboy>    jdong +1
  <arnieboy>    I dont want specialized search for Automatix
  <jdong>       I don't think any customizations to searching are necessary
  <arnieboy>    The genric search will work just fine for the AX team
  <arnieboy>    generic*
  <ubuntugeek>  Nothing needs to change on UF, if arnav see's a AX support threads he should reply
  <mstlyevil>   No need to customise searches ubuntugeek
  <jdong>       searching for the word 'automatix' will work just fine for this purpose
  <frodon>      jdong, because it is a helper scripts that encourage the user not using the official way to install things
  *     Vorian nods at ubuntugeek 
  <jdong>       we organize forums into sections when the searching mechanisms arent' discrete enough
  <frodon>      so it should remain like other helper script outside the global areas
  <jdong>       this does not appear to be an issue with automatix
  <jdong>       frodon the question is... are all installation scripts outside the "general" area?
  <jdong>       frodon what are nvidia/ati installations programs, or java binaries, than specialized installation scripts?
  <frodon>      no but it should because theuy have a third party forum
  <jdong>       I don't think our main support area is defined to be only "official" items
  <jdong>       as of now, that is.
  <SD-Plissken> Also should they not be able to fix said AX problem. they should have no issue with any member explaining how to do it with their helperscript.
  <compiledkernel>      so are we going to recommend that AX threads be centralized to an specific area?
  <ubuntugeek>  No
  <SD-Plissken> without*
  <compiledkernel>      general? beginner? whatever?
  <ubuntugeek>  Like I said before we put in place a policy for 3rd party area's we dont allow them when the software/product has a forum already
  <arnieboy>    just let people post wherever the want ....
  <jdong>       compiledkernel no other piece of software is mandatorily segregated in such a manner
  <arnieboy>    we will answer them
  <arnieboy>    they*
  <ubuntugeek>  +1 with arnav
  <compiledkernel>      understood jdong
  <frodon>      jdong, that's not about the official question but more about to educate better the user to know what he do
  <forumsmatthew>       arnieboy, +1 let the post occur where they occur
  <forumsmatthew>       Let's move on
  <SD-Plissken> Next..
  <jdong>       frodon that's not the issue at hand though; everyone can participate in an Automatix thread.
  <jdong>       frodon I don't think arnieboy would object to offering alternative ways of doing things
  <arnieboy>    OK.. that takes care of point 1 on our AX-UF agenda
  <Vorian>      Next item
  <Vorian>      Username change policy
  <Vorian>      Establish a policy for multiple accounts, username changes and disabling accounts.
  <jdong>       wait a second
  <arnieboy>    Now can we move to point 2?
  <jdong>       is the AX agenda completed?
  <compiledkernel>      not that im aware of
  <SD-Plissken> No it's not.
  <jdong>       ok, arnieboy , please continue with next item
  <arnieboy>    No jdong
  <Vorian>      that was just point 1?
  <ubuntugeek>  Item 2 please
  <arnieboy>    Ok.. the next item is that Automatix is wrongly referred to as a "helper script"
  <arnieboy>    It did start off as one
  <arnieboy>    It stayed one for a long time
  <arnieboy>    but its not any more
  <frodon>      jdong, if official ways are proposed as well and due warning associated to the helper script support request no problem at all
  <compiledkernel>      Scirpt based Package manager , as I imagine , correct arnieboy ?
  <jdong>       arnieboy can you please define characteristics that makes automatix no longer a helper script?
  <arnieboy>    I will write some documentation to explain what I mean
  <Vorian>      package manager? hmm
  <arnieboy>    it will come up soon
  <PriceChild>  How is it a package manager?
  <jdong>       one at a time, please...
  <Vorian>      arnieboy, please be quick about it.
  <arnieboy>    ok jdong the problem is.. I can very well explain to the people present here why its not just an installation script anymore
  <arnieboy>    but it will take a while..
  <arnieboy>    can we wait till I write documentation on this
  <compiledkernel>      again, this goes back to an opinion. If a user/staff/admin wants to refer to it that way
  <compiledkernel>      thats their business
  <arnieboy>    and then discuss it at a later date?
  <jdong>       arnieboy can we defer this until you write up such documentation?
  <arnieboy>    yes thats what I proposed jdong
  <ubuntugeek>  So this is about the forums referring to AX as a helper script?
  <MikeB->      sorry my building network died for a couple of minutes
  <Vorian>      arnieboy, I'll add it to the agenda for you.
  <arnieboy>    yes ubuntugeek
  <arnieboy>    Thanks Vorian
  <ubuntugeek>  What should we call it?
  <arnieboy>    script-based package manager is what we want it called
  <compiledkernel>      as I had already asked arnieboy
  <arnieboy>    but a few people would want clarification on that
  <popey>       script based package installer would be more accurate
  <arnieboy>    so I have to write documentation on that
  <arnieboy>    to explain my point
  <forumsmatthew>       Um...it's not technically a package manager, it manages package managers
  <jdong>       let's let arnieboy write up his documentation
  <jdong>       we are all speculating
  <compiledkernel>      aggreed jdong
  <forumsmatthew>       jdong, +1
  <forumsmatthew>       move on
  <jdong>       alright, arnieboy , any additional points?
  <arnieboy>    forumsmatthew, do you understand what synaptic is?
  <arnieboy>    its a GTK wrapper for apt
  <arnieboy>    and apt is the real package manager
  <arnieboy>    then why is synaptic called a package manager?
  <arnieboy>    thats why I said
  <arnieboy>    I need to write documentation
  <ubuntugeek>  ok enough, arnav write your documentation and we'll readdress it
  <Vorian>      arnieboy, not now please
  <ubuntugeek>  Lets move on
  <arnieboy>    I think I am done for this time jdong
  <jdong>       alright, if I may add one closing comment...
  <arnieboy>    Vorian, not now what?
  <ubuntugeek>  arnav please.
  <jdong>       there are still ones amongst us concerned about the safety of automatix, etc. There are varying statements about Atuomatix's safety
  <ubuntugeek>  lets move on
  <jdong>       the forums council cannot make a technical judgement on that
  <arnieboy>    because there is a ton of misunderstanding about Automatix
  <gnomefreak>  apt isnt package manager (
  <jdong>       it is beyond our scope of duties, and abilities even
  <arnieboy>    FUD snowballs
  <jdong>       arnieboy it certainly does
  <gnomefreak>  dpkg == package manager
  <compiledkernel>      you defeat FUD with education arnieboy , plain and simple
  <jdong>       I would like for the Atuomatix team to get together with some of the more technical members of the Ubuntu community
  <compiledkernel>      educate your users
  <voidmage>     APT  is  a  management system for software packages. ]
  <arnieboy>    I intend to compiledkernel
  <jdong>       to address some of these safety concerns
  <voidmage>    (from man apt, beat that)
  <earobinson>  jdong +1
  <jdong>       a community concensus on the technical aspects of Atuomatix would be nice to have
  <mstlyevil>   jdong, +1
  <forumsmatthew>       jdong, +1
  <arnieboy>    yes jdong I agree
  <jdong>       instead of mud-flinging back and forth on both sides
  <jdong>       do we have a procedure for escalating an issue to another government council?>
  <frodon>      jdong, +1
  <earobinson>  AX may or may not have been unsafe in the past but let the technical board judge it as it is now (or whenever the AX team feels it is ready), till then judgement should be pending
  <jdong>       earobinson exactly
  <mc>  earobinson the technical board is not going to endorse automatix
  <mc>  or any other third part scipt
  <jdong>       mc but the TB can make a more accurate analysis of Automatix
  <mc>  jdong they have done so in the past
  <jdong>       this is the last "unfinished" part of the automatix issue
  <earobinson>  mc That is for the AX team and the board to talk about
  <jdong>       mc the script has changed very significantly after then
  <mc>  ok
  <ubuntugeek>  OK this isnt a forum issue )
  <ubuntugeek>  Lets move on please.
  <jdong>       it isn't a forum issue, but it will precipitate into one
  <earobinson>  as long as thats ok with the AX team
  <forumsmatthew>       ubuntugeek, +1
  <arnieboy>    We do not want an opinion from anyone whether we rock or we suck.. if anyone is technically good enough, please come forth and write patches and bug reports
  <jdong>       so, just a side note, Vorian after the meeting let's see if we can get a technical followup arranged?
  <jdong>       other than that, I think we can move on with the FC agenda.
  <arnieboy>    just like you would do for apt or synaptic or gnome-app-install
  <Vorian>      kk
  <arnieboy>    We have our own opinions about various technical workings in Ubuntu
  <arnieboy>    and we have not tried to "educate" everyone about that
  <ubuntugeek>  Next item please
  <Vorian>      Next item
  <Vorian>      Username change policy
  <Vorian>      Establish a policy for multiple accounts, username changes and disabling accounts.
  <forumsmatthew>       username change policy
  <forumsmatthew>       let's revisit it
  <Vorian>      ty forumsmatthew )
  <jdong>       thanks for your cooperation, arnieboy
  <arnieboy>    Thank you for your time and cooperation jdong
  <ubuntugeek>  I think its ok to change the username if the person doesnt have a history or is being abused somehow. Other then that no.
  <forumsmatthew>       I think we should change everyone's username, effective immediately
  <forumsmatthew>       just kidding
  <jdong>       I think the system is working pretty good
  <forumsmatthew>       ubuntugeek, +1
  <Vorian>      simple enough )
  <jdong>       AFAIK there are no major issues with it up to now, correct?
  <bapoumba>    or if they put their email asa nick ;)
  <ubuntugeek>  I might change mine )
  <PriceChild>  at the end of the day, if an admin has the time then its pretty petty not to )
  <Vorian>      lol
  <SD-Plissken> The current method is working.
  <ubuntugeek>  current method +1
  <PriceChild>  Its just good to have a "we dont' normally" in the guidelines.
  <forumsmatthew>       need me to abuse you a bit, ubuntugeek, so you can change yours?
  <forumsmatthew>       current method +1
  <ubuntugeek>  lol
  <bapoumba>    current method +1
  <forumsmatthew>       any opposed
  <Vorian>      poke MikeB- 
  <MikeB->      sorry I'm lagging
  <SD-Plissken> PriceChild that can be added to the current statement.
  <MikeB->      my window just threw up  lines of text
  *     PriceChild didn't think anything should be added...
  <jdong>       haha
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken I think it's already in our current statement...
  <MikeB->      +1
  <jdong>       i.e. we change usernames in extenuating circumstances
  <SD-Plissken> ok
  <jdong>       make a case to an admin, and we'll see
  <earobinson>  everyone happy then?
  <SD-Plissken> For now.
  <forumsmatthew>       fourth item staff demoting procedure
  <forumsmatthew>       I propose we don't need anything more specific than
  <forumsmatthew>       obey the rules, don't be a pain, and we would love to have you here
  <SD-Plissken> Will that work?
  <forumsmatthew>       it has so far
  <PriceChild>  I don't think we need a "procedure". A vote on the FC can decide such matters.
  <forumsmatthew>       we have a great staff
  <jdong>       the process we used previously can be summed up as....
  <SD-Plissken> FC does good blackbag operations.. lol
  <forumsmatthew>       SD-Plissken, lol
  <earobinson>  Staff do a great job, dont think that has been enough problems to really test if the current method works but it seems to be, so its fine for now
  <forumsmatthew>       I could tell you more about how we operate, but then I'd have to kill you
  <jdong>       Privately discuss the situation with the staffer in question. If no agreement can be reached then it will be handled at a public formal FC meeting
  <jdong>       this method was suggested to us by a member of the Community Council
  <SD-Plissken> forumsmatthew i was only kidding. ponders getting a pink slip via PM.. lol
  <jdong>       in addition, I would like to have a weekly russian roulette staff demotion routine...
  <jdong>       no, kidding.
  <ubuntugeek>  lol
  <forumsmatthew>       SD-Plissken, I never doubted it...I thought your joke was amusing
  <earobinson>  jdong, Are we talking private meeting, or just a pm, because any large meeting should be public IMO
  <jdong>       earobinson if an agreement cannot be reached via e-mail/PM, it will be a public meeting
  <earobinson>  kk
  <jdong>       earobinson with same visibility/documentation as any FC meeting
  <jdong>       I think this procedure is pretty effective
  <earobinson>  perfect
  <MikeB->      SD-Plissken email break ups are the hardest )
  <jdong>       and it should simply be formalized on forum policies
  <forumsmatthew>       This is what we've done and it's been working well
  <SD-Plissken> There really should be no reason to subject a ?Staffer to public hearings unless the offense was of great magnitude.
  <forumsmatthew>       SD-Plissken, I agree
  <SD-Plissken> MikeB I hope that's not coming from experience.
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken we don't want it to be a giant humiliation fest for sure
  <ubuntugeek>  Ok whats next on the agenda?
  <forumsmatthew>       staff term limits
  <jdong>       it seems like every other community position in Ubuntu has some sort of renewable expiration term
  <ubuntugeek>  jdong +1
  <jdong>       in my experience, the renewals work well, are effortless
  <ubuntugeek>  of course we would need to grandfather current staff.
  <SD-Plissken> But how will the renewing be handled?
  <MikeB->      SD-Plissken I refuse to answer that question,since it may embrasses me)
  <ubuntugeek>  if we did this
  <SD-Plissken> I here you MikeB, and i understand.
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken basically, ask "hey, you're term is coming up. Are you interested in continuing?"
  <earobinson>  ubuntugeek grandfather current staff? Im not sure I understand
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken we don't anticipate renewals to be some hugely formal and trying process
  <forumsmatthew>       I like the idea, with grandfathering
  <jdong>       like a membership council hearing
  <SD-Plissken> Ok jdong seems fair.
  <forumsmatthew>       earobinson, that means that currently existing staff continue to operate under the rules
  <ubuntugeek>  earobinson IE current staff would get a term from the date going forward not the date they were elected to staff
  <forumsmatthew>       before this change
  <ubuntugeek>  we value our staff alot
  <SD-Plissken> ubuntu-geek how would that process be done.
  <earobinson>  thanks
  <SD-Plissken> seems like a neat plan on paper.
  <jdong>       definitely if we set term limits, everyone should start with today as their "birthday"
  <ubuntugeek>  sd dunno lets see if the FC thinks we need this or if we should contiue the way we were doing it
  <forumsmatthew>       SD-Plissken, I suggest a PM hey, do you want to continue to mod?
  <earobinson>  Why not do it at the FC meetings
  <ubuntugeek>  So do we need to continue this or should we leave things the way they are?
  <jdong>       earobinson there's usually no need for that level of formality
  <forumsmatthew>       earobinson, if someone wants to step down without explaining publicly, but wants to give the FC a reason, informal and private is better
  <earobinson>  jdong but if you wanted to do it like all the other positions with times, they are all done at meetings no?
  <jdong>       I for one am a proponent of doing term limits
  <jdong>       earobinson no, they are not done at meetings
  <jdong>       earobinson for my membership renewal, it was an e-mail
  <MikeB->      earobinson only for election not renewals
  <earobinson>  k then nevermind Im out of the loop
  <jdong>       it makes sure the FC stays in regular contact with our staff
  <jdong>       and vice-versa
  <forumsmatthew>       I don't really have strong feeling on this either way
  <SD-Plissken> A Pm asking do you want to contiue on Staff seems fair.
  <PriceChild>  SD-Plissken, do you still have concerns about unfair dismissal?
  <ubuntugeek>  We got like  staff.. how would we keep track of it )
  <SD-Plissken> Most of the current staff I doubt are ready to quit or retire.
  <forumsmatthew>       brb
  <MikeB->      so, yearly terms with current staff grandfather till 5//?
  <SD-Plissken> PriceChild to a certain degree yes,however. I can olny hope should shuch things take place they are handled fairly.
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken the goal of a terms system is not to force anyone to leave
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken as long as a staff member desires to be a part, we greatly value thier service
  <SD-Plissken> I understand that. My concern was with the renewing process.
  <MikeB->      jdong +1
  <ubuntugeek>  jdong +1
  <ubuntugeek>  As far as I am concerned a simple PM is good enough, if the staffer doesnt reply in  days we can deactivate until they contact us
  <jdong>       right
  <ubuntugeek>  simple as that
  <jdong>       a PM, e-mail, or both
  <ubuntugeek>  no need for a silly meeting for it )
  <MikeB->      it is really more an opportunity for the staff to look to see if they still enjoy what they do.
  <jdong>       MikeB- +1
  <forumsmatthew>       I'm back. +1
  <SD-Plissken> So if the staffer contacts you after  days and say i want back on. is it going to a simple yes?
  <ubuntugeek>  as far as I am concerned yeah
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken sure
  <ubuntugeek>   +1
  <MikeB->      SD-Plissken yes, unless that is the first time anyone saw them in a year)
  <SD-Plissken> in a year?
  <earobinson>  seems a bit silly to me, dont you want staff who are active on the forums, not away for  days?
  <forumsmatthew>       sometimes it happens
  <jdong>       earobinson we generally want staff who are regular participants in the community
  <SD-Plissken> earobinson people have lives, and issue doe pop up.
  <jdong>       earobinson but there are a lot of situations that might come up in their lives
  <forumsmatthew>       when I moved from the US to Africa I was incognito for almost 2 months
  <jdong>       earobinson we hope to be flexible about that
  <MikeB->      earobinson our staff is active, but we do understand when real life takes over for a person
  <earobinson>  I understand that SD-Plissken but if gone for a while is any explanation required?
  <jdong>       it's more that we'd like to know what's up
  <jdong>       earobinson if he is away for an extended period of time, we'd feel better if we knew why
  <bapoumba>    earobinson, went staff are absent for some time,, they usually advertise it
  <SD-Plissken> That would be at the discretion of the Admins. to request an explanation.
  <forumsmatthew>       we had one guy in the hospital for a while and only found out when he got back
  <MikeB->      earobinson most staff let the group know when they are going to be gone more than a day, it is not an issue
  <earobinson>  then it wouldent be an issue
  <jdong>       MikeB- lol, pretty true )
  <forumsmatthew>       I would have felt really bad if we had offed him when that happened
  <ubuntugeek>  Ok shall we move on
  <earobinson>  sure
  <ubuntugeek>  Staff selection..
  <forumsmatthew>       I think we need some cafe/backyard specific staff. Let's look at the users there and choose from among the most active
  <PriceChild>  I don't agree with that forumsmatthew
  <forumsmatthew>       maybe one who hasn't riled anyone up recently
  <ubuntugeek>  technical support really shouldnt be needed
  <SD-Plissken> Make sure their on the level..
  <PriceChild>  i think that it is great that forums staff are all given "the roam" of the entire forum.
  <jdong>       I think for staff candidates, it's imporant for them to have a staff "sponsor"
  <PriceChild>  If someone is good enough and trusted to moderate in one subforum, then why not everywhere else?
  <earobinson>  PriceChild +1
  <forumsmatthew>       yeah, but few of us really understand the backyard issues
  <jdong>       i.e. someone on the staff who could vouch that they know the candidate well and can confidently attest to their abilities
  <forumsmatthew>       the dynamics
  <forumsmatthew>       the people involved
  <forumsmatthew>       we need some of these guys in our staff discussions
  <ubuntugeek>  forumsmatthew +1 the people who are really BY posters
  <bapoumba>    in another staff forum ?
  <PriceChild>  If we wanted someone to moderate the backyard then I have no problem with that, but i don't think we should limit them to that..
  <forumsmatthew>       no, no that's not what I mean
  <PriceChild>  ah ok
  <forumsmatthew>       just find some from there and turn them loose all over the forums
  <SD-Plissken> What!
  <PriceChild>  haha
  <ubuntugeek>  forumsmatthew +1
  <MikeB->      +1
  <forumsmatthew>       give them banning powers and everything
  <SD-Plissken> So not only would they do BY work they would do what we do.
  <forumsmatthew>       yeah, that's it
  <SD-Plissken> If you give them banning powers then their effectively an Admin
  <forumsmatthew>       well, kind of
  <ubuntugeek>  I think it would be ok, most of the hardcore posters in the BY are good people.
  <forumsmatthew>       someone like fuscia, maybe
  <PriceChild>  SD-Plissken, we have banning powers?
  <ubuntugeek>  I think we should just get rid of the BY and merge it into the Cafe
  <SD-Plissken> So you what you need is an Admin that knows his her way around the forums as well the BY.
  <ubuntugeek>  Price Yeah + point infraction = ban
  <SD-Plissken> PriceChild are ban abilities are lower then the admins.
  <PriceChild>  Yes... we can be made accountable
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken it serves the exact same function though
  <forumsmatthew>       We can give them a special user badge
  <jdong>       PriceChild admincp bans are accountable too
  <ubuntugeek>  I think we should just get rid of the BY and merge it into the Cafe
  <forumsmatthew>       maybe with a dirty coffee cup set
  <PriceChild>  jdong, ok then... accountable to all the other staff.
  <jdong>       PriceChild point taken
  <ubuntugeek>  Or better yeah give them super mod permissions
  <earobinson>  Im with ubuntugeek thats what social dissuasion should solve
  <SD-Plissken> Ok thats the second time ubuntu-geek said get rid of the BY i think he is hinting at something.
  <ubuntugeek>  lol ok guys, we ar ejust messing around )
  <forumsmatthew>       ooh! We haven't had a super mod since William Shatner
  <forumsmatthew>       sorry
  <jdong>       lol
  <forumsmatthew>       stress relief
  <jdong>       I remember those days
  <jdong>       those were fun times
  <ubuntugeek>  lol that was fun..
  <forumsmatthew>       you've now been trolled by the best
  <SD-Plissken> Supper moderator.
  <SD-Plissken> You guys are bad
  <MikeB->      I need to bow out and handle something that came up at work
  <ubuntugeek>  see ya
  <jdong>       take care MikeB-
  <MikeB->      since we still have 3 FC members to vote)
  <forumsmatthew>       seriously, I like how we choose staff now
  <ubuntugeek>  OK just for the record me and matthew were just messing around
  <forumsmatthew>       we have a great team
  <forumsmatthew>       MikeB-, bye!
  <forumsmatthew>       I admit it
  <forumsmatthew>       just messing around before
  <ubuntugeek>  Yeah we do have a good team
  <jdong>       speaking from my past experience at other forums....
  <jdong>       applications for mod/staff status doesn't work out in practice
  <bapoumba>    jdong, +1
  <jdong>       it becomes a logistical nightmare
  <ubuntugeek>  Yep
  <forumsmatthew>       +1
  <ubuntugeek>  we've had some bad seeds the way we do it.. but it works 99% of the time
  <forumsmatthew>       and for the record, I like fuscia
  <jdong>       forumsmatthew I do too
  <bapoumba>    jdong, and egos to take care off when turned down
  <SD-Plissken> So the word of mouth method is still best way?
  <ubuntugeek>  sd yeah
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken IMO yeah
  <forumsmatthew>       yeah
  <PriceChild>  I hope we can trust current staff to help select new mods.
  <forumsmatthew>       hey, we're the Beatles
  <forumsmatthew>       yeah, yeah, yeah
  <jdong>       PriceChild lol
  <forumsmatthew>       PriceChild, well, it's shaky, we picked you. )  (kidding, I love you bro!!)
  <SD-Plissken> PriceChild I thing we can all come to some for of agreement on anyone brought before us.
  <SD-Plissken> think*
  <PriceChild>  jdong, I was being serious P
  *     PriceChild thanks frodon
  <jdong>       PriceChild in the humorous rhetorical way )
  <jdong>       or is it humourous for "you people"?
  <ubuntugeek>  anything else on the agenda vorian?
  <jdong>       Vorian headed out
  <forumsmatthew>       Vorian left, family emergency
  <jdong>       me had a situation pop up
  <forumsmatthew>       that's the end of the agenda
  <PriceChild>  jdong, (twss)
  *     SD-Plissken End Transmission..
  <jdong>       lol
  <jdong>       did we handle agenda issue #1?
  <jdong>       looking over our statement on helper scirpts?
  <ubuntugeek>  sorry i missed the first  mins
  <forumsmatthew>       yea, but you didn't actually miss anything
  <jdong>       ubuntugeek meh you missed nothing major D
  <forumsmatthew>       I think the discussion on that has been tabled until we see some documentation, isn't that what we were saying?
  <ubuntugeek>  lots of banter it looked like
  <ubuntugeek>  i gotta step out for a few
  <jdong>       right
  <jdong>       I think we're done
  <jdong>       anyone logging this for Vorian ?
  <PriceChild>  jdong, he's still logging
  <PriceChild>  jdong, and its on !logs
  <jdong>       ah, ok
  <jdong>       excellent
  <SD-Plissken> So thats all.
  <jdong>       shall we close the meeting?
  <jdong>       SD-Plissken that's what she said
  <SD-Plissken> End Transmission...
  <bapoumba>    ok, seeya around then )
  <jdong>       oh dear.... I hope someone'se editing the logs... D
  <forumsmatthew>       +1 for closing
  <jdong>       +1 for +1 for closing
  <forumsmatthew>       should we all leave before ubuntugeek gets back?
  <jdong>       forumsmatthew we should start discussing some random thing
  <forumsmatthew>       name it, I'll flow
  <jdong>       lol
  <jdong>       I'm gonna go eat now
  <jdong>       very productive meeting
  <forumsmatthew>       see you all later!
  <jdong>       thanks to everyone who came
  <jdong>       (that's what... never mind)
  <forumsmatthew>       thank you,everyone!
  <bapoumba>    thanks you forumsmatthew
  <bapoumba>    and everyone else

MeetingLogs/ForumCouncil/2007May18/Logs (last edited 2008-08-06 16:33:54 by localhost)