20140319
Meeting information
#ubuntu-meeting: IRC Operator team meeting, 19 Mar at 18:03 — 20:46 UTC
Full logs at http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2014/ubuntu-meeting.2014-03-19-18.03.log.html
Meeting summary
Minutes of previous meeting: http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2014/ubuntu-meeting.2014-01-22-18.01.log.html
Open items in the IRCC tracker
The discussion about "Open items in the IRCC tracker" started at 18:06.
Review Bugs related to the Ubuntu IRC Council
The discussion about "Review Bugs related to the Ubuntu IRC Council" started at 18:10.
The IRCC going forward
The discussion about "The IRCC going forward" started at 18:11.
Paste and attack prevention in the main channels
The discussion about "Paste and attack prevention in the main channels" started at 18:47.
ACTION: AlanBell to follow up with IRCC reporting back to community
ACTION: Tm_T to focus on communication
Factoid Review
The discussion about "Factoid Review" started at 19:06.
ACTION: knome to edit !repeat-#xubuntu to be more exact on xubuntu-specific links
ACTION: Alanbell to move !canibeanop link content to wiki
ACTION: AlanBell to send a summary of factoid changes to ubuntu-irc@
Metabot and Bestbot - clean up, or re-implement
The discussion about "Metabot and Bestbot - clean up, or re-implement" started at 19:56.
ACTION: ircc to clean up behind bestbot and metabot
Review #ubuntu-ops-team and how we as a team use the various communication channels
The discussion about "Review #ubuntu-ops-team and how we as a team use the various communication channels" started at 20:09.
Operator Applicants
The discussion about "Operator Applicants" started at 20:13.
Membership applications
The discussion about "Membership applications" started at 20:28.
Remove idoru from #ubuntu-offtopic and keep it out of there - rww
The discussion about "Remove idoru from #ubuntu-offtopic and keep it out of there - rww" started at 20:29.
Any Other Business
The discussion about "Any Other Business" started at 20:33.
Vote results
Action items, by person
- knome
- knome to edit !repeat-#xubuntu to be more exact on xubuntu-specific links
- Tm_T
- Tm_T to focus on communication
- **UNASSIGNED**
- Alanbell to move !canibeanop link content to wiki
- ircc to clean up behind bestbot and metabot
Done items
- (none)
People present (lines said)
AlanBell (307)
- knome (254)
- ubottu (108)
- rww (86)
- phunyguy (83)
- not_rww (67)
- ikonia (42)
- jussi (40)
IdleOne (40)
- Pici (35)
- cprofitt (27)
- tsimpson (25)
- Tm_T (18)
MooDoo (16)
- hggdh (12)
- meetingology (9)
- DJones (2)
- lderan (1)
- knome_webchat (1)
- elfy (1)
Full Log
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
Generated by MeetBot 0.1.5 (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology)
MeetingLogs/IRCC/20140319 (last edited 2014-03-20 08:30:39 by alanbell1)