[01:49] <nixternal> gnomefreak: what's up?
[01:50] <willys_fueguino> hi I need an ubuntu translator over here to private...
[01:50] <willys_fueguino> ;-)
[01:50] <gnomefreak> nixternal: nvm its been fixed. someone tried to take my meeting date and time
[01:50] <gnomefreak> but they didnt go about it right
[01:50] <nixternal> roger
[01:50] <gnomefreak> the 2 people on that team will have to meet in their channel i guess
[02:00] <willys_fueguino> the ubuntu-ops have a team?
[02:01] <nalioth> yes
[02:01] <tonyyarusso> http://launchpad.net/~team-awesome
[02:01] <willys_fueguino> nalioth: could it be the ubuntu-irc operators team??
[02:02] <willys_fueguino> I'm seeing that seveas is the lead administrator of that team
[02:03] <tonyyarusso> willys_fueguino: That's right
[02:03] <nalioth> willys_fueguino: that is it.
[02:03] <willys_fueguino> :-O
[02:04] <willys_fueguino> Could I join it??
[02:05] <willys_fueguino> Or I haven't the merit to join
[02:05] <tonyyarusso> willys_fueguino: It's for people who op in the main channels, where Ubugtu's bantracker is active.
[02:06] <willys_fueguino> oh...
[02:06] <willys_fueguino> "Main channels"??
[02:06] <willys_fueguino>
[02:06] <willys_fueguino> tonyyarusso: what are you trying to say
[02:06] <willys_fueguino> XDDDD
[02:07] <PriceChild> #x/k/ubuntu
[02:07] <tonyyarusso> What he said
[02:07] <willys_fueguino> thats odd....
[02:07] <PriceChild> oh and #ubuntuforums :P
[02:08] <PriceChild> although only two of us have requested access to the bantracker...
[02:08] <willys_fueguino> then the "main" people are those who can read and write english?? that's wrong...
[02:08] <PriceChild> willys_fueguino, we aren't all just english speakers
[02:10] <willys_fueguino> :-\
[02:10] <PriceChild> and anyway...
[02:10] <willys_fueguino> I'm just saying that is not fair to me...
[02:10] <PriceChild> with 1000 people in #ubuntu alone... we _need_ a bantracker to... well track bans
[02:11] <willys_fueguino> well thats truth
[02:12] <willys_fueguino> there's somebody that is an ubuntu translator over here???
[03:40] <no0tic> hi, I'm an #ubuntu-it operator and an Ubuntu Italian Member, from the Italian Team
[03:41] <tonyyarusso> hi
[03:41] <willys_fueguino> hola no0tic
[03:42] <no0tic> what's the purpose of this channel?
[03:42] <somerville32> no0tic, See topic.
[03:43] <no0tic> I saw it, then I asked :)
[03:49] <no0tic> I would like to know if there is a cloack for us, I don't think we can use the /ubuntu/member one, I was approved only in the Italian Team
[03:50] <nalioth> no0tic: you'll most likely have to talk to seveas
[03:50] <willys_fueguino> no0tic: If you have the ubuntu-ita locoteam then you should have the ubuntu-ita cloak...
[03:50] <willys_fueguino> but I'm not the one to talk to :-
[03:51] <no0tic> ok ok :) I'll talk first with mdke, if you know him
[03:52] <nalioth> mdke doesn't have anything to do with cloaks, no0tic
[03:52] <willys_fueguino> I don't :-$
[03:53] <no0tic> nalioth, I know, but he is an ubuntu/member and an ubuntu "italian" member
[03:53] <nalioth> no0tic: he'll just have to speak to seveas
[03:53] <nalioth> all roads lead to seveas
[03:54] <willys_fueguino> that's truth...
[03:54] <no0tic> nalioth, no problem, I asked only to know... no matter
[03:54] <no0tic> in seveas we trust :)
[03:54] <willys_fueguino> ubuntu on irc it's a kingdom... and seveas is the king...
[03:54] <willys_fueguino> no0tic: hahahhaah
[04:33] <tonyyarusso> somerville32: ping
[04:33] <somerville32> tonyyarusso, pong-a-dee-pong
[04:33] <tonyyarusso> somerville32: http://blog.tonyyarusso.com/floss/wordpress/plugins-and-stuff/
[04:36] <somerville32> haha, A1 :)
[04:36] <nalioth> meeting tomorrow
[04:37] <Hobbsee> oh?  i thought it was today...
[04:37] <nalioth> Hobbsee: where you are, it is probably today, yes.
[04:37] <nalioth> but for tonyyarusso and somerville32 it is tomorrow
[04:37] <Hobbsee> nah, that's still tomorrow
[04:37] <nalioth> tuesday at 2100 UTC, correct?
[04:37] <Hobbsee> yes
[04:38] <Kamping_Kaiser> so wouldnt that make it wed. here?
[04:38] <Kamping_Kaiser> about 6am?
[04:39] <Hobbsee> timeanddate.com
[04:40] <Kamping_Kaiser> better to be -5 then +10 :|
[06:21] <mneptok> i'll be fast asleep at 2100UTC
[06:22] <Hobbsee> mneptok: go to sleep early, then get up for the meeting
[06:23] <mneptok> Hobbsee: to get 8 hours of sleep i'd have to be asleep as soon as i walked in the door from work. i can't do that.
[06:23] <Hobbsee> dont have 8 hours then?
[06:23] <mneptok> well, at least not without drugs
[06:24] <Hobbsee> or just sleep at work
[06:24] <mneptok> but work is the time that i actually take the drugs
[06:24] <tonyyarusso> Get 6 hours.
[06:44] <mneptok> the squirrels are coming.
[06:44] <Kamping_Kaiser> dont think i'v ever seen a squirrel
[06:45] <mneptok> just wait. they're coming.
[06:50] <elkbuntu> mneptok, the caffeine+nicotine cocktail?
[07:04] <mneptok> mmmm .... so tasty
[07:04] <mneptok> but no. it's not enough.
[07:06] <tonyyarusso> Kamping_Kaiser: You've never seen a squirrel?
[07:07] <tonyyarusso> elkbuntu: Your DNS is fixed ;)
[07:07] <elkbuntu> tonyyarusso, yes, i fixed it for myself yesterday by going back to my isp's dns
[07:07] <tonyyarusso> elkbuntu: Ah
[07:08] <tonyyarusso> I like most of the theme, but things that change the cursor when you mouse over links bother me.
[07:09] <tonyyarusso> And you'll have to tell me how dreamhost works out.  I'm self-hosting for now, but I'm not sure how viable that option is in the long run.  I'd need to know if you can really continue keeping the costs down through other people, b/c if it jumped to full price after a year, well...
[07:30] <Kamping_Kaiser> tonyyarusso, dream host has been a bit meh at times, but tend to be good
[07:30] <Kamping_Kaiser> tonyyarusso, and i dont think i'v seen one no (cant remember seeing one)
[07:32] <Mez> KDE have a lot of their sites hosted by dreamhos
[07:33] <mneptok> tonyyarusso: basic Birdhouse account with student discount is US$80/yr ;)
[07:35] <Mez> hmm
[07:35] <Mez> I thought dreamhost dids cheap servers
[07:35] <Mez> dreamhost atm just seem to do cruddy shared hosting
[07:36] <Kamping_Kaiser> dreamhost have been less tehn stable recently (~6-9 months). didnt have problems before that
[07:37] <Mez> hmmles... acutally - the space looks nice
[07:38] <Mez> but it'd lack control for me...
[07:38] <Mez> I prefer having a VPS
[07:38] <mneptok> Mez: at Birdhouse?
[07:38] <Mez> birdhouse?
[07:38] <Mez> I'm looking at dreamhost
[07:38] <mneptok> right.
[07:38] <mneptok> didn't know which you meant.
[07:39] <Mez> http://www.bitfolk.com/
[07:52] <Kamping_Kaiser> can someone correct me if i'm wrong - does the -ops meeting conflict with the edubuntu meeting?
[07:57] <elkbuntu> @schedual
[07:58] <elkbuntu> @schedule
[07:58] <Ubugtu> Schedule for Etc/UTC: 30 Jan 20:00: Technical Board | 31 Jan 20:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 22:00: Xubuntu | 31 Jan 23:00: Kubuntu | 01 Feb 21:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 05 Feb 20:00: Mozilla Team
[07:58] <elkbuntu> no, i believe it comes after TB
[07:58] <elkbuntu> but is going to be in here in the likely case TB runs over
[07:59] <Kamping_Kaiser> i seeee. much better :)
[08:03] <Mez> when is the ops meeting again ?
[08:04] <mneptok> 2100
[08:04] <Mez> today ?
[08:05] <mneptok> Tuesday
[08:05] <Mez> thats todat
[08:05] <Mez> today *
[08:05] <mneptok> if it's Tuesday for you, then yes :)
[08:05] <Kamping_Kaiser> 2100UTC
[08:05] <Mez> hmm
[08:05] <Mez> I might be able to idle a lil
[08:05] <Mez> got work at half 10
[08:08] <ubotu> In #ubuntu, regeya said: ubotu: no, "you're a genius" is :-)
[08:10] <Mez> hmmles
[08:10] <Mez> now, which of the options on my oven is "grill" mode ?
[08:10] <Mez> (seeing as for some reason, the dials arent labelled)
[08:29] <jenda> Mez, just start a fire inside, and once you're down to cinders, use the oven's metal racks as the grill.
[08:29] <jenda> + it'll keep the room warm.
[08:29] <Mez> I foudn the grill setting
[08:29] <Mez> and forgot that i had
[08:29] <Mez> buurnt my toast
[08:29] <jenda> muhehe
[12:36] <mneptok> i love you, too.
[12:36] <GazzaK> I love you as well
[12:36] <mneptok> *gush*
[12:37] <jenda> hehe
[12:38] <Kamping_Kaiser> aw </3
[12:38] <Hobbsee> mneptok: good to see
[12:38] <elkbuntu> is it just me or are all the lists like dead tonight?
[12:38] <Kamping_Kaiser> ubuntu ones? yeh, reasonably. debians going strong though
[12:38] <GazzaK> I love you too jenda
[12:39] <jenda> I think I preferred jelous.
[12:39] <GazzaK> there is no pleasing some people
[12:40] <jenda> sorry GazzaK :)
[12:41] <GazzaK> and what is jelous?  is that like jealous?
[12:50] <jenda> haha
[12:50] <jenda> did I really misspell it twice in a row? :)
[12:51] <GazzaK> 9 minute reaction time, wow jenda you are on the ball
[12:51] <jenda> I'm supposed to be studying, GazzaK.
[12:51] <GazzaK> eeek
[12:51] <jenda> If it weren't for the fact that I already gave up.
[12:51] <jenda> Hobbsee: not nice.
[12:51] <GazzaK> opabuse!!!!
[12:51] <jenda> was that a 'hello?'
[12:52] <Hobbsee> jenda: no, it was me showing that i was on the ball.  see the kick message.
[12:52] <GazzaK> I did say :
 eek, shhhh
 stop talking about her now
[12:52] <GazzaK> earlier
[12:52] <jenda> heh
[12:52] <jenda>
[12:52] <GazzaK> just when Hobbsee joined -offtopic
[12:52] <GazzaK> but she missed that :p
[12:52] <GazzaK> so the kick was expected
[12:53] <Hobbsee> heh
[12:53] <GazzaK> jenda, /quit ????
[12:53] <jenda> Tactique 1: avoid the exam, so the prof can't recognise me on my second attempt.
[12:53] <jenda> Tactique 2: take a clean shirt and shave, look smart, and try to talk your way out of it.
[12:53] <jenda> hmm
[12:54] <jenda> GazzaK: the exam is in an hour - how much can I catch up on? ):
[12:54] <jenda> *:)
[12:54] <Hobbsee> jenda: if you cant dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
[12:54] <jenda> woohoo :)
[12:54] <jenda> alright, I'm off to shave, then :)
[12:55] <GazzaK> jenda, I managed to get through a couple of exams by using erm... methods....  but I'm not sure you'd wanna do that
[12:57] <mneptok> jenda: Tactic 3 - show up smeared with your owh piss and sick, screaming, "I AM READY FOR MY TRIAL OF STRENGTH, YOUR EXCELLENCY!"
[12:57] <GazzaK> OMG, mneptok thats so wrong!!!
[12:58] <GazzaK> yeah
[12:58] <GazzaK> unless it was a bet
[12:58] <GazzaK> i'd hire him
[12:58] <GazzaK> for a laugh
[12:59] <Hobbsee> GazzaK: what, sleeping with the prof or something?
[12:59] <GazzaK> Hobbsee, erm, yeah
[12:59] <Hobbsee> tonyyarusso: whoever it was, was probably rather drunk at the time
[12:59] <mneptok> their dog? a hole in their property fence?
[01:00] <GazzaK> made me feel dirty.  but the tutor was nice :-)
[01:00] <jenda> mneptok: I think I have a tactique #4, but that's not for the public to know ;)
[01:00] <GazzaK> jenda, is that like my idea?
[01:00] <tonyyarusso> Aargh.
[01:00] <jenda> GazzaK: nope - it's a private thing between mneptok and me.
[01:00] <GazzaK> really?  youtube it? :p
[01:00] <Kamping_Kaiser> um... topics direction not suitable for here?
[01:01] <tonyyarusso> So, I feel asleep at 01:00, woke up at like 05:30.  It is now 07:00.  I have to be in class at 11:00.  Do I go back to bed or not?
[01:01] <mneptok> tonyyarusso: only if your prof is not satiated
[01:01] <GazzaK> four hours, tonyyarusso get up, clean stuff?
[01:01] <tonyyarusso> GazzaK: That may be the wiser plan.
[01:02] <GazzaK> otherwise you'll be half alseep in class
[01:02] <tonyyarusso> Kinda sleepy, but probably not enough to get worthwhile rest.
[01:11] <Hobbsee> jenda: you mean you cant turn up in your ubuntu shirt?
[01:13] <jenda> I could, I guess ;)
[01:13] <jenda> But it wouldn't help me much.
[01:14] <jenda> and considering that the teachers are old farts - they'll feel more respected if I wear a buttonup shirt.
[01:14] <GazzaK> yeah
[01:14] <jenda> Don't forget - this is law school. The teachers are older than law itself ;)
[01:14] <Hobbsee> awww
[01:15] <tonyyarusso> I hate people/places that base their respect on what shirt you wear.
[01:15] <jenda> meh, there are worse things at this institution :)
[01:15] <GazzaK> jenda, when you graduate, I want your services to sue my house moving people...
[01:15] <jenda> For example - their titles...
[01:15] <jenda> GazzaK: alrighty, my first client :)
[01:16] <jenda> GazzaK: assuming I graduate.
[01:16] <GazzaK> true
[01:16] <GazzaK> if you spend all day on irc, it'll never happen
[01:17] <jenda> their titles: the bastards are absolutely adamant that we call them honorabilis spectabilis whateverabilis Proffesor A.B.Whoever - and noone is capable of remembering that... so nobody ever addresses them.
[01:17] <jenda> GazzaK: You think? Nah...
[01:18] <tonyyarusso> aaah.  This song is creeping me out.  It has a steady pinging noise in the background that's just like in submarines.  Makes me look over my shoulder for torpedos.
[01:43] <Kamping_Kaiser> sorry, i wont be able to make it to the meeting tomorrow morning :( picking up family from the airport.
[01:43] <Kamping_Kaiser> i'll see you all after, and get told what happened :|
[01:55] <Seeker`> tonyyarusso: Are torpedos a regular problem for you?
[01:55] <tonyyarusso> Seeker`: Not really :S
[01:56] <nalioth> tonyyarusso: don't you ever sleep?
[01:56] <tonyyarusso> nalioth: Yes.  I did from 01:00 to 05:30.
[01:57] <nalioth> liar, you are a robot.
[01:57] <Seeker`> nalioth: lo
[01:58] <nalioth> howdy, Seeker`
[01:59] <Seeker`> any opinions on the email i pasted last night?
[02:01] <nalioth> where did you post it?
[02:05] <Seeker`> in ##todays_menu
[02:05] <Seeker`> i think thats the channel name anyway
[02:05] <nalioth> ah, i think you should add the timestamps and such we discussed and let it run for a while
[02:06] <Seeker`> what do you mean "let it run for a while"?
[02:09] <nalioth> to gather data to be displayed
[02:09] <nalioth> to show off the new capabilities
[02:10] <Seeker`> it doesn't work on just normal text-  it is designed for use in meetings, when text is prefixed with special tags
[02:11] <Seeker`> also, do you think I should still send the email out to the -irc list?
[02:12] <nalioth> i'm not sure what 'special tags' one uses in a meeting
[02:13] <Seeker`> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/MeetingNotes/20070110Meeting
[02:13] <Seeker`> it is described there
[02:15] <nalioth> if it requires meeting attendents to code their speech, i'm not sure it'll be welcomeed
[02:15] <Hobbsee> in how many hours is this meeting?
[02:15] <nalioth> we do good to get folks to attend meetings  :|
[02:15] <Seeker`> most of it is done by someone running a meeting
[02:16] <Hobbsee> ah, it's at 8am here
[02:16] <Seeker`> the only thing people need to do is put [IDEA]  at the beginning of suggestions
[02:16] <Seeker`> and vote using +1 / -1
[02:47] <nalioth> wow, quick-draw-apokryphos
[02:47] <tonyyarusso> Yeah really
[02:55] <PriceChild> eek
[03:00] <apokryphos> :O
[03:04] <apokryphos> the abuse!
[03:05] <apokryphos> :O
[03:05] <apokryphos> who can stop it?
[03:06] <tonyyarusso> Aargh.
[03:06] <tonyyarusso> My Xanga crossposting plugin for WordPress was working fine on classic, but borks on Premium :S
[03:07] <tonyyarusso> Oh well, worst case scenario it won't work for the first month, then it's reverting ;)
[03:08] <GazzaK> eeeek
[03:11] <LongPointyStick> Jucato: sometime soon
[03:11] <Jucato> heheh
[03:12] <PriceChild> meh
[03:12] <PriceChild> Not even original.... :P
[03:12] <GazzaK> yeah, shes so last year!
[03:13] <PriceChild> wooo :)
[03:14] <PriceChild> @lart LongPointyStick
[03:14] <GazzaK> @pity 10 LongPointyStick
[03:14] <PriceChild> tonyyarusso, I haven't got ops in here :)
[03:14] <LongPointyStick> tonyyarusso: kickban
[03:14] <tonyyarusso> PriceChild: Really?  Oh.
[03:14] <PriceChild> tonyyarusso, i've only got ops in forums and -xgl :)
[03:15] <tonyyarusso> gotcha
[03:15] <PriceChild> hehe :)
[03:16] <PriceChild> haha :)
[03:16] <PriceChild> :O
[03:16] <PriceChild> madness
[03:17] <Jucato> ha!   Back as soon as my oatmeal is cooked :)
[03:18] <LongPointyStick> tonyyarusso: is that a kick invite?
[03:18] <Jucato> with skill and cunning? typical Hobbsee/LongPointyStick... :)
[03:18] <tonyyarusso> er, no ;)
[03:18] <nalioth>  /quote kline LongPointyStick<PHONE_NUMBER>00 <enter>
[03:18] <LongPointyStick> awww
[03:18] <PriceChild> haha :)
[03:18] <LongPointyStick> nalioth: now that's plain not fair.
[03:18] <nalioth> darn, missed
[03:18] <PriceChild> dare you :P
[03:19] <PriceChild> LongPointyStick, matter of opinion
[03:19] <LongPointyStick> heh
[03:21] <PriceChild> LongPointyStick, yeah... you gotta be up in 7 hours :P
[03:21] <LongPointyStick> PriceChild: eep :(
[03:22] <LongPointyStick> a
[03:22] <nalioth> yes, meeting today
[03:24] <apokryphos> no autojoin? Dang, and I was taking a shortcut to restore +v :O
[03:26] <apokryphos> and no autojoin on invite, beh
[03:26] <nalioth> think hobbsee is gone for the moment
[03:27] <Jucato> O.o
[03:29] <tonyyarusso> nalioth: is<PHONE_NUMBER>00 a duration?
[03:29] <apokryphos> in hours, yeah
[03:29] <tonyyarusso> oh my
[03:30] <apokryphos> or maybe light years, who knows
[03:30] <nalioth> actually, it's minutes.  she could be back in years instead of millenia  :P
[03:30] <tonyyarusso> apokryphos: light years are a unit of distance doofus
[03:30] <apokryphos> yeah, I realised after I typed ;P
[03:31] <Jucato> doofus... :P
[03:31] <apokryphos> planck time units
[03:53] <gnomefreak> !paste
[03:53] <ubotu> pastebin is a service to post large texts so you don't flood the channel. The Ubuntu pastebin is at http://paste.ubuntu-nl.org (be sure to give the URL of your paste - see also the #ubuntu channel topic)
[03:54] <nalioth> gnomefreak-infiltrator
[04:33] <tonyyarusso> Reminder: I may be late to the meeting, but I'm coming.
[04:34] <PriceChild> pfft we weren't worrying about you anyway :P
[04:34] <tonyyarusso> Gee, thanks
[04:35] <PriceChild> didn't mean it really :)
[04:35] <PriceChild> forgive me?
[04:56] <LjL> !server
[04:56] <ubotu> Ubuntu Server Edition is a release of Ubuntu designed especially for server environments. The default install includes a server kernel and no GUI. The install CD contains many server applications. Current stable version is 6.06 LTS. For more info see https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerFaq/
[04:56] <LjL> !no server is <reply> Ubuntu Server Edition is a release of Ubuntu designed especially for server environments. The default install includes a server kernel and no GUI. The install CD contains many server applications. Current stable version is 6.06 LTS. For more info see https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerFaq/ - The channel #ubuntu-server provides specific support
[04:56] <ubotu> I'll remember that, LjL
[04:56] <gnomefreak> Current stable version is 6.06 LTS?
[04:57] <gnomefreak> shoudlnt current stable be edgy?
[04:58] <LjL> gnomefreak: guess so... though perhaps i think i'd change that to "current LTS version is 6.06"
[04:58] <LjL> (wouldn't use edgy on a server myself...)
[04:59] <LjL> !no server is <reply> Ubuntu Server Edition is a release of Ubuntu designed especially for server environments, including a server-specific kernel and no !GUI. The install CD contains many server applications. Current !LTS version is 6.06. For more info see https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerFaq/ - The #ubuntu-server channel provides specific support
[04:59] <ubotu> I'll remember that, LjL
[05:01] <LjL> !server is <sed> /kernel/!kernel/
[05:01] <ubotu> I'll remember that, LjL
[05:17] <gnomefreak> .win 1
[05:18] <Amaranth> !server
[05:18] <ubotu> Ubuntu Server Edition is a release of Ubuntu designed especially for server environments, including a server-specific !kernel and no !GUI. The install CD contains many server applications. Current !LTS version is 6.06. For more info see https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerFaq/ - The #ubuntu-server channel provides specific support
[05:40] <LjL> !irssi
[05:40] <ubotu> irssi is irssi is a command line interface IRC client ( "sudo apt-get install irssi" without the quotes to try it out ) - also see http://ubuntu-tutorials.com/2007/01/17/my-new-irc-client-irssi-ubuntu-606-610/
[05:40] <LjL> !no irssi is a command line interface !IRC client. See https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Irssi for help
[05:40] <ubotu> I'll remember that, LjL
[05:49] <Seeker`> woo for irssi
[07:51] <Seveas> hiya
[07:51] <jenda> hey Seveas
[07:52] <somerville32> Hi
[07:52] <Seveas> so is tech board done already?
[07:57] <somerville32> Hasn't started
[07:57] <Amaranth> Seveas: they don't start for another hour
[07:57] <Seveas> ah right
[08:32] <willys_fueguino> I have 313 karma points... hurray!!
[08:58] <effie_jayx> LjL,  Tirunfant little me... I got my ubuntu laptop authorized for proxy connection at work ... no more ircatwork for me... :D
[08:59] <willys_fueguino> effie_jayx: hahahahhaah
[08:59] <willys_fueguino> effie_jayx: congratulaciones!!!
[08:59] <willys_fueguino> :-D
[09:03] <effie_jayx> willys_fueguino,  :D
[09:03] <willys_fueguino> effie_jayx: que hac aqui??
[09:03] <willys_fueguino> solo se mete de vez en cuando??
[09:12] <SportChick> hi Seveas
[09:12] <Seveas> hi SportChick
[09:12] <willys_fueguino> Seveas: :-D
[09:13] <willys_fueguino> Could someone tell me How are the karma points distributed on launchpad??
[09:13] <mc44> randomly mostly
[09:14] <Seveas> hahaha
[09:14] <Seveas> it looks that way indeed
[09:14] <jenda> I'd agree
[09:14] <willys_fueguino> hahahha
[09:14] <willys_fueguino> jenda: ufff that's a cool character (?)
[09:14] <jenda> Oh - it's Seveas' ;)
[09:14] <jenda> I stole it from him.
[09:15] <willys_fueguino> hahahhaahah
[09:15] <willys_fueguino> :-
[09:15] <willys_fueguino> this one is cooler :-
[09:15] <Seveas> jenda, I stole it from someone else
[09:15] <willys_fueguino> hahahahhah
[09:15] <Seveas> (and stopped using it already)
[09:15] <willys_fueguino> X'D
[09:15] <jenda> I know :)
[09:15] <jenda> -
[09:16] <LjL> you surely aren't attempting to rationalize something as subtle as karma i hope. /dev/urandom *is* the best karma source
[09:16] <willys_fueguino> jajajjajaaj
[09:17] <Seveas> LjL, no, launchpad karma is great entropy for /dev/urandom :)
[09:17] <willys_fueguino> I have 313 for one translation...
[09:17] <LjL> that too i guess
[09:17] <willys_fueguino> But I think that suggested translations doesn't count right??
[09:17] <LjL> i might want to keep that in mind next time gpg complains about not having enough of that
[09:20] <willys_fueguino> okay... ignore me :-(
[09:20] <LjL> i just have no idea
[09:20] <LjL> it's closed source karma anyway
[09:20] <jenda> rofl, Seveas :D
[09:20] <willys_fueguino> hahahhahahah
[09:21] <willys_fueguino> jenda: It's harder than you thought to get in the spanish-translators team...
[09:22] <willys_fueguino> An ex member told me that I have to translate for a month to become a member (?)
[09:22] <willys_fueguino> (I hope it isn't that much)
[09:24] <jenda> ugh
[09:25] <willys_fueguino> Looks almost like their gonna pay me...
[09:25] <willys_fueguino> (with that requisite I hope they do)
[09:25] <willys_fueguino> :-
[09:25] <gnomefreak> meeting in a half hour?
[09:25] <LjL> 35 minutes
[09:25] <gnomefreak> crap
[09:25] <gnomefreak> ok
[09:25] <gnomefreak> ty
[09:26] <LjL> well i wanted to go to the cinema for that matter :P
[09:27] <willys_fueguino> gnomefreak: meeting???
[09:27] <willys_fueguino> :-O
[09:27] <LjL>  /topic
[09:29] <willys_fueguino> LjL: yeah yeah I know... but I don't know the hour that's gonna be over here for that....
[09:29] <effie_jayx> !schedule caracas
[09:29] <ubotu> Sorry, I don't know anything about schedule caracas - try searching on http://bots.ubuntulinux.nl/factoids.cgi
[09:29] <effie_jayx> :S
[09:29] <mc44> @schedule caracas
[09:29] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Caracas: Current meeting: Technical Board | 31 Jan 16:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 18:00: Xubuntu | 31 Jan 19:00: Kubuntu | 01 Feb 17:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 05 Feb 16:00: Mozilla Team
[09:30] <willys_fueguino> @schedule rop grande
[09:30] <willys_fueguino> us...
[09:30] <willys_fueguino> @schedule rio grande
[09:30] <LjL> we aren't in the schedule, we're not set up for -meeting
[09:30] <willys_fueguino> @schedule ushuaia
[09:30] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Argentina/Ushuaia: Current meeting: Technical Board | 31 Jan 17:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 19:00: Xubuntu | 31 Jan 20:00: Kubuntu | 01 Feb 18:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 05 Feb 17:00: Mozilla Team
[09:30] <effie_jayx> LjL,  mmm
[09:31] <effie_jayx> but we are @ 21:00
[09:31] <willys_fueguino> Technical board in 2:30 hours right??
[09:31] <willys_fueguino> ups...
[09:31] <Seveas> tb is now
[09:31] <LjL> effie_jayx: we're making the meeting in here, not in -meeting
[09:31] <tonyyarusso> No...they're meeting now
[09:31] <willys_fueguino> my clock its wrong...
[09:31] <willys_fueguino> :-O
[09:31] <effie_jayx> LjL,  thanks ...
[09:32] <willys_fueguino> effie_jayx: thanx
[09:34] <effie_jayx> dummie ... I log out instead of blocking screen
[09:34] <effie_jayx> :S
[09:36] <willys_fueguino> effie_jayx: hahahhahahha
[09:37] <willys_fueguino> Seveas: question: Can I create a meta-package for the *-es translations??
[09:37] <willys_fueguino> so it's included on the ubuntu repos??
[09:37] <willys_fueguino> *to be
[09:37] <Seveas> it already has language-pack-es etc...
[09:39] <willys_fueguino> Seveas: but it doesn't install spanish support for all installed programs... ie: I have oo installed but that package Doesn't install the -es package for tat app
[09:40] <Seveas> language-support-es
[09:40] <Seveas> (that includes the langpack and firefox/tb/ooo
[09:42] <willys_fueguino> ok then....
[09:42] <Amaranth> 20 minutes...
[09:46] <PriceChild> looking forward to it Amaranth ? :)
[09:52] <nalioth> where is the meeting gonna be?
[09:53] <Seveas> here
[09:54] <willys_fueguino> @schedule ushuaia
[09:54] <Ubugtu> Schedule for America/Argentina/Ushuaia: Current meeting: Technical Board | 31 Jan 17:00: Edubuntu | 31 Jan 19:00: Xubuntu | 31 Jan 20:00: Kubuntu | 01 Feb 18:00: Ubuntu Development Team | 05 Feb 17:00: Mozilla Team
[09:54] <LjL> how are we dealing with people potentially coming in for ops-related matters that don't have anything to do with the meeting?
[09:54] <gnomefreak> wtf
[09:54] <Seveas> handle the matter?
[09:54] <Seveas> it would pull us away from the meting anyway
[09:54] <willys_fueguino> you want me to leave?? 'cause I have NP with that :-S
[09:54] <willys_fueguino> *:-D
[09:54] <gnomefreak> nixternal: the mozilla meeting should be 20:00UTC iirc
[09:54] <LjL> and use it as a use-case for the meeting?
[09:55] <Seveas> willys_fueguino, I personally would appreciate it if you remained quiet during the meeting but there is no need to leave
[09:55] <LjL> willys_fueguino, i was really mostly thinking about banned users coming to appeal
[09:55] <willys_fueguino> Seveas: the meeting will be here right in an hour right???
[09:56] <Seveas> no
[09:56] <Seveas> in 5 minutes
[09:56] <LjL> no
[09:56] <Amaranth> 4 minutes
[09:56] <willys_fueguino> :-S
[09:56] <LjL> Amaranth wins
[09:56] <Seveas> heh
[09:56] <willys_fueguino> xubuntu meeting??
[09:56] <LjL> no idea about the xubuntu meeting
[09:56] <Seveas> Amaranth, remind me to ask the rest about your op status as well
[09:56] <Seveas> that should be solved
[09:56] <Amaranth> alright
[09:56] <Seveas> willys_fueguino, irc ops meeting
[09:57] <Seveas> that's not on the schedule
[09:57] <willys_fueguino> ohh.... :- didn't knew that
[09:58] <LjL> 3 minutes... one cig
[09:58] <Seveas> heh
[09:58] <Seveas> smokey smokerson
[09:59] <Seveas> @enable nicks
[09:59] <Seveas> @nicks
[09:59] <Ubugtu> alindeman, Amaranth, apokryphos, area44, Burgwork, DBO, effie_jayx, elkbuntu, fdoving, gnomefreak, highvoltage, hybrid, imbrandon, jenda, joejaxx, Jucato, Kamping_Kaiser, LjL, mc44, Mez, mneptok, nalioth, nixternal, pleia2, popey, PriceChild, PuMpErNiCkLe, QMario, rob, Seveas, somerville32, SportChick, stylus, TheSheep, tonyyarusso, tonyybot, tonyyserver, tritium, tsmithe, ubotu, Ubugtu, ubuntulog, and (1 more message)
[09:59] <Seveas> meeting!
[09:59] <Seveas> @disable nicks
[09:59] <Seveas> @more
[09:59] <Ubugtu> willys_fueguino
[09:59] <gnomefreak> im kind of here :)
[09:59] <tonyyarusso> Niiiiiiice plugin
[09:59] <SportChick> ?
[09:59] <mc44> ping spam!
[09:59] <willys_fueguino> what??
[10:00] <Seveas> SportChick, the irc ops have a meeting now and I abused @nicks to get thir attention
[10:00] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Is that homemade or built-in?
[10:00] <SportChick> Seveas: shall I leave?
[10:00] <willys_fueguino> oh... I'm here and I'll be quiet (?)
[10:00] <Seveas> built in
[10:00] <Seveas> SportChick, no need to
[10:00] <SportChick> Seveas: if you need me to, just say my name again or kick me :)
[10:00] <Amaranth> eek
[10:00] <Seveas> actually, we may want freenode staff input for some points
[10:01] <nalioth> SportChick: you'll be fine
[10:01] <SportChick> okies
[10:01] <Seveas> hi Hobbsee
[10:01] <Seveas> just in time :)
[10:01] <gnomefreak> hi Hobbsee  :)
[10:01] <Seveas> so who's around for the meeting?
[10:01] <nalioth> Hobbsee: leave your BPS at the door, please
[10:01] <tonyyarusso> I am
[10:01] <Amaranth> <--
[10:01] <nalioth> everyone who is active, please answer up
[10:01] <tonyyarusso> And, as promised via e-mail:
[10:01] <PriceChild> hi
[10:02] <somerville32> hi
[10:02] <Jucato> hi
[10:02] <tonyyarusso> ~treats Seveas nalioth Amaranth PriceChild somerville32 gnomefreak Jucato Hobbsee
[10:02] <tonyybot> tonyyarusso: Error: "treats" is not a valid command.
[10:02] <Seveas> heh
[10:02] <tonyyarusso> ~treat Seveas nalioth Amaranth PriceChild somerville32 gnomefreak Jucato Hobbsee
[10:02] <tonyyarusso> There we go :)
[10:02] <nalioth> wtf?! a BOT
[10:02] <Jucato> yummy!
[10:02] <gnomefreak> thats not good :(
[10:02] <tonyyarusso> nalioth: I said I'd bring treats - that's all ;)
[10:03] <Seveas> LjL, elkbuntu
[10:03] <tonyyarusso> It can leave after you get your doughnut, or just be quiet :)
[10:03] <Seveas> around?
[10:03] <LjL> yes
[10:03] <Hobbsee> nalioth: awww, why?
[10:03] <gnomefreak> tonyyarusso: get your bot to read the emails and come up with a time
[10:03] <nalioth> you've had too much fun with it earlier, Hobbsee
[10:03] <tonyyarusso> gnomefreak: lol...not quite that skilled
[10:04] <Seveas> Shall we get started? I only have 90 minutes until my wifi access runs out here
[10:04] <Amaranth> alright
[10:04] <gnomefreak> Seveas: lets do it
[10:04] <Seveas> ok, first things first: IRC council
[10:04] <Amaranth> brb, have to baby the roast
[10:04] <Seveas> It's clear that now we are growing as team, we need this governance structure in place
[10:05] <Seveas> We had it active for far too short to judge it succesfulness, but with a new member we should get it back on track
[10:05] <gnomefreak> i take it ompaul isnt coming back afawk?
[10:05] <Seveas> gnomefreak, not soon I believe
[10:05] <jenda> meeting here, or -meeting?
[10:05] <Hobbsee> nalioth: no fun.
[10:05] <Seveas> jenda, here
[10:05] <gnomefreak> k
[10:05] <jenda> k
[10:05] <gnomefreak> jenda: here
[10:05] <Seveas> -dev still has meeting
[10:06] <Seveas> Too bad elkbuntu did not show up
[10:06] <nalioth> Seveas: wiki says she won't be able to make it
[10:06] <Seveas> Does anyone else want to volunteer to be on the council (and be busy next weeks with all the documents)?
[10:06] <gnomefreak> dinner time there i think
[10:06] <Seveas> gnomefreak, breakfast is more likely
[10:06] <tonyyarusso> She mentioned that earlier that she couldn't
[10:06] <gnomefreak> that works too
[10:07] <apokryphos> what documents, exactly?
[10:07] <Seveas> apokryphos, 'what processes need to be written down'
[10:07] <Seveas> the IRC council should at least proofread them
[10:07] <apokryphos> sure
[10:08] <Seveas> and probably will end up writing most of them :)
[10:08] <apokryphos> I think we should've done the next member of the council the same way we did the original council
[10:08] <apokryphos> but I guess it doesn't matter that much
[10:08] <gnomefreak> we did i thought but threw it out last meeting
[10:08] <Seveas> that sounds good, I want to get at least nominees and a preliminary vote done now
[10:09] <Seveas> Hobbsee, so to be blunt: it's now or next time (which may take a while)
[10:09] <tonyyarusso> LjL: Had you thought any more about council sitting?  I seem to remember your name coming up before.
[10:09] <apokryphos> is there anyone that doesn't want to be on the council?
[10:09] <Hobbsee> Seveas: what will it be required to do?
[10:09] <Hobbsee> sorry, sorting multiple things that have come up here
[10:09] <LjL> tonyyarusso: i have added myself as a nominee to the agenda page
[10:09] <tonyyarusso> I probably have neither the time nor adequate experience myself.
[10:09] <tonyyarusso> LjL: ah, right.  /me loads
[10:09] <Seveas> Hobbsee, be an escalation point, write/proofread documents/policies and approve new ops
[10:09] <gnomefreak> Seveas: put everyone in it and see what happenes?
[10:09] <Amaranth> i'd like to volunteer pending reactivation
[10:10] <Seveas> Amaranth, noted
[10:10] <Hobbsee> Seveas: okay, i'll nominate
[10:10] <Seveas> Hobbsee, noted as well
[10:10] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: +1
[10:10] <tonyyarusso> We are leaving elkbuntu on the list even though she can't be here I hope?
[10:10] <Seveas> gnomefreak, bad idea -- that happened last time and I had some negative comments :)
[10:10] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, definitely
[10:10] <tonyyarusso> good
[10:10] <apokryphos> Seveas: what like?
[10:11] <Seveas> that surely means no voting today though
[10:11] <Seveas> I'll send out a call for votes later (tomorrow)
[10:11] <Seveas> apokryphos, people on the list who didn't want to be on there
[10:11] <Seveas> not angry mails, but negative comments
[10:11] <Hobbsee> on the mailing list/
[10:12] <apokryphos> Seveas: put me on as well 8)
[10:12] <Seveas> ok
[10:12] <Seveas> good
[10:12] <apokryphos> and rob, since he mentioned that some time ago
[10:12] <Seveas> you all know it would mean much work in the near future?
[10:12] <Amaranth> yep
[10:12] <Seveas> I'd assume so
[10:12] <Seveas> Next point: Amaranth
[10:13] <Seveas> Let me summarize this quickly:
[10:13] <apokryphos> well, documents and approving new ops? Seems ok ;-)
[10:14] <Seveas> Amaranths cloak and op status were removed after he misbehaved a while ago in a non-ubuntu related channel. This all was solved and the cloak was restored. I'm just not 100% comfortable with just restoring his ops access and look for input (a +1/-1 will do, but arguments are better)
[10:14] <Seveas> somerville32, feedback please!
[10:14] <Seveas> err
[10:14] <Seveas> STUPID TAB
[10:14] <Seveas> I meant: so, feedback please
[10:14] <somerville32> lol
[10:14] <Seveas> and hit tab after so ;)
[10:14] <Seveas> (though somerville32's feedback is also appreciated)
[10:15] <apokryphos> Amaranth has been with us for some time and was a decent Op when around. I believe he's learned from what went wrong and Id' like to see him reinstated personally.
[10:15] <gnomefreak> without being fully up to date i say +1
[10:15] <Hobbsee> +1 here.  no one's perfect
[10:15] <Seveas> (btw: in the future these kinds of things are irc council material instead of a full ops tribunal ;))
[10:15] <jenda> I think swearing in any channel in one situation does not imply Amaranths ability to act as an op has decreased... +1
[10:16] <PriceChild> +1
[10:16] <apokryphos> jenda: ok, but it wasn't just profanity.
[10:16] <tonyyarusso> I don't know much about it, but he seems generally competent.  Perhaps there could be some sort of probationary thing if it's a concern, an understanding just that folks are watching, but I'm fine +1
[10:16] <LjL> well, argument: i don't really know what has happened exactly, neither the "misbehavior" itself nor the "after-misbehavior". but if it mostly come down to very heated argument that ended up in un-CoC language and such... well, i think that can happen to everyone, and while not justifiable, it can be understandable
[10:16] <jenda> apokryphos: alright s/swearing/unCoCness/
[10:16] <Seveas> LjL, that's what I'm thinking as well
[10:16] <Seveas> LjL, so +1/-1 ?
[10:17] <Hobbsee> On that subject, i dont think that anything on another server, where i dont have a ubuntu hostmask, or have not explicitly said that i'm here for ubuntu, relates to ubuntu ops on freenode.
[10:17] <LjL> unless there is something important that i don't really know about, +1
[10:17] <Amaranth> i think the final part of it was someone telling me i should do all my work outside of trunk of a project because i don't know how to program and me blowing up
[10:17] <Seveas> Hobbsee, agreed, but this was done whilst wearing an Ubuntu cloak
[10:17] <tonyyarusso> Agreed @ Hobbsee - the hostmask is all
[10:17] <Hobbsee> Seveas: i know.  related, not the same :)
[10:17] <Amaranth> but there was general swearing and unkindness beforehand
[10:17] <Seveas> I see only +1
[10:17] <Seveas> so welcome back Amaranth!
[10:17] <Amaranth> woo
[10:17] <jenda>
[10:18] <Amaranth> My first action will be to kick you all from -offtopic ;)
[10:18] <Seveas> (I'll restore access later, want to finish this before wifi runs out)
[10:18] <apokryphos> =)
[10:18] <Seveas> somerville32, the documents
[10:18] <Seveas> argh
[10:18] <Seveas> AGAIN
[10:18] <LjL> ...
[10:19] <Amaranth> maybe you just really like somerville32 ;)
[10:19] <Seveas> Amaranth, you have not read the last week of irc I assume :)
[10:19] <Seveas> jenda, I just hit tab too often
[10:19] <jenda> evil
[10:20] <Seveas> anyway, documents
[10:20] <Seveas> I'd like to add one more to that list: "What does the IRC ops team cover"
[10:20] <Amaranth> yes, that is one thing i wanted to bring up
[10:21] <Seveas> so let's do them in sequence
[10:21] <jenda> (Seveas: I hope you understand when I accidentally mis-complete your name instead of "Severe" and "Severred")
[10:21] <Seveas> 1) Appointing ops
[10:21] <Seveas> jenda, ;)
[10:21] <Seveas> currently that's per channel the channel contacts task
[10:21] <Seveas> But I've heard lots of people wanting a unified team for the large channels
[10:21] <Amaranth> i thought you were the channel contact for them all :)
[10:22] <Seveas> so: shout input now please
[10:22] <Seveas> Amaranth, not really
[10:22] <jenda> Amaranth: Freenode Group Contact != channel contact
[10:22] <apokryphos> I think a bit of delegation is good, since some people only [want]  to operate in particular channels
[10:22] <jenda> and, we seem to have a third, internal, meaning of contact now.
[10:22] <Amaranth> jenda: i know but Seveas is the channel contact for a _lot_ of ubuntu channels
[10:22] <jenda> (but that should, IMHO, be equalized brutally with the channel contact)
[10:23] <LjL> i'd be tempted to say irc council, pending the approval of the channel contact (who may well ask the "local" operators an opinion before giving it)
[10:23] <jenda> Amaranth:
[10:23] <gnomefreak> +1 ljl
[10:23] <tonyyarusso> I'd second LjL
[10:23] <Seveas> good one
[10:23] <Amaranth> +1 LjL
[10:23] <jenda> +1
[10:23] <Hobbsee> sounds sane
[10:23] <Seveas> What do we do with current ops? If they want to help in certain channels, just poke channel contact?
[10:24] <Amaranth> yeah
[10:24] <jenda> yep
[10:24] <tonyyarusso> You mean like if I wanted to help in #kubuntu or something?
[10:24] <Seveas> yes
[10:24] <nalioth> tonyyarusso: yes
[10:24] <tonyyarusso> 'k, yeah that makes sense
[10:24] <jenda> Seveas: I think this warrants a list of team-approved channel contacts
[10:24] <Seveas> (channel contact for kubuntu being apokryphos for us)
[10:24] <apokryphos> and Hobbsee
[10:24] <jenda> yay for bureaucracy :)
[10:25] <Seveas> jenda, full ack. You make the list :)
[10:25] <gnomefreak> Seveas: is the councel over #kubuntu?
[10:25] <jenda> DAMN!
[10:25] <jenda> Seveas: that's _not_ what i meant :)
[10:25] <nalioth> gnomefreak: yes
[10:25] <gnomefreak> since riddle is the only one really approving
[10:25] <Seveas> gnomefreak, that's the new document not on the list :)
[10:25] <Seveas> gnomefreak, not anymore
[10:25] <jenda> Seveas: but sure, if you feed them to me as they get approved...
[10:25] <gnomefreak> ah ok
[10:25] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: me and Hobbsee have 30
[10:25] <gnomefreak> ah
[10:25] <Seveas> so any other input for this one?
[10:26] <LjL> for the record, my opinion on this is "no idea"
[10:26] <Seveas> heh
[10:26] <apokryphos> I think it sounds good
[10:26] <Amaranth> If the council has approved you once why would they need to again?
[10:26] <Hobbsee> Seveas: how can we cheak the channel contact?
[10:26] <apokryphos> but note that we have a few ops, I believe, in here who are only ops of loco teams
[10:26] <apokryphos> that perhaps needs a bit of clarification
[10:26] <somerville32> I just think we need to be careful not to step on people toes in regards to having one umbrella for IRC.
[10:26] <Seveas> Hobbsee, there'll be a list in this document
[10:26] <gnomefreak> Hobbsee: /cs info #channel
[10:26] <Seveas> somerville32, full ack
[10:26] <Seveas> but that's not this doc yet
[10:26] <Amaranth> anyone with 30 access is a channel contact, no?
[10:27] <PriceChild> Amaranth, no
[10:27] <LjL> apokryphos: nothing, i think, would be saying that you *have* to give *any* member of the ops team +o in a given channel, if i'm understanding this correctly
[10:27] <Seveas> Amaranth, technically they can add ops
[10:27] <Amaranth> so jenda and PriceChild aren't contacts for #ubuntuforums? :)
[10:27] <PriceChild> Amaranth, I have 30 in #ubuntuforums for example... but only zenwhen is contact
[10:27] <jenda> Amaranth: not really.
[10:27] <apokryphos> there is technically only one (or possibly two) channel contacts, but we're using channel contact = operator adders, here.
[10:27] <jenda> Right, next sub-issue, contact for #ubuntuforums :)
[10:27] <nalioth> Amaranth: the questions was asked (i believe) about #kubuntu only
[10:27] <Seveas> LjL, the suggestion is to let the channel contact make that final decision
[10:27] <Amaranth> nalioth: i was just giving an example
[10:28] <LjL> Seveas, yes. in other words, IRC council says "ok, this person is eligible for being an Ubuntu op", then the channel contacts make a per-channel decision
[10:28] <apokryphos> LjL: right
[10:28] <Amaranth> but i think if you've been given 30 access you should be the contact/team
[10:28] <nalioth> not necessarily, Amaranth
[10:28] <jenda> zenwhen is the owner and founder of the channel, but doesn't seem to want to act as contact to the IRC team. PriceChild and myself will be 'contacts' in his stead, unless anyone objects?
[10:28] <Seveas> jenda, that's really internal to #ubuntuforums
[10:29] <Seveas> as long as you agree in there, that should be fine imho
[10:29] <jenda> Seveas: alright
[10:29] <PriceChild> :)
[10:29] <Amaranth> jenda: no way man, you suck :P
[10:29] <Amaranth> PriceChild: you too, don't smile
[10:29] <jenda> Amaranth: :)
[10:29] <LjL> or perhaps do we want some channels to have local ops without an IRC council approval? loco channels as has been mentioned?
[10:29] <somerville32> The dynamics in different channels vary greatly
[10:29] <somerville32> Some people might be good ops for certain channels but not others
[10:29] <Seveas> So next: coverage of the ops team (which should solve some confusion)
[10:29] <Amaranth> LjL: well #ubuntuforums for example is apparently forums staff _only_
[10:29] <jenda> I think the IRC council should not have to approve channel ops.
[10:29] <tonyyarusso> I'm not aware of us currently approving loco ops at all, no?
[10:29] <somerville32> jenda++
[10:30] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, no
[10:30] <DBO> tonyyarusso, I dont think they are
[10:30] <apokryphos> LjL: for sure, Loco teams are run by the LoCo admins.
[10:30] <LjL> ok, so, it doesn't seem to me like this matter is clear yet
[10:30] <Seveas> LjL, that's why I want to discuss the coverage of the team now
[10:30] <jenda> Amaranth: well, it's decided by the channel contacts ;)
[10:31] <LjL> alrightie
[10:31] <DBO> LjL, thats because the system we are trying to describe is extremely complex, we all mentally know how it works, but that translates poorly to paper
[10:31] <somerville32> Maybe the IRC council should be directly responsible for overseeing the ops in the primary, public channels like -meeting, -offtopic, and #kubuntu, #ubuntu, and #xubuntu  and the team and LoCo group channels can be a bit more autonomous?
[10:31] <Seveas> so far the irc-ops team covers #ubuntu #ubuntu-offtopic #xubuntu #xubuntu-offtopic #kubuntu #kubuntu-offtopic #ubuntu+1 #ubuntu-meeting with #ubuntuforums joining
[10:31] <apokryphos> unless there are problems, we shouldn't be concerned with loco channels, yeah.
[10:31] <DBO> #ubuntu-xgl is large enough for consideration I would think
[10:31] <Seveas> #ubuntu-devel, #ubuntu-motu and other devel channels specifically are NOT covered except for emergencies
[10:32] <Hobbsee> what about the -devel ones?
[10:32] <apokryphos> DBO: agreed
[10:32] <Hobbsee> and -motu
[10:32] <Hobbsee> should they be?
[10:32] <somerville32> What about #xubuntu-devel ?
[10:32] <tonyyarusso> We cover -meeting?  How so?
[10:32] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, because I have meeting ;)
[10:32] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: ha, okay
[10:32] <DBO> somerville32, -devel might be best to take a more hands off approach with
[10:32] <somerville32> Right
[10:32] <jenda> Seveas: #ubuntuforums joined the primary namespace... I'm not sure what you mean by the ubuntu-ops governing it? I think that team channels (-doc, -marketing, -xgl) are more specifically governed by it...
[10:32] <jenda> s/govern/cover/
[10:33] <Seveas> anyway: I'd love it if other channels (like the -motu or #kubuntu-devel) to join under the umbrella but that has to be done at the contacts request
[10:33] <apokryphos> jenda: as in, what the Ubuntu IRC operators are concerned with
[10:33] <jenda> apokryphos: in which case it applies as i said
[10:33] <apokryphos> k-devel and -motu have never had problems, so I'm not sure if we should meddle in things there
[10:33] <tonyyarusso> Maybe we should just make a point of asking various contacts if they're interested?
[10:33] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, +1
[10:33] <gnomefreak> apokryphos: once or twice
[10:33] <Seveas> but: what does it mean for them?
[10:33] <apokryphos> unless there are issues, I don't think we should get involved in a lot of those
[10:34] <Seveas> apokryphos, exactly
[10:34] <gnomefreak> and it was people from #ubuntu causing atleast one of the issues
[10:34] <LjL> +1 tonyyarusso, we can't stomp on their feet, and there is no clear line to say what "naturally belongs" to the ops team and what doesn't IMHO
[10:34] <Seveas> what I'm suggsting is: if they join, we can do things *in case of emergency* by poking freenode staff
[10:34] <Hobbsee> apokryphos: -motu sometimes does, with flamers and all that.  at the moment, there are no ops around who can deal with it most of the time, iirc.
[10:34] <tonyyarusso> More people on who are used to taking care of problems should they arise, basically.  Not so much an intrusion as just a bunch of folks idling who will respond to !ops I suppose.
[10:34] <jenda> One point: anything that starts with #ubuntu, #kubuntu, #xubuntu or #ubuntuforums and is followed by a non-alphanumeric character is under the ultimate power of the Ubuntu group contact: Seveas.
[10:34] <jenda> (FYI)
[10:35] <Hobbsee> actually, i've had trouble in both -devel channels, too (but have ops there)
[10:35] <apokryphos> Hobbsee: I think I've only ever seen one occurence, but perhaps I don't look closely enough.
[10:35] <Seveas> jenda, that's only from freenode point of view
[10:35] <Seveas> jenda, my habds are very much tied when it coms to the ubuntu side
[10:35] <DBO> Seveas bondage =P
[10:35] <jenda> Seveas: yes, I'm saying as it makes it possible to implementing the decision at this meeting even if the current operators disagree.
[10:35] <apokryphos> I think we should move to have @freenode/staff in pretty much all channels
[10:36] <jenda> woo ;)
[10:36] <Seveas> actually, if we get our documents and governance working right, I hope to get permission to make the other members of the council group contacts as well
[10:36] <Seveas> apokryphos, +1
[10:36] <DBO> do we need that though
[10:36] <DBO> I mean I have no issue with it
[10:36] <Seveas> jenda, is it possible to get cloaks that end with a .?
[10:36] <jenda> Seveas: only if that's your nick :)
[10:36] <Seveas> (so just the . and not the ?)
[10:36] <apokryphos> DBO: it just means that if there's something going on, the staffer has the blessing to intervene
[10:36] <LjL> apokryphos, Seveas: what exactly would the difference be between that (i.e. the contacts adds Freenode staff with level 10) and what's been proposed (i.e. make them "under" the ops team, with ops calling staff)?
[10:37] <apokryphos> otherwise their hands are tied back (unless they're breaking Freenode policy explicitly)
[10:37] <jenda> Seveas: what are you thinking of, particularly?
[10:37] <jenda> Seveas: I believe .s are valid cloak characters - look at nalioth ;)
[10:37] <apokryphos> LjL: since that's the policy required for Freenode staffers intervening
[10:37] <Seveas> jenda, giving the team-approved ops a not too special cloak that can be wildcarded
[10:37] <apokryphos> LjL: i.e. it's a Freenode thing
[10:37] <nalioth> DBO: having other council members as freenode GCs makes sense, as the Ubuntu IRC community has grown quite large and officially only a GC can do certain things
[10:38] <Hobbsee> GC?
[10:38] <jenda> Seveas: shouldn't be a problem.
[10:38] <LjL> apokryphos: right, but then what does putting the IRC ops team umbrella on those channel add to that?
[10:38] <jenda> Hobbsee: Group Contact
[10:38] <DBO> nalioth, ok you win =P
[10:38] <Seveas> Hobbsee, group contact
[10:38] <Hobbsee> ah
[10:38] <Seveas> LjL, that's what we are discussing :)
[10:38] <Seveas> suggestions are welcome
[10:38] <apokryphos> LjL: I presume it'd mean giving some ubuntu ops access there, but that's the issue.
[10:38] <Seveas> It may be possible to wildcard all ops in an access list
[10:38] <PriceChild> I like the idea of the fallback .'d nick...
[10:39] <Seveas> (see my discussion with jenda)
[10:39] <Seveas> We should not do ubuntu/op/$someone
[10:39] <Seveas> but an inconspicuous . at the end is doable
[10:39] <jenda> hmm
[10:39] <PriceChild> s/nick/cloak
[10:39] <tonyyarusso> What's a . mean?
[10:39] <LjL> as long as it's very clear that only serious emergencies should be handled by "dot-ops", i guess
[10:39] <apokryphos> don't like the idea; it still wouldn't work for people who don't have cloaks
[10:40] <gnomefreak> tonyyarusso: atm nothing
[10:40] <tonyyarusso> gnomefreak: oooh
[10:40] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, nothing, but if all ops have a cloak ending in a . it can be asily wildcarded
[10:40] <jenda> tonyyarusso<EMAIL_ADDRESS>[10:40] <tonyyarusso> got it
[10:40] <PriceChild> tonyyarusso, basically the idea of a format of cloaks for 'just' approved ops
[10:40] <Seveas> jenda, no ubuntu/member/seveas.
[10:40] <jenda> Seveas: nope...
[10:40] <Seveas> the /member/ should preferably not change
[10:40] <jenda> Seveas: at the end, it has to be your nick.
[10:40] <Seveas> hmm
[10:40] <apokryphos> I think it's a bad call, since like we said before operators are ops in some places, and not others
[10:40] <gnomefreak> move the . to just before nick?
[10:40] <Seveas> who do I need to talk to in freenode staff for an exception
[10:41] <apokryphos> (to the channel contact's and the IRC council's discretion)
[10:41] <Seveas> apokryphos, adding the wildcard to the list is voluntary
[10:41] <jenda> Seveas: by being GC, you have the right for user@group/*/nick
[10:41] <Seveas> I'd do it in -meeting for instance
[10:41] <nalioth> Seveas: an exception to what?
[10:41] <Seveas> nalioth, to allow the dot-at-the-end even though it's not in the nick
[10:41] <apokryphos> Seveas: but not all operators have cloaks
[10:41] <jenda> apokryphos: huh? They don't?
[10:41] <Seveas> I used to discuss such things with lilo
[10:41] <tonyyarusso> Would it really be so bad to just make a few access lists a few lines longer?
[10:42] <LjL> jenda: /whois ljl
[10:42] <Seveas> jenda, not all of them are members
[10:42] <apokryphos> jenda: /whois $me, DBO, LjL
[10:42] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, it would need maintenance after approved/disapproved ops
[10:42] <jenda> LjL: do you want an unaffiliated cloak?
[10:42] <jenda> :)
[10:42] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: True
[10:42] <Amaranth> how are you an op and not a member?
[10:42] <tonyyarusso> It would be nice if we had a good way to track that
[10:42] <Amaranth> i thought we all had to be members
[10:42] <jenda> Amaranth: simple: not required.
[10:42] <Seveas> Amaranth, not neccessarily
[10:42] <apokryphos> Amaranth: not necessarily.
[10:42] <nalioth> Seveas: it'd have to be @ubuntu/member./* no?
[10:42] <Seveas> helping and op'ing can be a good contribution
[10:42] <LjL> jenda: i made a point to not ask for one :P perhaps i'll apply for ubuntu membership anyway, sooner or later
[10:42] <jenda> Seveas: why wouldn't ubuntu/member./nick do?
[10:43] <jenda> LjL: gah!
[10:43] <DBO> jenda, not all ops are members =P
[10:43] <Seveas> nalioth, right now yes, but I want to talk to someone about the possibility of changing that
[10:43] <apokryphos> I still think it's a bad idea... all this effort just for -meeting?
[10:43] <jenda> DBO: most have cloaks, though.
[10:43] <Seveas> not just there
[10:43] <Seveas> other channels can vry much benefit
[10:43] <nalioth> Seveas: you are the GC. you make any cloaks you like in the Ubuntu name space
[10:43] <apokryphos> Seveas: where else?
[10:43] <Amaranth> *cough*
[10:44] <Seveas> nalioth, ah, jenda just told me that it had to be the nickname on the end
[10:44] <Amaranth> this part is taking too long
[10:44] <gnomefreak> how do the non member ops feel about haivng an unaff. cloak?
[10:44] <Seveas> apokryphos, -doc -motu -xgl, locoteams
[10:44] <Seveas> to name but a fw
[10:44] <Amaranth> XGL is ours?
[10:44] <DBO> yes
[10:44] <jenda> of course
[10:44] <Seveas> Amaranth, true, but it needs to be fleshed out
[10:44] <Seveas> Amaranth, #ubuntu-xgl
[10:44] <gnomefreak> or whatever other cloaks freenode hands out
[10:44] <jenda> Amaranth: everything is.
[10:44] <Amaranth> no no, i'm saying seveas owns -xgl
[10:44] <Amaranth> so we don't need the dot thing there
[10:44] <apokryphos> -locoteams is boring, -xgl shouldn't have everyone necessarily, and -doc have their own governance (with plenty of people around, it seems)
[10:45] <LjL> gnomefreak, i won't kill myself, but on the other hand i don't feel to pressed to believe that, as a non-Ubuntu member, i *should* have operator privileges on just about about everywhere
[10:45] <nalioth> Seveas: it can be as you specify, you are GC.  unafilliated cloak syntax is set in stone, not project cloaks
[10:45] <apokryphos> -motu might need some ops, but I'm not sure that the solution is giving everyone ops there
[10:45] <jenda> Amaranth: he owns all #ubuntu-* channels, by freenode policy.
[10:45] <Seveas> nalioth, thanks
[10:45] <Amaranth> ok but -xgl is a user channel
[10:45] <apokryphos> Amaranth: /cs info #ubuntu-xgl -- yeah
[10:45] <gnomefreak> LjL: my point being about giving non-members cloaks to we can add the . or * where ever im not sure if it works withoput a cloak
[10:45] <jenda> Seveas: nothing is preventing approved ops from registering their nick. and setting it as primary :)
[10:45] <Seveas> ok, I see resistance and we're not getting any further
[10:46] <jenda> Seveas: actually, that would do it...
[10:46] <Seveas> maybe we should all think more about it and defer for now
[10:46] <apokryphos> agreed
[10:46] <gnomefreak> dbo == member i thought
[10:46] <gnomefreak> apokryphos: and LjL are good canidates IMHO
[10:46] <Seveas> "Dealing with abuse from operators"
[10:46] <LjL> gnomefreak: yes, i got that, but perhaps we could *want* non-member operators to be excluded from that wildcard. that's a point to consider. some channels might not like the idea of non-ubuntu members to have op privs, even though they might be OK with the "ops team" in general to be able to act in emergencies
[10:46] <Seveas> I think that's too generic and always will be a case-by-case matter for the IRC council
[10:47] <apokryphos> right
[10:47] <jenda> agreed
[10:47] <Seveas> feel free to disagree and comment, I'd like to be wrong here
[10:47] <nalioth> i think that adding new ops to the channels should be run by the council by the channel owner/contact (just so we can keep up)
[10:47] <jenda> I believe, however, that any user should be at least heard out by other ops in #ubuntu-ops.
[10:48] <LjL> well as long as it's voluntary for the specific channel contact anyway, it should not be much of an issue, as long as there is no reason why they would feel *compelled* to accept this
[10:48] <tonyyarusso> I'd say just bite the bullet and do normal individual access entries, and figure out some decent way of tracking those.
[10:48] <DBO> jenda++
[10:48] <Seveas> jenda, full ack, the appeal process from the usrs side should not change
[10:48] <LjL> nalioth++, but i think that's not really disputed
[10:49] <Seveas> anyone comments about the ops abuse item?
[10:49] <Seveas> How do we deal with it if the abusing op is a council membr?
[10:49] <LjL> there are other council members
[10:49] <Hobbsee> then they dont decide themselves?
[10:50] <apokryphos> right
[10:50] <somerville32> 1) I think that we could create some process to allow users to have some sort of official hearing with the IRC Council
[10:50] <Seveas> I think if a council member is abusive, the others should have the power to start a vote to remove the abuser from the council
[10:50] <somerville32> s/official/official public
[10:50] <Seveas> somerville32, +1 good call
[10:50] <Hobbsee> true
[10:50] <Hobbsee> Seveas: what kind of abuse are we talking about though?
[10:50] <tonyyarusso> Yeah, the other x council members would decide after hearing from people involved.
[10:50] <apokryphos> somerville32: sounds good enough; similar to the CC method would be good.
[10:50] <LjL> Seveas +1
[10:51] <Hobbsee> and are we talking about one night of it, or repeated?
[10:51] <jenda> Seveas: a private complaint mailing list for the council?
[10:51] <Seveas> Hobbsee, like me kicking out LjL because he makes fun of me
[10:51] <tonyyarusso> For the individual case, what you said afterwards or whatever
[10:51] <Seveas> jenda, I tend to lean to -1 there for now
[10:51] <apokryphos> Hobbsee: each situation would have to be assessed, but it'd have to be quite serious if someone would consider them losing their post
[10:51] <jenda> Hobbsee: or you kicking GazzaK for... well... for...
[10:51] <jenda> ;)
[10:51] <jenda> Seveas: ok
[10:51] <Seveas> Hobbsee, depends on the severity
[10:51] <somerville32> What would one do if a member of the CC abused their powers?
[10:51] <Seveas> jenda, no, kicking gazzak should ALWAYS be possible :)
[10:51] <Hobbsee> Seveas: presumably not including joke kicking, or something
[10:51] <Hobbsee> Seveas: indeed :D
[10:52] <apokryphos> somerville32: CC don't have powers apart from at the council, so :P
[10:52] <PriceChild> that gonna be a special clause at thebottom of the document? :)
[10:52] <Seveas> PriceChild, heh
[10:52] <jenda> Hobbsee: I think joke kicking isn't good in public channels.
[10:52] <LjL> Hobbsee: what he's saying is just that the *other* IRC council members would have the ability to remove a council member. they wouldn't *have* to take such a vote as soon as someone cries "abuse!", unless i've totally misunderstood something
[10:52] <gnomefreak> if your gonna have "fun" kicking than a non op cant vote for anything or all kicks fun or not will be veiwed aas abuse of poweer
[10:52] <jenda> Hobbsee: it defeats the whole purpose of hidden ops.
[10:52] <somerville32> apokryphos, Not isn't quite true. The CC group owns a lot of groups on launchpad ;]
[10:52] <Seveas> jenda, I think we covered that extensively last meeting
[10:52] <jenda> alright.
[10:53] <Hobbsee> LjL: true
[10:53] <somerville32> In the case of abuse on the IRC Council, shouldn't that goto the CC since it would most likely be a violation of the CoC and LCoC?
[10:53] <somerville32> s/on/from
[10:53] <Seveas> somerville32, good point
[10:53] <gnomefreak> +1
[10:53] <apokryphos> yes, that's what the Council is there for
[10:53] <LjL> surely. but we can't decide about that here - that's already decided for us
[10:53] <apokryphos> but matters should *first* go to the IRC council, before being escalated.
[10:54] <LjL> yes
[10:54] <nalioth> somerville32: there are supposed to be 3 members on the irc council for such occasions
[10:54] <somerville32> But when it comes to it, do you really think that another member of the IRC Council can be impartial about it?
[10:54] <somerville32> I mean, we (for the most part) are a closed nit of people
[10:54] <Seveas> somerville32, the future will learn
[10:54] <somerville32> I consider most of you friends
[10:54] <tonyyarusso> Perhaps abuse by a most ops are dealt with by our own council, abuse by our council goes to CC.
[10:54] <Seveas> you can't see everything in advance
[10:55] <somerville32> tonyyarusso++
[10:55] <apokryphos> we can't begin on the presumption that they cannot be impartial to a reasonable extent, anyhow.
[10:55] <Seveas> not everything should be completely set in stone
[10:55] <jenda> tonyyarusso++
[10:55] <Seveas> apokryphos, indeed
[10:55] <LjL> if the way the IRC council deals with anything (and yes, it *has* to be the IRC council dealing with it *first* IMHO) does not satisfy the person who appealed to it, then to CC it goes, i'd say
[10:55] <Seveas> I think I've heard enough to make a first draft of this page and would like to move along
[10:55] <LjL> that deals with the possible partiality of the IRC council i think
[10:55] <gnomefreak> seveas kicking Hobbsee shouldnt really need to go to CC unless it happens often
[10:55] <apokryphos> cool. Ok, what elese?
[10:56] <gnomefreak> just example
[10:56] <Seveas> rewording guidelines
[10:56] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: and i have a problem with it
[10:56] <gnomefreak> lol
[10:56] <Seveas> I think it's a good idea to simply split off ops guidelines and make it a lot more thorough
[10:56] <Seveas> including things like "#
[10:56] <Seveas> Technical issues
[10:56] <Seveas>     *
[10:56] <Seveas>       Guidelines (note guidelines, as in "help us know what to do") for dealing with attacks - a.k.a. "when +rR ain't enough". +mz? +J? Smart bots?
[10:56] <Seveas> "
[10:57] <tonyyarusso> If we do that, I would like to consider having a link to that page on the regular guidelines page - I think it's nice for users to be aware of how we operate too.
[10:57] <Seveas> ack
[10:57] <gnomefreak> +1
[10:57] <somerville32> +1
[10:57] <LjL> we've often had attacks where +rR was, as far as i could see, totally uneffective
[10:57] <apokryphos> Seveas: before I forget to mention it, +J does detect netsplits. It's only bad when Chanserv crashes
[10:57] <apokryphos> which is very rare I think
[10:57] <Seveas> apokryphos, that must be new
[10:57] <Seveas> nice :)
[10:57] <LjL> i'd like to understand what technically is the best way to deal with massive attacks
[10:58] <gnomefreak> +r
[10:58] <tonyyarusso> Can jenda or nalioth confirm that point?  That would be useful to know.
[10:58] <DBO> LjL, especially during netsplits...
[10:58] <apokryphos> I think it's worth mentioning a bit about +r and +R
[10:58] <Seveas> LjL, +r, followed by the apparently safe +J and as last resort +i
[10:58] <apokryphos> +R stops registered users from talking. Unless there are talking bots, this shouldn't ever be set!
[10:58] <gnomefreak> +r doesnt really do much once +r is in place does it?
[10:58] <apokryphos> for persistent join/part bots, +r is what to set
[10:58] <gnomefreak> s/+r/+R
[10:58] <nalioth> we'll write up a "what to do in an attack" document
[10:58] <apokryphos> s/stops registered/stops non-registered/
[10:58] <Seveas> nalioth, +1
[10:58] <tonyyarusso> I once had to use +i, since +r didn't work and +J was unavailable.  It kind of worked.
[10:58] <LjL> Seveas, i have also used +mz with manual relaying of relevant messages, comments on that?
[10:59] <apokryphos> nalioth: sounds good
[10:59] <gnomefreak> nalioth: +1
[10:59] <Seveas> LjL, if you can keep up with the pace it's nice
[10:59] <apokryphos> LjL: it's bad, since most bots don't talk, and they aren't registered.
[10:59] <Seveas> but that smells like 'last resort' measure
[10:59] <apokryphos> right
[10:59] <LjL> apokryphos, most bots *were* registered in the last attacks i witnessed...
[10:59] <tonyyarusso> LjL: Do you then +v people who seem human and sane?
[10:59] <LjL> at least, my +rR didn't do them anything
[11:00] <apokryphos> they still talked in the channel?
[11:00] <LjL> tonyyarusso: i did that last time, after Flannel suggested me to in -offtopic
[11:00] <apokryphos> ok, then that's a chance for +mz, but it's certainly *very* rare
[11:00] <DBO> tonyyarusso, I think I would go through a bit of backscroll and +i those who were talking before
[11:00] <LjL> apokryphos: talked and gave channel notices and CTCPs
[11:00] <tonyyarusso> LjL: Could make sense at times, just not often
[11:00] <DBO> erm
[11:00] <DBO> tonyyarusso, make that +v I cant think
[11:00] <tonyyarusso> DBO: right
[11:00] <apokryphos> we'll write a doc for this. Next item?
[11:00] <Seveas> ops removing other ops bans
[11:01] <Seveas> I think that's perfectly fine if the bans are old
[11:01] <tonyyarusso> apokryphos: Yes, I have encountered many talking bots, ftr.
[11:01] <nalioth> Tm_T: you've decided to join us in a meeting, pull up a chair  :)
[11:01] <Tm_T> :o
[11:01] <Tm_T> nalioth: Just heard... ;)
[11:01] <Seveas> if bans are not to be removed it should be discussed on the mailing list
[11:01] <nalioth> bans should not last over 24 hours, unless under extenuating circumstances
[11:01] <apokryphos> if it's a controversial issue it should be discussed
[11:01] <LjL> ok, i'll put this another way: when you have 20+ bots who do 1) privmsg 2) notice 3) ctcp with 1) obscene language 2) insults to operators 3) DCC exploits...   is +mz for some 5 minutes adequate if +rR doesn't quite work? :-)
[11:01] <Seveas> nalioth, -1
[11:01] <Seveas> LjL, more than that :)
[11:02] <gnomefreak> ops removing other ops bans because they dont like it?
[11:02] <apokryphos> LjL: if +R doesn't work, it means they're registered so like I said -- yeah.
[11:02] <tonyyarusso> With care on that Seveas - for instance Madpilot removed one of the four bans set for KillerDemon before I noticed and pointed him at the bantracker comment.  If we comment extensively and check those it should be okay.
[11:02] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: no, that always happens through discussion.
[11:02] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, true
[11:02] <PriceChild> I think that because of the ban tracker... its obvious whether any unCoC has happenned... and any unCoC'ness should wait until the banning op decides its time to remove it.
[11:02] <gnomefreak> the old age is fine but its stall bad because i may not know bleh was banned for something bad
[11:03] <LjL> commenting bans will help us determining stuff i'm sure
[11:03] <DBO> we need to decide on a ban age limit here
[11:03] <DBO> IP's change hands
[11:03] <tonyyarusso> "because they don't like it" would be a bad reason, imo.  We discussed in great depth procedures for that, and "just remove" was nowhere among them.
[11:03] <Seveas> *brainwave* Is there a better idea to communicate bans than the bantracker or can the bantracker be imporved?
[11:03] <somerville32> Seveas++
[11:03] <LjL> for instance, i removed a ban by Seveas once, based on the fact that the comment (well, the remove message, but anyway) explicitly specified that it would last for a day
[11:03] <DBO> Seveas, give the bot a way to do it
[11:03] <gnomefreak> apokryphos: that happened the other day witha  well know troll gateway thats why it was added (also because of the large ban list in #ubuntu)
[11:04] <Seveas> DBO, that's easier said than done
[11:04] <LjL> if i saw a comment saying "strongly abusive user" or something, i wouldn't remove such a ban
[11:04] <Seveas> hmm
[11:04] <Tm_T> What is bantracker?
[11:04] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Can Ubugtu /msg us an hour later to harass us if we forgot to go comment it?  ;)  (j/k..maybe)
[11:04] <Seveas> how about @check [nickname-or-mask-here]
[11:04] <somerville32> Maybe we could have mail notification on bans or something and then make use of mutes more then bans to reduce spam?
[11:04] <apokryphos> Tm_T: bots.ubuntulinux.nl
[11:04] <gnomefreak> place that tracks bans :)
[11:04] <Seveas> and ubugtu would do a summary?
[11:04] <DBO> Seveas, I have faith in your total willingness to sacrifice all your free time
[11:04] <Tm_T> apokryphos: Thanks.
[11:04] <Seveas> DBO, ;)
[11:05] <LjL> Seveas: more ways to use the bantracker efficiently are always welcome for me, so +1
[11:05] <apokryphos> how about being able to specify -b with Ubugtu
[11:05] <Seveas> @check DBO
[11:05] <apokryphos> this ties into Ubugtu Op powers
[11:05] <Ubugtu> 3 bans, 5 kicks an 0 mutes in #ubuntu
[11:05] <Seveas> it would go like that
[11:05] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: what sort of summary?
[11:05] <tonyyarusso> ah
[11:05] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, see above ;)
[11:05] <Hobbsee> Seveas: yes, but could they list them in a query or something?
[11:05] <Seveas> (I'd love to see @check GazzaK)
[11:05] <Seveas> Hobbsee, I can make @chck only available in here
[11:06] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: It might be nice if you could, in /msg, get more info from the log, since loading up the web site is sometiems a hassle
[11:06] <LjL> tonyyarusso: +1, and i'm not joking
[11:06] <LjL> (the ubugtu harassement that is)
[11:06] <Seveas> tonyyarusso, launching the browser a hassle or is the website not efficient enough?
[11:06] <DBO> Seveas, both
[11:06] <tonyyarusso> LjL: I'd like it for me - would want input about whether that should be an 'opt-in' service or not
[11:06] <Seveas> because the latter is fixable
[11:06] <somerville32> DBO++
[11:06] <DBO> mostly I forgot my username and password makes it very ineffective for me
[11:06] <gnomefreak> how about adding last kicked for (whatever reason op gave)? is that possible at all?
[11:06] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: Launching browser, and sometimes for me, waiting for SSL on dialup (summer)
[11:06] <Seveas> DBO, use the cookie :)
[11:07] <LjL> Seveas, i'd say it would be nice to have an API for the bantracker, so each of us could integrate it into their IRC client or whatever the way they like and find most convenient
[11:07] <Seveas> DBO, and using it is now login-free
[11:07] <Hobbsee> DBO: same here
[11:07] <Seveas> LjL, ooooooh
[11:07] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: I would love it if I could specify an autoremove time through Ubugtu.
[11:07] <Seveas> now there's a weird idea
[11:07] <LjL> Seveas: sorry :)
[11:07] <nalioth> as i previously said, barring extenuating circumstances, a ban should not last more than 24 hours
[11:07] <Seveas> LjL, file it as bug please ;)
[11:07] <somerville32> Would it be possible to have some sort of auto-unban mechanism that authenticated users in the bantracker use?
[11:07] <DBO> Seveas, oh yes, please please API
[11:07] <somerville32> ie. We could login to the ban tracker and set it to unban in x number of hours?
[11:07] <Seveas> somerville32, file it as bug
[11:08] <Seveas> anyway, we're going way beyond the subject
[11:08] <LjL> that still entails ubugtu op powers
[11:08] <Seveas> it was clear that the subject was incorrect :)
[11:08] <Seveas> LjL, I'm fine with that if only used for unbanning
[11:08] <tonyyarusso> We are straying, yeah.
[11:08] <Seveas> don't know about the rest
[11:08] <LjL> then +1 about a handy unban/unmute timer
[11:09] <somerville32> LjL++
[11:09] <DBO> @unban nick 10 (as in 10 hours) would be easier
[11:09] <Seveas> DBO, file it as bug
[11:09] <Seveas> (seriously, I'll forget requests if noone files them)
[11:09] <Hobbsee> yay, timers :)
[11:09] <DBO> damn you old man Seveas
[11:09] <Seveas> anyway, next is regularity of discussion
[11:09] <somerville32> Maybe we could organize a bot/ban tracker IRC sprint sometime?
[11:09] <Seveas> BIWEEKLY MEETINGS!
[11:10] <LjL> Seveas is right, we're really just discussing technical issues with the bots now, there's nothing to agree or disagree upon about having handy timers and such, i suppose
[11:10] <Hobbsee> no!  not meetings twice a week!
[11:10] <gnomefreak> bimonthly maybe?
[11:10] <Hobbsee> maybe use @unban nick never for those not to be undone
[11:10] <Jucato> monthly?
[11:10] <LjL> biyearly?
[11:10] <jenda> could someone please pastebin me the log of the past 8 minutes? :(
[11:10] <somerville32> Triweekly
[11:10] <gnomefreak> bimonthly == 2 times a month
[11:10] <Hobbsee> quintweekly?
[11:10] <tonyyarusso> I don't care if they're biweekly - just something regular.  If it's every two months, or four months, or whatever, that's cool.
[11:10] <somerville32> gnomefreak, biweekly = 2 times a month
[11:10] <DBO> Trifortnight!
[11:11] <Seveas> somerville32, that's what I thought :)
[11:11] <gnomefreak> biweekly i thought was 2 weekly
[11:11] <jenda> neverly? :)
[11:11] <DBO> me too...
[11:11] <gnomefreak> seeing as bi == 2
[11:11] <Seveas> anyway, a meeting every 2 weeks would definitely be nice in the near future
[11:11] <DBO> and weekly == seven days
[11:11] <LjL> i'd make it every 3 weeks or every month, but it's ok anyway... fire up bc and take an average of all suggestions
[11:11] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: no, bi = 2. So bi-weekly -- every two weeks.
[11:11] <Seveas> since we have a lot to catch u on
[11:11] <Seveas> catch up*
[11:11] <somerville32> +1
[11:11] <LjL> so we can have a meeting every 2.4333333 weeks
[11:12] <apokryphos> yeah, I like 3-4 weeks. 2 weeks is too soon :P
[11:12] <jenda> gnomefreak: one every 2 weeks :)
[11:12] <Seveas> apokryphos, not for the next 2 or three
[11:12] <gnomefreak> :)
[11:12] <Seveas> we need to get this all off the ground
[11:12] <Seveas> after that monthly may even be fine
[11:12] <tonyyarusso> jenda: http://paste.ubuntu-nl.org/3503/
[11:12] <LjL> +1 seveas
[11:12] <gnomefreak> every 2 weeks until we have everything in place than once a month?
[11:12] <somerville32> Before I go, I'd like to propose no more secret IRC council meeting.
[11:12] <Seveas> gnomefreak, yeah
[11:12] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: we can decide that then, I guess
[11:12] <Seveas> somerville32, there have never been such meetings
[11:13] <jenda> tonyyarusso: thx
[11:13] <Seveas> only impromptu discussions between the members of it in a separate channel
[11:13] <Tm_T> Catch up and then monthly +1
[11:13] <tonyyarusso> More often in immediate future then to monthly +1
[11:14] <somerville32> +1
[11:14] <apokryphos> ok, anything else on the agenda?
[11:15] <somerville32> I have a question
[11:15] <Seveas> shoot
[11:15] <apokryphos> shoot
[11:15] <tonyyarusso> BAM!
[11:15] <Seveas> jenda, if somerville32 has shot, you can aim
[11:16] <somerville32> What happens if a ban is found unfair but the ban has already elapsed before the powers that be convene for a hearing?
[11:16] <jenda> somerville32 has'nt shot, however :)
[11:16] <jenda> it was tonyyarusso :)
[11:16] <LjL> nothing happens imho
[11:16] <tonyyarusso> LjL: ++
[11:16] <jenda> the person can be unbanned ceremoniously again.
[11:16] <tonyyarusso> "Learn from the experience for next time"
[11:16] <somerville32> Do we just say "Sorry, better luck next time?" or what?
[11:16] <PriceChild> +1 tonyyarusso
[11:16] <Seveas> LjL, -1, I think a user should still have the option of filing a complaint
[11:16] <apokryphos> somerville32: depends on the situation. We can apologise for it perhaps, but nothing else really needs to happen.
[11:17] <PriceChild> somerville32, if they want to take it further with the council then they can
[11:17] <LjL> Seveas: yes, no need for any sort of automatic procedure for "when an elapsed ban is found unfair" though
[11:17] <tonyyarusso> Seveas: I like that too, but what does that filing actually do, ultimately?  I'm not clear where it goes from there.
[11:17] <DBO> Seveas, I dont mean to sound negative, but those that are banned seem to me quite likely to simply file complaints out of spite
[11:17] <gnomefreak> than you have the everytime whiners
[11:17] <Seveas> LjL, +1
[11:17] <jenda> Seveas: well, considering the decisions made on approving new ops, I suppose my issue is now irrelevant
[11:17] <Seveas> DBO, that also holds when they're srill banned
[11:18] <DBO> Seveas, of course, but what gets done about it?
[11:18] <Seveas> I simply don't think we should ignore a complaint if a user has been unbanned already
[11:18] <Seveas> good question
[11:18] <Hobbsee> apokryphos: YOU DONT KICK NON-RESPONDING CLIENTS, MMMKAY?
[11:18] <Seveas> that's something the IRC council has to figure out
[11:18] <jenda> Hobbsee: unless they have public away...
[11:18] <Hobbsee> jenda: well of course
[11:18] <jenda> (oh, and !caps ;)
[11:18] <somerville32> I mean, It isn't like we have "get unbanned free"  or "get $5 off your next purchase" cards to hand out ;]
[11:19] <apokryphos> Hobbsee: hehe, that evil pointy stick. You don't have autojoin on invite too :P
[11:19] <gnomefreak> do we remove for public aways or do we warn them?
[11:19] <Seveas> jenda, I'm not entirely sure but it's best defered to when a first draft of the "what do we cover" and "how to appoint ops" docs are available
[11:19] <nalioth> if the user has been unbanned already and complains, the situation will be parsed by the IRCC and the op spoken with if necessary (or the situation ignored, if it's a 'whiner/constant filer over nothing)
[11:19] <Seveas> gnomefreak, remove
[11:19] <gnomefreak> k
[11:19] <Hobbsee> apokryphos: thought i did, but i dont look at hte irssi config much
[11:19] <Seveas> policy has always been remove
[11:19] <LjL> Seveas: perhaps if the user complains, and the IRC council finds the complain is justified, a bantracker comment should be added saying that the ban was found unnecessary
[11:19] <apokryphos> Hobbsee: irssi user now? :O
[11:19] <somerville32> I look forward to the next meeting
[11:19] <LjL> when i ban people by mistake (err... yes... i do that), i generally add a bantracker comment to that effect
[11:19] <Seveas> LjL, that's the least that should be done imho
[11:19] <Hobbsee> apokryphos: no.
[11:20] <apokryphos> complaints don't necessarily have to go to the council
[11:20] <jenda> Seveas: alright.
[11:20] <somerville32> I'd like to look at op conduct expectations and guidelines for ops to follow when dealing with different situations.
[11:20] <somerville32> (for the next meeting)
[11:20] <apokryphos> if someone appeals a ban, they simply appeal in here. It *can* be escalated to the council, but that doesn't mean it has to.
[11:20] <Seveas> +a
[11:20] <Seveas> +1 even for apokryphos
[11:20] <tonyyarusso> LjL: I would add that comment regardless probably, if just concluded in regular discussion too.
[11:20] <gnomefreak> 1
[11:20] <somerville32> apokryphos, Has a ban ever been overturned when just discussed in here?
[11:20] <LjL> tonyyarusso: true nuff
[11:20] <apokryphos> somerville32: indeed it has
[11:20] <Seveas> somerville32, yes
[11:20] <gnomefreak> how long do we let a complaint go on in here though?
[11:21] <somerville32> apokryphos, ok
[11:21] <somerville32> then +1 from me
[11:21] <LjL> Seveas: not sure what more - the (un)banned person complains, the council finds the complain is justified, and...? what on earth could happen? a free T-shirt to them?
[11:21] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: another case of use judgement
[11:21] <tonyyarusso> gnomefreak: as long as it's polite and productive.
[11:21] <gnomefreak> there have been some that lasted an hour or so IMHO thats 45 minutes too long
[11:21] <apokryphos> gnomefreak: we can try to explain it several times, but if things aren't getting anywhere after a while it can't go on.
[11:21] <Jucato> um... shouldn't we first warn public away users first before removing them? some just don't know the policy and disable it right after they have been informed
[11:21] <Seveas> LjL, if an op gets more complaints (s)he may be removed from the team perhaps
[11:22] <Seveas> LjL, that's more something that has to grow than decided now
[11:22] <LjL> Seveas: but that's for the IRC council itself to decide, no?
[11:22] <apokryphos> right
[11:22] <LjL> i mean - the IRC council *already* has the power to revoke access - no?
[11:22] <gnomefreak> Jucato: how do you warn someone that isnt there?
[11:22] <Seveas> LjL, yes
[11:22] <somerville32> re: "What do when...?" maybe the IRC council could come up with a document that describes general procedures and then we can review and approve it as a team at the next meeting?
[11:22] <tonyyarusso> Jucato: Depends if you feel nice :)  I often warn, yes, but don't mind removing either (especially in the major chans)
[11:22] <Jucato> gnomefreak: !away > nick
[11:22] <Hobbsee> Jucato: no.  they're away.
[11:22] <Jucato> Hobbsee: sometimes, they don't immediately go away after setting /away
[11:22] <Seveas> they're away so can't listen
[11:22] <Jucato> I've seen that happen
[11:23] <Hobbsee> true
[11:23] <gnomefreak> Jucato: do all clients log when away?
[11:23] <Seveas> /remove is the only way to make 100% sure they notice something's wrong :)
[11:23] <LjL> tonyyarusso: removing has the advantage of being logged in the tracker (hopefully commented), and that helps with dealing with users that are never *very* abusive but are *often* abusive
[11:23] <nalioth> gnomefreak: you can't assume so
[11:23] <tonyyarusso> LjL: agreed
[11:23] <tonyyarusso> /remove + !away >
[11:23] <gnomefreak> i agree with the remove since that is how its always been
[11:23] <apokryphos> we don't have to set it in stone; no problem with using judgement
[11:24] <Seveas> if someone feels like annoying me: file a bug that says "detect kickbans and only create one entry in the tracker kthxbye"
[11:24] <somerville32> apokryphos, Right
[11:24] <Jucato> er sorry had to go /away ironically...
[11:24] <LjL> apokryphos ++
[11:24] <somerville32> apokryphos, But guidelines would be good to offer consistency
[11:24] <LjL> Seveas: wasn't that already filed and rejected? /me hides :P
[11:24] <Seveas> LjL, maybe
[11:24] <gnomefreak> somerville32: the pages you are talking about have already been agreed to be writen
[11:25] <Seveas> anyway: anyone else want to discuss something in the 10 minutes I have left?
[11:25] <jenda> Jucato: a kick is considered a warning
[11:25] <somerville32> Since the CC has already been notified of the incident that happened the other week, where are we going to go from here?
[11:25] <tonyyarusso> If not you can always pass the treats around again.
[11:25] <LjL> well, one thing. when is a ban considered appropriate in *this* channel?
[11:25] <Seveas> if a user clearly misbehaves?
[11:26] <apokryphos> yeah
[11:26] <Seveas> and at least two ops agree on the ban?
[11:26] <tonyyarusso> LjL: When they go on and on and on and/or are non-CoC here
[11:26] <LjL> Seveas: define clearly misbehaves
[11:26] <somerville32> Seveas++
[11:26] <Seveas> LjL, that's what I have you for ;)
[11:26] <tonyyarusso> Well, no.  Mute for case one if necessary, ban for case two.
[11:26] <LjL> tonyyarusso++. but is non-CoCness good enough to justify a ban?
[11:26] <Jucato> jenda: I guess so... it might just be a bit disconcerting on the end of the user if he finds himself kicked for a first offense (probably)
[11:26] <Seveas> actually:
[11:26] <nalioth> if a banned user comes in here to appeal, and will not let it go. . . .
[11:27] <jenda> Jucato: second offense.
[11:27] <Seveas> I think we should *never* ban in here
[11:27] <Seveas> only mute
[11:27] <tonyyarusso> LjL: I think so myself - although it should be more than a "Won't remove my ban?  Damn."
[11:27] <somerville32> Seveas++
[11:27] <jenda> Jucato: the first offence is not reading the guidelines ;)
[11:27] <Seveas> and ban if they part/join spam
[11:27] <Jucato> jenda: heheh :P
[11:27] <gnomefreak> how about only the councel can ban from here?
[11:27] <LjL> Seveas: that works
[11:27] <Seveas> (so NEVER is not true)
[11:27] <PriceChild> Seveas, what happens instead then?
[11:27] <Seveas> gnomefreak, -1
[11:27] <tonyyarusso> I'm fine only mute, yeah
[11:27] <PriceChild> just mute?
[11:27] <jenda> Seveas: can you even join a channel when 'muted'?
[11:27] <Seveas> PriceChild, they can still read and cool down a bit
[11:27] <nalioth> mute and ban on join/part flood
[11:27] <Seveas> jenda, yes
[11:27] <nalioth> jenda: yes
[11:27] <Jucato> mute +1
[11:27] <somerville32> jenda: yes
[11:27] <gnomefreak> mute person leaves comes back no more mute
[11:27] <nalioth> gnomefreak: no.
[11:27] <Seveas> gnomefreak, not true
[11:27] <LjL> perhaps when a user comes here to appeal, *AS SOON AS* he even slightly violates the CoC, he should be pointed to !etiquette
[11:28] <somerville32> gnomefreak, no
[11:28] <gnomefreak> no?
[11:28] <LjL> then a mute is justified if they don't tone down
[11:28] <apokryphos> it depends. What happens if we have a guy who's ban evading in many ubuntu channels, can he idle silently in -ops?
[11:28] <nalioth> gnomefreak: a mute is the same as a ban
[11:28] <Seveas> gnomefreak, try rejoining
[11:28] <Jucato> ...
[11:28] <tonyyarusso> apokryphos: does it do any harm?
[11:28] <Seveas> heh
[11:28] <nalioth> gnomefreak: except you can join channels
[11:28] <Seveas> gnomefreak, you're still muted
[11:28] <gnomefreak> oh
[11:28] <Seveas> but you can speak because of the +v
[11:28] <PriceChild> ah.... that's what the % means at the start of the ban :)
[11:28] <LjL> apokryphos: i think he should unless he uses the -ops knowledge to dodge the ban more effectively. or bring in clonebots at the right time.
[11:28] <gnomefreak> ah
[11:28] <Jucato> heh.. how ironic... he's voiced but muted :)
[11:28] <LjL> .... which is almost impossible to know
[11:29] <Tm_T> Ok, going to bed, waking up in 6 hours so have fun etc. ->
[11:29] <jenda> aahh, it's the %
[11:29] <apokryphos> tonyyarusso: don't know. Might be an issue, like LjL is saying, if we're discussing how to stop this guy
[11:29] <somerville32> I have to go
[11:29] <apokryphos> see you Tm_T
[11:29] <somerville32> But whats going to happen re: incident the other week?
[11:29] <tonyyarusso> I guess if you start discussing ways to get rid of them you could take them out of here.
[11:29] <Jucato> by Tm_T! glad you could drop by :)
[11:29] <PriceChild> jenda, way ahead of you ;)
[11:30] <Seveas> I have a few seconds of connection left on my prepai....
[11:30] <apokryphos> Seveas: I think somerville32's issue is important to address, however.
[11:30] <apokryphos> it was part of the reason this meeting was scheduled. Hm, someone should've had it on the agenda
[11:30] <gnomefreak> malt?
[11:30] <Seveas> somerville32, next meeting please (in 2 weeks time)
[11:30] <maxamillion> PriceChild: hi hi
[11:30] <somerville32> Ok
[11:30] <Seveas> THANK YOU VERY MUCH everyone
[11:31] <somerville32> +1
[11:31] <Seveas> It's been a productive meeting
[11:31] <maxamillion> somerville32: when will you be back from your meeting?
[11:31] <PriceChild> :)
[11:31] <apokryphos> ok, excellent. I'm out too.
[11:31] <PriceChild> Who'll be writing it up? ;)
[11:31] <somerville32> maxamillion, I'm leaving now. Will be back in 3 hours or so
[11:31] <Seveas> PriceChild, I will
[11:31] <maxamillion> somerville32: oh wow ... ok, well i'll be back later later ... so i'll catch you around then
[11:31] <gnomefreak> crap forgot to do the updates
[11:31] <PriceChild> :)
[11:31] <Seveas> but it will take a while
[11:31] <tonyyarusso> ~treat everyone
[11:31] <Seveas> (2 days)
[11:31] <nalioth> there will be documents emerging over the next few days
[11:31] <PriceChild> Seveas, hehe I won't be too eager to read it :P
[11:31] <apokryphos> if someone has time, write minutes
[11:32] <nalioth> as an aside, a large swarm of bots is attempting to join the network
[11:32] <nalioth> be wary
[11:32] <Seveas> ok
[11:32] <Seveas> good luck all!
[11:32] <PriceChild> go get 'em nalioth
[11:32] <LjL> wonderful, back to real non-work :P
[11:32] <LjL> see you Seveas
[11:32] <Seveas> next meeting will be in -meeting, I'll make sure to reserve the channel
[11:32] <tonyyarusso> good
[11:33] <tonyyarusso> nalioth: what do you mean "attempting"?
[11:33] <LjL> tonyyarusso: he's k-lining them
[11:33] <tonyyarusso> Oh, duh.
[11:33] <nalioth> tonyyarusso: we are whacking them as they join (but there are a 'few' of them)
[11:33] <gnomefreak> but some may slip through so just keep eyes open
[11:34] <tonyyarusso> So how many digits is a 'few' these day?  I can never keep track of inflation.
[11:34] <nalioth> 'few' hundred, lol
[11:34] <LjL> gee hundred, i don't think i've ever connected to more than 20 proxies at a time ever :P
[11:35] <nalioth> LjL: zombies
[11:35] <LjL> well a zombie's still a proxy no
[11:36] <PriceChild> a few hundred :O
[11:37] <nalioth> LjL: no, a zombie is not a proxy
[11:37] <tonyyarusso> PriceChild: It's okay - the spread out, so only about 40 hit #ubuntu at once ;)
[11:37] <tonyyarusso> *they
[11:37] <PriceChild> tonyyarusso, hehe
[11:43] <sabdfl> evening
[11:43] <nalioth> hi sabdfl
[11:43] <nixternal> evening :)
[11:43] <Seeker`> lo
[11:43] <Jucato> O.O
[11:43] <nalioth> you just missed us all  :(
[11:44] <sabdfl> sorry
[11:44] <sabdfl> just saw a ping about it now
[11:44] <Hobbsee> hey sabdfl
[11:44] <Jucato> hi sabdfl!
[11:44] <sabdfl> things settled a bit?
[11:44] <nalioth> it as a quick meeting, seveas was on limited time
[11:44] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: *far* too late.  even later than i was with lure :)
[11:44] <tonyyarusso> lol Jucato
[11:44] <Jucato> :)
[11:44] <effie_jayx> good meeting though.. :D
[11:44] <nalioth> sabdfl: we have some paths to follow now
[11:45] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: seems there's a council, not sure who's on it yet, which will handle more things
[11:45] <jenda> welcome :)
[11:45] <sabdfl> ok, that sounds good
[11:45] <tonyyarusso> sabdfl: We covered a lot of ground still.  Going to have frequent mtgs in coming weeks to take care of various outstanding stuff for now though.
[11:45] <sabdfl> please brief jono
[11:45] <sabdfl> you guys do amazing work
[11:45] <nalioth> Hobbsee: you know two of the members :P
[11:45] <sabdfl> even so, it's good to get called up and held to a high standard
[11:45] <LongPointyStick> nalioth: well, true.
[11:45] <sabdfl> i just had that with a .it community member
[11:45] <sabdfl> who rightfully accused me of not saying thank you enough
[11:46] <nixternal> heh
[11:46] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: reminds me of the bug about "developers do not get enough thanks"
[11:46] <tonyyarusso> Hobbsee: I love that bug
[11:46] <sabdfl> a regular meeting is good, it means that when something tough comes up folks have real relationships to build on for the tough discussion
[11:46] <nixternal> nalioth: +1
[11:46] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: while i remember, when's UDS going to be announced?  i'd like to come
[11:46] <sabdfl> ok, well done guys, and thanks
[11:47] <sabdfl> UDS is (I think) week of May 5th
[11:47] <sabdfl> in Seville, Spain
[11:47] <sabdfl> next one is in November
[11:47] <Jucato> wow
[11:47] <Hobbsee> fun :)
[11:47] <sabdfl> in Boston
[11:47] <effie_jayx> Hobbsee,  :D
[11:48] <Hobbsee> heya effie_jayx
[11:48] <Hobbsee> hrm.  shouldnt be too bad, during uni
[11:48] <Jucato> tonyyarusso: I sym/empathize with you... except on point #1
[11:49] <effie_jayx> Hobbsee,  it's only a week
[11:49] <effie_jayx> :D
[11:49] <PriceChild> Hobbsee, UDS is starting the same as my exam's week :'(
[11:49] <Seeker`> UDS?
[11:49] <gnomefreak> ubuntu developer summit
[11:49] <tonyyarusso> Jucato: Yeah, point 1 is like Hobbsee's, university student, so it's hard to get away
[11:49] <effie_jayx> Seeker`, Ubuntu Developer Summit...
[11:49] <PriceChild> Not that i'd ever get sponsorship :P
[11:49] <jenda> Seeker`: Ubuntu Developer su...
[11:49] <nalioth> Ubuntu developer summit
[11:49] <jenda> right...
[11:49] <Hobbsee> PriceChild: yeah.  that's my problem with november
[11:49] <effie_jayx> gnomefreak,  beat me there...
[11:49] <Hobbsee> effie_jayx: that's true.  it's also 29 hours of uni to catch up on.
[11:49] <Hobbsee> er, 28
[11:50] <PriceChild> Hobbsee, wait no... it isn't...
[11:50] <effie_jayx> Hobbsee,  just tried to make the escape easier on you...
[11:50] <PriceChild> Hobbsee, woo its after exams week :D
[11:50] <Hobbsee> effie_jayx: :)
[11:53] <effie_jayx> me too...
[12:13] <LjL> bug 82374 bug 82379
[12:13] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 82374 in ubuntu-bots "Wish: Bantracker API" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/82374
[12:13] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 82379 in ubuntu-bots "Wish: Links in bantracker" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/82379
[12:14] <LjL> tonyyarusso: perhaps the "ubugtu harassment" feature can be left out if we have an API. or not. should see
[12:14] <tonyyarusso> LjL: Yeah, will be a pondering for later.
[12:14] <tonyyarusso> Of course, having an API isn't the same as having code for your client ;)
[12:15] <LjL> and i've left out the "unban timer" for now, i can't quite picture a implementation in my head
[12:15] <LjL> tonyyarusso: it sure isn't, but then the same guy who can close those bugs is also known for making nasty utility scripts for certain clients
[12:15] <tonyyarusso> I imagine something like /abr someone, /msg ubugtu make that 24hr
[12:15] <tonyyarusso> LjL: True.
[12:16] <LjL> tonyyarusso: define "someone". you can't just give a nick, because bans are by mask... and giving a mask might not be easiest otoh
[12:16] <LjL> also, should the @unban command work for other people's bans, or just for your own? i see *cough* political issues on this :)
[12:17] <tonyyarusso> LjL: /abr nick is the syntax for my kickbanner.  For ubugtu, it could either be by mask or your most recent.
[12:17] <tonyyarusso> Just your own I'd imagine.
[12:17] <LjL> most recent might work
[12:17] <LjL> if it isn't too much of a headache to implement
[12:19] <tonyyarusso> aargh.  digg is full of stories that make your really disappointed in the world today
[12:21] <LjL> isn't everything?
[12:23] <tonyyarusso> Well, yeah.  Some days are worse than others.