30 Jan
2013
30 Jan
'13
11:44 p.m.
Seconded. Extraspecially yummy.
How can I help?
If Jen + Mark are willing, we could use ourselves as a test case, or try
to resolve the same thing we resolve naturally when Mark gets back, via
IRC, too, to test the bot. I recommend "literate programming" as being
both geek and non-geek friendly (and I like ECMAscript, squeak, Python,
and UNICODE/multilingualism as tools).
Timon: Tel=voice=+1.415.900.8233; internet every 72 hours or so, for now.
On 1/30/13 11:10 PM, Garrett Robinson wrote:
We discussed giving a Sudoroom IRC bot operator
privileges at the last
(not tonight's) weekly meeting. While just giving the bot ops
privileges only moves the problem another layer away (to whoever can
control the bot), I was thinking about programming it with behavior to
enforce community guidelines.
For example, if a user is misbehaving in the channel, other users
could priv msg the bot until a quorum is reached that allows the bot
to kick the misbehaving user.
Allowing a bot to do this using policies that we have agreed upon
(running open source code of course) would be the best solution to
this problem IMHO.
I have been working on a bot in node.js (mostly as a way to improve my
javascript) that is almost ready to be implemented in the channel. We
should compare code, see which codebase it would make sense to move
forward with, and implement this!
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Matthew Meier <wolfy(a)wlfy.it
<mailto:wolfy@wlfy.it>> wrote:
Just wanted to advertise that I had it as an option.
I didn't write any direct control into the bot thus far. But the
thing about a bot is that the community could control it. It
could, without emotion, act on the IRC policies we program it to know.
-Wolfy
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:44 PM, David Rorex <drorex(a)gmail.com
<mailto:drorex@gmail.com>> wrote:
How is the bot any better than using the built in ChanServ
features?
And don't you end up with the same problem of deciding who gets to
control the bot?
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Matthew Meier <wolfy(a)wlfy.it
<mailto:wolfy@wlfy.it>> wrote:
I've also written an IRC bot in python. super
basic that can
ops people from
a list. It works with server messages directly
too so i can
write it to
perform any other actions that would be
beneficial to our
IRC channel and
policy.
Just throwing that out there.
-Wolfy
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Matthew Senate
<mattsenate(a)gmail.com
<mailto:mattsenate@gmail.com>>
wrote:
>
> OKAY, I've added some more to the conflict resolution item
on our
agenda
> tonight: https://pad.riseup.net/p/sudoroom
>
> // Matt
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:15 PM, rachel lyra hospodar
> <rachelyra(a)gmail.com <mailto:rachelyra@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> i think this reply is dismissive and it makes me sadfaced.
>>
>> Yardena is talking about much deeper and more insidious,
and
potentially
>> divisive, issues than typos or spelling.
If you think her
concerns are
>> boring, then you could easily ignore them
and stay silent
without being
>> dismissive and rude.
>>
>> Yardena did an awesome job of facilitating meetings for 6
straight
hours
>> last week... it seems to me like anyone
who enjoyed that
experience with her
>> might take a moment to give a damn about
her concerns.
>>
>> Multiple folks have suggested it would be good to have a
clear
IRC
>> policy. That seems like a good next
step. Maybe a wiki
page, seeded with
>> Yardena's suggestion here? I am not
active on the channel
so am not sure if
>> it makes sense for me to be too involved
in that process...?
>>
>> R.
>>
>>
>> On 1/30/2013 1:07 PM, Clarence Beeks wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you know why America is awesome? We have the time and
privilege and
>>> resources to argue
>>> over replacing a "Y" with a "J".
>>>
>>> I can't wait for the next comet.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Yardena Cohen
<yardenack(a)gmail.com <mailto:yardenack@gmail.com>
>>> <mailto:yardenack@gmail.com
<mailto:yardenack@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> Apparently the Sudo folk with admin privileges to
the #sudoroom
>>> IRC channel are jealously
resistant to sharing control,
>>>
>>> > This is not the case. Jordana and Tunabananas have
operator
>>> privileges and can perform any
sort of moderation
they desire. If
>>> you have an issue with the
content of #sudoroom,
creating a new
>>> channel will not solve that
problem.
>>>
>>> I avoided replying to this right away, because I was
too
angry and
>>> creeped out over being called
"Jordana." He did this
once before in
>>> the IRC while at the same time
talking about me with
male pronouns
>>> (he/his) - he knows better, so I
took this as
targeted harassment,
>>> or
>>> at the very least disingenuous passive aggressive
participation in
>>> the
>>> trolling games that have been going on lately. He's
apologized to me
>>> in private since then but I just
want to register
that joking about
>>> hackerspace wars can be fun, but
actually gaslighting
each other is
>>> NOT fun. It can be scary,
intimidating, and seriously
compromise the
>>> accessibility and diversity of
our community.
>>>
>>> As to the substance, he's absolutely right that we
have op
>>> privileges,
>>> but this obscures a few things. For technical
background,
I
>>> encourage
>>> people to read about the difference between +F and
+o.
Your best
>>> guide
>>> will be logging onto freenode and typing: "/msg
chanserv help flags"
>>> but more general guides are
online:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRC#Modes
>>> https://freenode.net/using_the_network.shtml
>>>
>>> There've been conflicts over how to run the channel.
Namely:
>>>
>>> 1) The person with +F has used his privileges to
override
the
>>> decisions of those with only +o,
at several times
unquieting people
>>> we've quieted. The contexts
for these were admittedly
controversial
>>> and fall on ideological fault
lines over how to run
an IRC channel
>>> in
>>> general, so I agree 100% with Andrew that a clear IRC
policy is the
>>> way to go. For the record, this
has been mostly about
using
>>> oppressive
>>> slurs, and my position has been not to tolerate them
very
much. We
>>> happen to have in our community a
person who makes it
his life's
>>> work
>>> to push peoples' buttons with slurs, and happened to
be doing that
>>> IN
>>> the IRC channel. He'd also made a habit of typing
anatomical words
>>> at
>>> random times. Form your own opinions. Again, the
solution
to this
>>> may
>>> be more about having a clear policy, than who
enforces
it.
>>>
>>> 2) The person with +F has acted in bad faith. He
flooded
the channel
>>> with ascii art of an ejaculating
swastika and claimed
it was an
>>> "accident", which would
be a no-brainer kban in most
any channel.
>>> When
>>> asked to share +F with other people, his response was
to
vandalize
>>> the
>>> Sudoroom wiki to say he is the "leader" (
>>> http://sudoroom.org/wiki/Community_Structure ). In the
meantime, he
>>> shares +F with a friend of his
who hadn't been to
Sudoroom since
>>> summer 2012 and didn't even
seem to know anybody's
name. They'd also
>>> set the +S (successor) flag for a
person who is
emphatically NOT a
>>> Sudoroom member and has even
publically criticized
Sudoroom. This
>>> sent
>>> a clear message to the rest of us that we were
dealing
with people
>>> who
>>> saw us as a joke; didn't respect our community; and
that there was
>>> little we could do about it in
the short term. That
mistrust has
>>> colored all of the talk over IRC
privileges since
then, and has only
>>> escalated since these same people
came to our 1/16
meeting and made
>>> it
>>> significantly longer (by complaining about the
meeting
being long!),
>>> and also filled our meeting
agenda notes with things
like "fuck",
>>> "poop" and "this
is why you guys never hack anything".
>>>
>>> I'm not bitter or anything, just trying to bring out
some of the
>>> subtext here for those not
following why things are
happening the
>>> way
>>> they are.
>>>
>>> I think the best formulation for IRC rules that
everyone
can agree
>>> on
>>> would be something like: we want the IRC channel to
accurately
>>> reflect
>>> the atmosphere at the physical sudoroom space. To me,
that
nicely
>>> encompasses all the many
behavioral problems and
general do's and
>>> don'ts. Honestly the room
itself has rarely had the
kind of problems
>>> the channel has, because people
tend to be a lot more
decent to each
>>> other face to face, and because
it self-selects for
people who care
>>> about the community.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>>
>>>
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
>>
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss