On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Matthew Meier <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@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@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@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@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@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@lists.sudoroom.org
>>>> <mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>> sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>

_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss