9:19 p.m.
Hello!
Over the last hours, a few people joined the #gnuassembly Freenode IRC
channel, mostly people hostile to the Assembly.
I “kicked” someone who insulted and threatened us, since it’s a clear
code of conduct violation; they came back later, this time using softer
words, but always rehashing their opposition to what we were doing,
questioning the code of conduct even after being told it’s not up for
discussion, and so forth. Other newcomers contribute to that.
At this point, the few of us who’ve been around are outnumbered and
chatting with people evidently not interested in joining the Assembly.
This is unsustainable. If we want an IRC channel that remains useful to
us, I think we may have to make it “invitation-only” so that only
Assembly participants can join, at least the coming days/weeks.
Mark W., is this feasible? WDYT? (I think you’re the one with Ultimate
Power over the channel; we should update ‘roles.md’.)
It would still be good to be able to answer questions from outsiders,
but currently we’re just too few on IRC to handle it, I’m afraid.
Thoughts?
Ludo’.
9:46 p.m.
Ludo', Mark,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
I think we may have to make it “invitation-only”
Mark W., is this feasible?
Technically: absolutely, but you probably knew that.
WDYT?
I hope we can have both but I know that's mightily optimistic of
me.
(I think you’re the one with Ultimate
Power over the channel; we should update ‘roles.md’.)
Speaking of which: is it possible to dole out some more ChanServ
FLAGS to the current and future ops?
I find classic lacking to effectively moderate a channel: you can
kick people but they'll know it was you (that sounds great and
transparent until you're actually banning aggressive trolls) and
that's it.
We can't ask ChanServ to do so anonymously, set bans (/mode +b),
or add people to ChanServ's AKICK list, because we're missing
flags from
/msg ChanServ flags #gnuassembly
mjw +AFORefiorstv
civodul +AOiotv
Even civodul wasn't able to ban people, but I was too distracted
to ask exactly what happened and if/how they were opped
(sorry...).
On #guix, I gave up trying to deduce the magic minimal combination
of flags (IME it's *not* as documented), and just gave everyone
/msg ChanServ flags #guix nckx +ARefiorstv
It works for us.
Kind regards,
T G-R
11:03 p.m.
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 11:46:54PM +0200, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> I think we may have to make it “invitation-only”
> Mark W., is this feasible?
Technically: absolutely, but you probably knew that.
So to be honest, no, we were really a bit clueless.
> WDYT?
I hope we can have both but I know that's mightily optimistic of me.
> (I think you’re the one with Ultimate
> Power over the channel; we should update ‘roles.md’.)
Speaking of which: is it possible to dole out some more ChanServ FLAGS to
the current and future ops?
So, we forgot about the irc channel. It was just something some of use
hang out during the last year. But it would probably be good if we
said it was an official part of the GNU Assembly. But that does mean
our code of conduct applies there and we should be prepared to enforce
it to make sure the channel is as friendly as this mailinglist is.
Given that nobody else really has much clue about irc, channels,
modes, etc. I propose that we make Tobias (irc nick nckx) our Ultimate
IRC overlord for now (to be added to roles.md?) who can help others
technically with the channel/irc and who other groups consult if there
ever is any issue there. Like all other roles we'll have to figure out
how to "appoint" his successor and/or extend the irc technical team
when necessary.
BTW. I think I agree that it might be good to make the channel invite
only for the first couple of weeks if the discussions are just people
who don't want to join the GNU Assembly shouting. But we can see how
it goes. We can also simply close the channel if it doesn't provide
any value to the GNU Assembly. My worry is that we don't have enough
people to hang out in the channel to keep it relevant, if not and the
channel simply becomes a place where trolls hang out to harass others,
it would be better to not have it.
Cheers,
Mark
1:42 p.m.
Hi Mark,
Mark Wielaard <mjw(a)gnu.org> skribis:
So, we forgot about the irc channel. It was just something some of
use
hang out during the last year. But it would probably be good if we
said it was an official part of the GNU Assembly. But that does mean
our code of conduct applies there and we should be prepared to enforce
it to make sure the channel is as friendly as this mailinglist is.
I agree with Carlos and others: the code of conduct should apply to all
the communication channels of the Assembly, and #gnuassembly has become
one of the Assembly’s channel (even though that’s a bit unplanned).
I agree we should try hard to keep the channel open so we can welcome
those who want to learn more about what we’re doing. We should just
make sure this doesn’t come at the cost of moderator burnout and/or an
unwelcoming atmosphere on the channel.
Ludo’.
10:02 p.m.
Hi Ludo,
I didn’t see your message when I drafted mine, but I’ve come to
the same conclusion as you have.
This is unsustainable. If we want an IRC channel that remains
useful to
us, I think we may have to make it “invitation-only” so that
only
Assembly participants can join, at least the coming days/weeks.
Mark W., is this feasible? WDYT? (I think you’re the one with
Ultimate
Power over the channel; we should update ‘roles.md’.)
It would still be good to be able to answer questions from
outsiders,
but currently we’re just too few on IRC to handle it, I’m
afraid.
I agree that for the time being we should restrict discussion on
#gnuassembly until a time when we can be confident that enough of
us are present to adequately handle the many genuine questions
that undoubtedly will be raised, but also to ensure that
discussions on this channel are not merely dominated by
non-members expressing their disagreement with us, drowning out
any other conversations that could be had there.
--
Ricardo
12:06 a.m.
Hi,
Together with mjw I've made the (now auto-)op setup a tad more
robust.
lfam, rekado, and me can now request ops from ChanServ whenever
needed, and drop them again when not:
/msg ChanServ OP #gnuassembly NICK
/do thething
/msg ChanServ DEOP #gnuassembly NICK
Freenode recommends this workflow of not ‘flashing your badge’ in
daily conversation, and so do I. It's what we do on #guix.
You won't lose op when you disconnect.
These 3 are simply who was opped at the time. 4 others (mjw,
civodul, codonnel, and wingo) were already registered and remain
so.
I still hope we can avoid making the channel invite-only. Despite
my misgivings, here's the command for that:
/msg Chanserv set mlock #gnuassembly +i
This will restrict the channel to mjw, civodul, codonell, wingo,
nckx, rekado, and lfam: those with the +i flag in
/query ChanServ flags #gnuassembly
Others can be whitelisted by adding them to the +I list:
/mode #gnuassembly +I MASK
where MASK is the *!*@* you're either familiar with or need to
look up yourself ;-) Don't match only on nicknames (nick!*@*) as
they are easily spoofed.
Setting the /mode back to -I removes all invite restrictions and
makes the channel public once more.
Kind regards,
T G-R
5:35 p.m.
In the interest of transparency, I banned a user from the channel last
night. This person had insulted us multiple times, despite being warned
to communicate in a respectful way. I also received private complaints
about them from other people in the channel.
6:36 p.m.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 1:35 PM Leo Famulari <leo(a)famulari.name> wrote:
In the interest of transparency, I banned a user from the channel last
night. This person had insulted us multiple times, despite being warned
to communicate in a respectful way. I also received private complaints
about them from other people in the channel.
I agree we need strong moderation exactly in line with the community
CoC and the Social Contract.
I support banning individuals that show a flagrant disregard for
creating an inclusive harassment-free IRC channel.
Attempting to keep the channel open is a noble goal we should strive
to maintain. I'm happy to help any way I can.
New people will want to join and discuss issues. Therefore I would be hesitant
Cheers,
Carlos.
8:05 p.m.
I'm not going to be able to help here because after decades I still don't have
impedance match with IRC's connection model so I finally stopped using it.
But one thing comes to mind when you talk about:
I support banning individuals that show a flagrant disregard for
creating an inclusive harassment-free IRC channel.
Have you heard of something called "shadowbanning"? The lichess.org author
discusses this - his s/w and his moderators find the incorrigible trollers.
If you disable their accounts they just rejoin, so what they do is leave them in the chat
rooms, but their postings can only be seen by other shadowbanned people.
I wonder if IRC can be configured for that.
9:33 p.m.
Mark Galassi writes:
I wonder if IRC can be configured for that.
Not without notifying everyone (including the subject) of the
action, which rather defeats the point.
There's no technical reason that an IRC server couldn't implement
it, but Freenode explicitly won't:
https://freenode.net/news/shadowban-fix
Kind regards,
T G-R
7:45 p.m.
Hi again,
When you use the ‘normal’ /kick and /mode +b commands, this is
what the entire channel sees:
* sjw sets ban on *!*@fsf/member/LousyFruit
* sjw has kicked LousyFruit from #chan (LousyFruit)
That's the last thing LousyFruit sees before they are kicked.
Guess who they're going to PM all their love?
Instead, use
/msg ChanServ AKICK #chan ADD *!*@fsf/member/Lousyfruit
[optional reason]
which prints
* ChanServ sets ban on *!*@fsf/member/Noisytoot
There are other, minor, technical reasons to prefer the latter.
For example when Freenode reboots, +b bans are lost. The AKICK
list is forever, and displays ban reasons (if any) and age.
/query ChanServ AKICK #chan LIST
I highly recommend reading
/query ChanServ HELP COMMANDS
if you're interested in upping your op game.
Kind regards,
T G-R
4:14 a.m.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 09:45:06PM +0200, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
if you're interested in upping your op game.
Thanks for the tips.
Personally, I have to step back from the channel a bit. It's too
stressful for me to moderate it. Maybe it will get better, or maybe we
should be more proactive, making it members-only or something like that.
1:38 p.m.
Hi!
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me(a)tobias.gr> skribis:
Freenode recommends this workflow of not ‘flashing your badge’ in
daily conversation, and so do I. It's what we do on #guix.
Speaking of which, I automatically get op when I join #gnuassembly.
What should I do so I’m noop (ah ha!) by default?
Thanks,
Ludo’.
PS: And thanks Tobias for explaining things over and over to IRC newbies
like me. :-)
10:38 p.m.
New subject: [EXT] Moderation of the IRC channel
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 5:19 PM Ludovic Courtès <ludo(a)gnu.org> wrote:
Hello!
Over the last hours, a few people joined the #gnuassembly Freenode IRC
channel, mostly people hostile to the Assembly.
I “kicked” someone who insulted and threatened us, since it’s a clear
code of conduct violation; they came back later, this time using softer
words, but always rehashing their opposition to what we were doing,
questioning the code of conduct even after being told it’s not up for
discussion, and so forth. Other newcomers contribute to that.
At this point, the few of us who’ve been around are outnumbered and
chatting with people evidently not interested in joining the Assembly.
This is unsustainable. If we want an IRC channel that remains useful to
us, I think we may have to make it “invitation-only” so that only
Assembly participants can join, at least the coming days/weeks.
+1 seems fine for now.
Mark W., is this feasible? WDYT? (I think you’re the one with
Ultimate
Power over the channel; we should update ‘roles.md’.)
It would still be good to be able to answer questions from outsiders,
but currently we’re just too few on IRC to handle it, I’m afraid.
I didn't know about the channel, but now that I do I could join and if
an extra moderator is needed I can help. I'm not on IRC all the time
but when I am I can check in as time allows.
- Dave
1316
days inactive
1318
days old
13 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Carlos O'Donell -
Leo Famulari -
Ludovic Courtès -
Mark Galassi -
Mark Wielaard -
Ricardo Wurmus -
Thompson, David -
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice