On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Ian Jackson <[email protected]> wrote: > Sune Vuorela writes ("Re: GR proposal: code of conduct"): >> Much of irc are semiprivate chatter and socializing and not really >> something that should be available to the wider public. > > I don't think this is realistic for channels which anyone in the world > can join. There are no doubt many people who have private logs and > there would be nothing stopping anyone making such a log public > without our consent. If we objected we would have to engage in > ridiculous and easily-defeated forensics (and perhaps disruptive > interventions) to try to discover who the "leaker" was. > > Is it really the case that making the logs available as public text > files produces too much search engine exposure etc. (which is I guess > the real concern) ? > > Ian.
I think we might be overthinking IRC bans. In my mind, IRC bans aren't a big deal, as even a faultily configured IRC client can (rightfully) trigger these bans. It's also fairly obvious to others in the channel why bans are instituted. Also, since IRC bans don't trigger a project-wide ban from mailing lists, bugtracker, etc, I don't believe we really have to worry about instituting new IRC based tracking processes. IE: IRC is a sometimes flaky, informal transient/dynamic communications medium, if it breaks or someone is banned for having a faulty client, they can always fall back to email or other more formal communications methods.. Thanks, Brian P.S. - I sidestepped the question about publicly logging IRC channels as I have mixed feelings on the topic, and don't feel it's required to agree to the CoC and implement it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cacfairypzwf2ggqy+gp4mk-tlvbywav3ej_e_3r4t8wasta...@mail.gmail.com
