On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 13:33:07 -0000 Máirín Duffy <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Are the #fedora OPs supposed to have jurisdiction over any #fedora-* > channels? No. The irc support sig only manages/handles/deals with 4 channels: #fedora, #fedora-ops, #fedora-social, #fedora-unregistered. Nothing else. Some people involved in the sig may have ops in other channels, but other channels have always been managed by who already has permissions in them along with spot with always can get permissions on any #fedora channel. > Because that really doesn't jibe with how we work, yet > gnokii has gotten banned from (amongst others) #fedora-meeting-* > because of a #fedora policy that I don't think should apply to other > Fedora channels. The ban isn't because of any misbehavior - it's > because he doesn't have access to an IRC proxy so he has frequent > joins/parts because the internet in his country is really unreliable. My understanding of events is: Some folks complained that he was bouncing in and out of channel and bothering their meetings. Ben (aka kk4ewt, Southern_Gentlem) is an op in #fedora-meeting and baned him with this before the ban. Jul 15 20:13:30 <kk4ewt> gnokii, when you get your network fixed let me know Then there was a bunch of (mis)communication between them. gnokii seems to think Ben is out to get him or something, but I've seen pretty much no evidence of that. In other cases where people have been (temporarily) banned for bouncing too fast they just come back and say "sorry, hopefully it's fixed, can you remove the ban" and the answer is "sure!" The ban in #fedora-meeting was then removed: Jul 16 12:08:20 * kk4ewt removes ban on $a:gnokii I don't see any meeting he missed in that less than 24 hour period. (July 15th was a friday and the 16th was saturday). > Certainly if, as a project we're interested in increasing our > diversity, we should be more understanding of those folks who stay up > until 3 AM their time and deal with awful internet service to > contribute to Fedora, and not ban them from being able to get their > jobs done! To ban someone based on the fact they come from a third > world country is problematic on multiple levels, I hope you'd agree. Sure, but if they are: a) not around b) bouncing in and out of channel rapidly it also makes meetings not so great for the people who are there. But perhaps we should ignore this if causes too much pain for the people bouncing. This case really doesn't seem to happen that often. In a rational world people would just talk and sort this out. ;( > The thing is, gnokii is a senior, extremely productive member of the > design team, and I needed him in a meeting that was held in a > #fedora-meeting channel recently and after struggling to get him in > there I came to find he had been banned by a #fedora OP. To me, this > is completely unacceptable. If this sort of thing happens you can contact any op on the #fedora-meeting channel access list: /cs access #fedora-meeting list The number of bans in that channel over the years is very small though. > Here's a proposal: > > #fedora-* channels affiliated with a team should be opped by the > admins of the corresponding FAS groups in charge of those teams. > Folks who are not active members of those teams should *not* have OP > status in those channels. I kind of thought this was how things > operated, but apparently not based on how gnokii has been banned. > Certainly, if such a ban were instituted in #fedora-design we'd have > no designers - #fedora-design is the very first IRC experience most > of the designers we recruit have ever had - they don't know anything > about nickserv, ops, join/part messages, proxys/bouncers, etc. And > they shouldn't have to! The problem here is that some teams may have no care or knowledge of irc stuff and in fact ops are used so rarely it largely doesn't matter. In these cases I think the minimal set of admin folks (myself, spot, etc) should be able to handle things. > > #fedora-meeting-* and other project-wide channels (eg the flock > channels) should be OPed by commops. There is no reason #fedora ops > should have de facto ops in those channels unless they are engaged in > the comm ops team, and sorry to say, I haven't seen any involved in > comm ops (please correct me if I'm wrong.) Sure I guess... but again infrastructure folks are already around most of the time so we are likely to be able to react faster than a specific group that may not have worldwide coverage. > #fedora - i have no idea what to do about, but let's contain the > problem and not let it spread to other parts of the project. > > Some suggestions for #fedora: > > - My suggestion here would be that if any OP has had multiple > complaints filed against them in the ticket system - there's probably > been many other CoC violations the victims didn't bother to file - > and they really should retire and recover from their burnout before > trying again. > > - Op status is *not* a status symbol, it's a responsibility, and it > seems like a lot of people wield IRC ops not due to any actual > personal responsibility but rather because they were around when the > Fedora project was in its early days and have held on to it since > then - not really a good reason to keep them. It should be more like > a relay race baton, not a certificate you hang on your wall forever. > > - A suggestion would be to offer ops to top-rated helpers on ask.fpo > and make them rotating positions as any other parts of the project > (fesco, council, famsco, etc.) are. This would also hopefully help > combat burnout by giving overwhelmed ops a e asy way to gracefully > bow out without drama or feeling like a quitter or leaving the other > opers high and dry without a replacement - just don't run for > re-election and let someone else step up. ask and irc are very different worlds and I don't know if there's really much overlap between them. Someone who can moderate a post slowly and deliberately might not be best to react to a spammer or realtime issue on irc. > We do get very positive feedback about users' interactions on ask.fpo > and use it as the main support channel we point people to on our > websites. The system has built in moderation that allows to keep > things more civil than IRC affords. Apples and oranges I think... kevin
Attachment:
pgpcb8Jr06SRW.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.
