16:00:05 <nirik> #startmeeting IRC Support SIG (2010-06-03)
16:00:05 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Jun  3 16:00:05 2010 UTC.  The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:05 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:05 <nirik> #meetingname irc-support-sig
16:00:05 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'irc-support-sig'
16:00:05 <nirik> #topic init process
16:00:15 <nirik> who all is around for an irc support sig meeting?
16:00:34 * zcat 
16:01:29 * Southern_Gentlem 
16:02:45 * nirik will wait a few more for more folks to wander in.
16:04:34 <nirik> ok, we have a few things on the agenda today, so I guess we should start in...
16:04:51 <nirik> #topic Week in review
16:05:08 <nirik> first the typical week in review...
16:05:10 <nirik> http://fedora.theglaserfamily.org/ircstats/fedora-weekly.html
16:05:37 <nirik> The nss-softokn stuff has been all too common...
16:05:43 <nirik> hopefully that will be fixed very soon.
16:06:41 <nirik> ok, if nothing else... moving on.
16:07:02 * dcr226 here
16:07:07 <nirik> #topic fedora-social guidelines
16:07:20 <nirik> There were some questions last week about #fedora-social and it's guidelines...
16:07:40 <nirik> I made an initial FAQ like we are using for the main channel now: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Social_Channel_FAQ
16:07:57 <nirik> thats my understanding of the channel, but we may want to adjust or modify that stance.
16:08:02 <nirik> or ask social folks for input.
16:08:47 <Southern_Gentlem> looks good
16:08:50 <nirik> any thoughts or comments on that?
16:08:56 <dcr226> Heh. bacon
16:09:02 <plarsen> nirik, would writing the actual channel name on that guide help?
16:09:05 <mock> bacon?
16:09:14 <mock> looks like i got here just in time
16:09:23 <nirik> plarsen: where?
16:09:23 <Southern_Gentlem> mock,  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Social_Channel_FAQ you see anything wrong with that as far as -social is concerned
16:09:38 * nirik isn't sure how mediawiki treats #'s
16:09:40 <mock> looking...
16:09:48 <plarsen> nirik, like the title: #fedora-social FAQ instead of "Fedora Social Channel FAQ" ?
16:10:38 <mock> might a specification be put in for vim/emacs and gnome/kde wars?  maybe in the religion/politics section?
16:10:52 <mock> or are those allowed in there, as long as they kept civilized?
16:10:55 <nirik> plarsen: I don't think you can put #'s in titles.
16:11:08 <nirik> I can look into it tho.
16:11:12 <stickster> nirik: Good idea, that page
16:11:16 <Southern_Gentlem> mock you are more a person to tell us that
16:11:19 <zcat> +1 to "try" to avoid religion/politics. :)
16:11:26 <mock> Southern_Gentlem: :)
16:11:38 <nirik> thanks. I think we need to make sure people know what to expect...
16:11:50 * stickster notes that standard Freenode guidelines still say, zero tolerance for racial or religious slurs or any other discrimination.
16:11:51 <dcr226> probably s/fedora-social/#fedora-social <- my only comment
16:11:53 * mock knows he loves a good friendly gnome/kde rumble with others occasionally ;)
16:12:17 <Southern_Gentlem> nirik,  i posted a link to it in -social and asked for feedback thus the influx of new nicks
16:12:24 <nirik> ah, cool.
16:12:32 <stickster> Fedora enjoys the support of the Freenode staff and therefore we will observe the rules of their highway too.
16:12:41 <nirik> well, I would say perhaps we gather feedback over the next week or so and see if it looks good next week?
16:13:10 <Southern_Gentlem> i will add it to the social topic
16:13:32 <nirik> stickster: indeed. The link in the above points to that freenode guideline.
16:13:35 * mock is glad for the spotlight on bacon in that faq
16:14:32 <nirik> any other comments on it? Or should we gather feedback and see next week? or do we think it's ok as is?
16:15:53 <Southern_Gentlem> next week give the users of the channel time for feedback
16:16:00 <mock> Southern_Gentlem +1
16:16:08 <Southern_Gentlem> and to be here next meeting
16:16:20 <nirik> ok, sounds good to me.
16:16:40 <nirik> #topic greivance process
16:16:59 <nirik> So, we have had a pretty informal process for people to notify us of issues/bad behavior.
16:17:19 <nirik> Consisting of letting us know in #fedora-ops and/or mailing the alias the various ops are on.
16:17:28 <nirik> Do we need a more formal process?
16:17:46 <zcat> nein
16:17:48 <plarsen> nirik, I thought !ops nick issue was also active?
16:17:56 <Sonar_Guy> nirik: maybe we need to document our informal process on our wiki page
16:17:57 <Southern_Gentlem> i really dont think so
16:18:11 <nirik> plarsen: nope... there's not bot avenue.
16:18:11 <Southern_Gentlem> that would work
16:19:05 <nirik> well, there are drawbacks to our current setup... but honestly it doesn't get used much.
16:19:17 <Southern_Gentlem> add to the wiki page to inform us in #fedora-ops
16:19:30 <plarsen> nirik, is that because it's not known how to, or because people don't need it?
16:19:45 <nirik> plarsen: good question. Perhaps some of both.
16:19:57 <dcr226> ummm, I think you might get a recursive problem letting everyone know the existence of -ops fwiw
16:20:01 <Southern_Gentlem> usually there is an op person in the channel that handles it fairly quickly
16:20:34 <dcr226> wiki page with the nick's of ops for the various channels, otherwise you (imo) will get a flood of non-ops in -ops
16:20:35 <Southern_Gentlem> but i am sure there are times we are busy with other stuff
16:21:01 <dcr226> "popped in to complain, stuck around to watch"
16:21:07 <Southern_Gentlem> dcr226,  or give the /cs access list command
16:21:30 <nirik> I think freenode has a policy of not discussing klines on network at all... only email.
16:21:44 <dcr226> personally, I think -ops should be the only channel that has an acl, but thats imo
16:21:57 * dcr226 sees the hypocracy
16:22:18 <nirik> well, at the very least we should document the current policy...
16:22:28 <nirik> but I think we might be able to adjust it so it works better.
16:22:30 <dcr226> nirik, +1, and a contact strategy
16:22:52 <dcr226> Southern_Gentlem, that works
16:23:01 <nirik> honestly I think email would be better for talking to folks who had been banned than letting them go into ops and rant
16:23:25 <nirik> for noting problems, email is slower... so might not catch a bad activity when it's happening.
16:23:39 <Southern_Gentlem> exactly
16:23:51 * dcr226 /cs acces list wfm
16:24:14 <nirik> well, the problem with access list is that someone will just pick someone out...
16:24:14 <dcr226> that way, you find an active op - when its needed
16:24:25 <nirik> they may be gone, not active, not able to look, etc.
16:24:57 <nirik> and then also the issue goes to private message most likely, which means only the person and the op can see it.
16:24:59 <mock> what is -ops normally used for, other than raising complaints?
16:25:03 * nirik would prefer things to be transparent.
16:25:08 <mock> ops meetings?
16:25:11 <dcr226> nirik, how about an alisa - which ping's ops? @complain for example
16:25:16 <plarsen> It's been my experience that coming in after the fact rarely is helpful. If there's an ongoing issue, it's important to be able to call in an active op to "referree"
16:25:29 * dcr226 gah my spelling sucks today
16:25:46 <nirik> mock: discussion of channel activity, ops from some channels letting others know about problem users, etc
16:26:09 <nirik> plarsen: +1
16:26:16 <mock> nirik: so, is ops the best place for normal users to bring matters up?  what about another channel for it?
16:26:26 <nirik> dcr226: I would fear it would get misused... and/or doesn't have a way to know who's active. ;)
16:26:37 <mock> #fedora-customer-service
16:26:59 <mock> #fedora-support-customer-service
16:27:01 <dcr226> nirik, yeah, but if it announces in -ops, then thats as good as visiting ops, without the inherant danger maybe?
16:27:03 <nirik> mock: well, we could do that, but it has all the same disadvantages, IMHO.
16:27:12 <mock> if they take the time to type it out, their complaint would be worth listening to
16:27:54 <nirik> yeah, we definitely want to hear issues... even if we can only learn from them after the fact.
16:28:23 <mock> i was just thinking of keeping ops for ops and not for not public
16:28:34 <dcr226> example : - pm the bot, complain blah blah blah - announces in -ops as to the complaint
16:28:38 <dcr226> mock, +1
16:28:48 <mock> but i fear i know not enough about ops procedures to really talk about that smartly
16:28:54 <plarsen> dcr226, that's what I thought was already the case ;)
16:28:56 <nirik> I can see if there is a way to do that... I don't know off hand.
16:29:10 <dcr226> plarsen, it wont be if its location is advertised on the wiki
16:29:42 * dcr226 is a -ops occupying hypocrit
16:29:44 <nirik> well, it's already mentioned on the wiki...
16:29:51 <dcr226> oh, ok then :)
16:30:02 <nirik> but our policiies around it are not noted anywhere I know of.
16:30:30 <nirik> So, I guess I need a Fedora_Ops_FAQ ? (whee... we can put them all in a fedora-irc-channels category)
16:31:25 <nirik> ok, I can look at documenting and we can all brainstorm ways to do things better in this.
16:31:51 <nirik> any other thoughts on this before we move on?
16:32:23 <nirik> ok, moving along.
16:32:26 <nirik> #topic irc-support-operators group questions
16:32:43 <nirik> I orig setup the irc-support-operators fedora group to contain people who were ops in #fedora.
16:32:59 <nirik> Over time I added a few more active ops in other #fedora-* channels.
16:33:19 <nirik> Do we want to keep this group to just #fedora ops? or any #fedora-* or does it even matter?
16:33:42 <nirik> the only way this enters into things is that it's an alias people can send complaints to and get to all the folks in the group.
16:34:56 <nirik> we could just setup a proper mailing list for people interested in irc support, but then complaints to there might be a bad idea as it would be public and have public archives, etc.
16:35:54 * zcat is more content to just be a low-level grunt op in #fedora. this admin stuff makes me all dilbert-y
16:36:15 <mock> heh
16:36:15 <nirik> so, any thoughts there? or does it all tie into any changes in the process?
16:36:22 <nirik> zcat: agreed. Can't we all get along? :)
16:36:31 <zcat> +1000 on just getting along
16:36:37 <plarsen> nirik, it's been my experience that mailing lists are very bad at handling "ad-hoc" situations
16:36:52 <plarsen> nirik, why not have two ops channels? A public and a private?
16:37:07 <dcr226> that gets wiggy
16:37:18 <nirik> I think that would just add to confusion...
16:37:24 <Southern_Gentlem> plarsen,  most of us are in TOOOO many channels as is
16:37:31 <fenris02> erm, i'm in plenty of channels already
16:37:33 <plarsen> Southern_Gentlem, tell me about it :(
16:37:57 <plarsen> Well, if you want a dialog with the person that is having issues, you really don't have many options then?
16:38:04 <dcr226> nirik, cant @say #fedora-ops be squished into an alias @{something}?
16:38:07 <Southern_Gentlem> if need be we can always set -ops to invite only and kick everyone else out
16:38:13 <nirik> plarsen: right.
16:38:31 <nirik> well, we could make ops invite only... then invite anyone who wished to note an issue...
16:38:39 <plarsen> Personally, I call "ops" when there's a situation at hand like flooding that needs to be dealt with immediately. Anything else I would most likely just pm an op about
16:38:53 <mock> #fedora-waiting-room
16:39:05 <mock> take complaints there ^^
16:39:05 <nirik> dcr226: nope... say requires you to have privs on the bot... ;(
16:39:14 <plarsen> So a bot or similar to call attention to a situation would suffice.
16:39:15 <fenris02> Southern_Gentlem, imho, that will only make matters worse / more combative
16:39:26 <nirik> but yeah, we could possibly do an alias...
16:39:36 <dcr226> nirik, another bot? specifically for the purpose?
16:39:41 <Southern_Gentlem> fenris02, i said if need be
16:40:01 <nirik> dcr226: I think I could make an alias that lets someone ping something in ops... if we decide thats usefull.
16:40:14 <dcr226> I think that works fwiw
16:41:16 <dcr226> makes for a simple procedure on the faq/wiki
16:41:17 <nirik> so, really we just need a documentable way to let people notify us of issues that are currently happening/urgent...
16:41:37 <nirik> and another procedure (email ?) for non currently happening/less urgent issues.
16:42:01 <mock> #fedora-parents
16:42:09 <mock> "i'm telling..."
16:42:13 <dcr226> "@911 no-one will help with my $other_os kernel re-build"
16:42:33 <nirik> ok, I can look at cooking up a bot alias.
16:42:54 <mock> nirik: @judge
16:42:55 <plarsen> nirik, yup - I think it should be that "simple"
16:43:07 <nirik> Now, after the complaint/issue is noted... how do we act on it? Currently it's just a rough consensus...
16:43:07 <mock> or @judge_n_jury
16:43:23 <dcr226> nirik, use the fight alias ;-)
16:43:33 <mock> lol
16:43:39 <nirik> there was mention of some kind of panel/council who would review issues. Do we want something like that?
16:43:41 * mock almost spit his water out
16:44:09 <plarsen> wow - what kind of issues demand that kind of bureaucracy ?
16:44:15 <mock> nirik: i would think the matter, once raised, would be noted in -ops?
16:44:15 <fenris02> nirik, to repeat, a panel of *uninvolved* parties to mom the -ops
16:44:39 <fenris02> nirik, if that happens, you can kiss any amount of order good bye
16:44:59 * nirik was just bringing up the idea. ;)
16:45:02 <Southern_Gentlem> nirik i think thats  what this meeting is for
16:45:09 <fenris02> afterall, who is left to mother them?
16:45:35 <nirik> well, the problem with this meeting is that it's logged and public... and people may not want to drag specific issues out to the public...
16:45:45 <fenris02> email then
16:46:03 <fenris02> email has the advantage of attaching logfiles if they so desiren
16:46:07 <dcr226> why not, if the problem is _that_ bad, go by vote on active ops in -ops at that time - surely they will be best placed to judge?
16:46:13 * dcr226 braces for impact
16:46:17 <plarsen> Aren't we talking about two different things? OP actions in the channel and "policy" issues about what should be allowed?
16:46:18 <Southern_Gentlem> and what type of issue gets regulated to that
16:46:51 <nirik> plarsen: yeah, theres a number of things here... I was talking about complaints specifically.
16:47:42 <Southern_Gentlem> i would hate to think anytime an op did anything in the channel we had to go through all of this
16:47:56 <plarsen> nirik, Policy/rules talk is a completely different animal. An op to me is "all powerful" in channel. And when he puts his hat on, and say jump - you jump or find another channel.
16:48:08 <dcr226> plarsen, +1
16:48:10 <plarsen> nirik, that should be the way it is.
16:48:18 <dcr226> ops are nominated with good reason
16:48:40 <nirik> ok, so. I will document our current setup, try and get a bot command to note issues to ops, and we can revisit next week and see if we can improve anything.
16:49:16 <nirik> anything else we need to do now? any further thoughts before we move on?
16:49:23 <Southern_Gentlem> move on
16:50:02 <nirik> #topic Open Floor
16:50:10 <nirik> ok, thats all I had. Any issues for open floor?
16:51:11 <Southern_Gentlem> we have 2 indivuals i want to nominate for limited bot use in #fedora for 30 days as Trail ops
16:51:31 <Southern_Gentlem> plarsen and dcr226
16:52:25 * nirik would be ok just nominating them as ops personally.
16:52:26 <fenris02> what would 'Trial ops' include?
16:53:12 <zless> +1
16:53:13 <plarsen> Thanks Southern_Gentlem. What does that entail?
16:53:26 <Southern_Gentlem> fenris02,  give us time to evaluate them and see if they will be good ops
16:53:44 <fenris02> Southern_Gentlem, sure, i mean is that a bot-op, or a +o ?
16:53:45 <nirik> plarsen: the bot is opped there, so you can kick/ban/change topic, etc... via the bot.
16:53:49 <Southern_Gentlem> but i will say we go nirik way as well
16:54:02 <plarsen> nirik, ohhhhhh
16:54:11 * dcr226 is happy with probation - and to be notminated, thanks
16:54:41 <Southern_Gentlem> but we said a while back that all new ops would be bot ops on a trail basis before coming +o ops
16:55:05 <fenris02> +2, in this case - one for each
16:55:05 <Sonar_Gal> I was going to bring up a problem in Social of not having ops in there or ops that won't kick people.  EvilBob Has things going on and hasn't been online much gwerra has things going on and I am sorry he will not kick people.
16:55:08 <nirik> plarsen / dcr226: so our procedure here is that some op nominates you and the pool of existing ops vote...
16:55:31 <nirik> Sonar_Gal: did you see the draft faq?
16:55:31 * dcr226 nods
16:55:41 <plarsen> Southern_Gentlem, not a problem. I have no problems with being "evaluated". I've spend a lot of time on IRC avoiding being an OP though ;)
16:55:41 <fenris02> Sonar_Gal, afaik, -social has no additional rules beyond the freenode ones
16:55:42 <nirik> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Social_Channel_FAQ
16:56:06 <nirik> If someone breaks those rules, I would be happy to clear them out...
16:56:17 <zless> Sonar_Gal, if you're talking about a certain "hacker dood", he hasn't hit my kick threshhold - sorry
16:56:39 <Sonar_Gal> ok
16:56:44 <Sonar_Gal> Thanks
16:57:06 <Southern_Gentlem> nirik,  i know how to solve this problem in social as well
16:57:29 <Southern_Gentlem> lets let the lady really swing the frying pan
16:57:35 <dcr226> Southern_Gentlem, +1
16:57:39 <fenris02> +1
16:58:03 * dcr226 thinks thats a great excuse for @pan alias
16:58:04 <Southern_Gentlem> Sonar_Gal,  you want +o in social or just bot op
16:58:21 <kc8hfi> i haven't read the faq yet for -social, but maybe we should nominate Sonar_gal as an op there,
16:58:24 <mock> dcr226 +1
16:58:38 <nirik> sure... thats ok with me. I'm sure she would go a fine job.
16:58:38 <Sonar_Gal> Southern_Gentlem, No I am fine.  I said last week if it couldn't get resolved I would not stay in that channel
16:58:48 <Sonar_Guy> Southern_Gentlem: +1
16:59:13 <nirik> Sonar_Gal: feel free to ping me or ops when/if an issue comes up... (until I get a pesky '@shiny-red-button' alias for the bot)
16:59:29 <Southern_Gentlem> +1 +o for Sonar_Gal in -social
16:59:30 * dcr226 thinks Sonar_Gal would do a great job
16:59:59 <Sonar_Guy> Southern_Gentlem: +1
17:00:17 <dcr226> I've only ever seen you make well placed comments about bad conduct Sonar_Gal
17:00:34 <dcr226> fwiw
17:00:56 * mock has full confidence in Sonar_Gal to wield the frying pan effectively
17:01:24 <Sonar_Gal> dcr226, I normally don't have an issue.  Only twice have I asked for someone to be kicked since the day that channel started
17:02:01 <dcr226> Sonar_Gal, I saw 1 occassion that you are referring to, and I think you were justified totally
17:02:22 <nirik> well, sounds like if you want ops there it's yours Sonar_Gal. ;) Otherwise we can try harder to police if there are issues.
17:03:11 <nirik> Anyone have any additional issues to bring up?
17:03:14 <Sonar_Gal> nirik, like I said I have only had a few issues in there most of the time it's fine in there
17:04:35 <dcr226> Sonar_Gal, no harm in +o then ;-)
17:05:00 <mock> Sonar_Gal: c'mon, everyone's doing it!  </peer_pressure>
17:05:06 <Sonar_Gal> dcr226, nirik That's fine
17:05:16 * dcr226 yeeeeeeyy
17:06:48 <nirik> ok, will close out the meeting in a minute here if nothing else comes up.
17:07:06 * mock holds his breath...
17:07:37 * mock turns blue...
17:07:40 <nirik> thanks for coming everyone
17:07:43 <nirik> #endmeeting