[Foundation-l] Status of cloak requests

Dan Rosenthal swatjester at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 23:40:32 UTC 2008

On Feb 26, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Casey Brown wrote:

> Why is this a problem for you?  People only have to be ops in channels
> who *want* to be and are willing to use the commands.  I don't think
> you are an op in any channels, so this shouldn't be a problem for you.

I'm in op in several channels. This is a problem for me. I may be  
criticized for inactivity, but the only reason for my inactivity as an  
op is because Freenode, as a network has a convoluted system that is  
far more difficult for ops than it needs to be.
> I'm going to respond to numerous comments in this thread in one bulk
> e-mail (not necessarily everything is directed at you).
> freenode has its guidelines for a reason and they normally work well.

Do they? I beg to differ. We're continually troubled with drama users  
who get banned and unbanned quickly, and we coddle them with a  
"catalyzing" policy that does not work, and does not allow ops to do  
what they are supposed to do.

> The networks that you are talking about where ops are *always* opped,
> don't have channel services and the only way to keep control of their
> channels is to remain opped at all times.  This is not a problem on
> freenode, we have channel services (ChanServ for that).

Incorrect I don't know where to begin. On the server where I  
maintained my channels,  we had full chanserv and nickserv abilities,  
and yet every single channel keeps their ops always opped. On the  
other major networks that I use from time to time, they all have  
channel services, and yet ops always stay opped. It's not about  
"control of the channels". It's because there is no reason not to.  
There is no reason to force users to go through a silly "op/ban/deop"  
procedure, when they could just remain opped the whole time. Please  
don't assume that Freenode is doing things correctly, when in fact it  
is backwards.

> The list of ops can be viewed by doing /msg chanserv access #channel
> list and you can contact someone on the list by /msg'ing *or* by
> visiting the #wikimedia-ops IRC channel.  freenode also requests that
> users are not opped at all times because it turns down the heat in
> channels and makes everyone equals.  However, it *is* technically
> possible for chanserv to op you whenever you enter a channel and allow
> you to remain opped in it (/msg chanserv help level), but #wikimedia
> channels don't do that for reasons outlined above.

So.....you would rather go through an extensive chanserv command, or  
send people to a separate channel than allow users to easily see who  
the ops are visually?

How does having an @ in front of one's name "turn down the heat" in  
channels and "make people equals"? That's a ridiculous policy, as the  
rest of the internet has realized. What heat is generated by me  
staying opped? Does having an @ in front of my name mean that people  
automatically hate me? Can you see how flaccid that argument is? If  
you can easily look at who the ops are anyway, what is the point of  
hiding their status?
> On the subject of clients, please do not use the fact that your client
> does not work properly as a reason for why we should change networks.
> There are *many* clients to choose from:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_IRC_clients> and even a
> few that work well for macs.

I'm not using the fact that my client does not work properly as a  
reason to change networks, because it is not my client that is working  
improperly, it is the server that is working improperly. My client  
works fine on every other server I have ever used, except Freenode.  
Furthermore, please do not lecture me on the choice of IRC clients for  
Mac. There are few stable ones, some of which share engines (and thus  
problems), and none (I repeat) *none* are designed to be op-friendly  
using Freenode's server configuration. I'm far from an IRC neophyte  
Casey, you do not need to treat me like one.

> If you a question about customizing a specific client, try visiting
> its IRC channel.  For example, there's one at #colloquy on freenode.

*crickets* Suggesting channels that have no activity is a generally  
poor help.

We can argue the merits of Freenode all day long, until one of the  
list moderators yells at us for being off-topic, but that does not  
change the simple fact that there is dissatisfaction with freenode  
from people other than myself, and that it would not be difficult to  
host an IRC on Wikimedia servers, there are some tangible benefits to  
doing so, and very few adequate reasons not to, none of which  
immediately come to mind.


> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Dan Rosenthal  
> <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I use colloquy on a mac. To op and de op, etc. I have to remember and
>> type out the exact /msg chanserv op #channel (or whatever it is),
>> because none of the mac IRC clients have good compatibility with
>> freenode's services. Other networks have simple commands like !up  
>> and !
>> down. They also allow tools like /onotice, which works like the  
>> normal
>> notice command, except it only goes to people who have the op flag
>> turned on, allowing them to discuss op things within a channel, and
>> non-ops won't see.
>> It's a continual source of frustration for me to have to fight  
>> against
>> IRC to get it to work the way it should, when other networks are so
>> easy. If we had a Wikimedia IRC network (that was using normal style
>> IRC commands, not freenode's strange ones), it'd make being an op so
>> much easier, and that would have a net effect on the enjoyment of the
>> channel users too.
>> John if you know of a way that I can simplify the op/ban/deop  
>> process,
>> that will work in colloquoy on a Mac, I'm open to suggestion.
>> -dan
>> On Feb 26, 2008, at 4:58 PM, John Reaves wrote:
>>> Well most of our bans are just zombie proxies, or whatever they're
>>> called,
>>> so there's no real need for a long ban.  Persistent trouble makers
>>> have
>>> longer expiries or are added to the autorem.  It takes what,  
>>> maybe .5
>>> seconds to type your /cs op shortcut?  I for one can just click a
>>> nick and
>>> op/remove/ban/deop in one fell swoop.  Discussing operator issues in
>>> channel
>>> just invites drama.  I don't know what /onnotice is but it sounds
>>> useful.
>>> --John Reaves
>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Dan Rosenthal
>>> <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Actually, freenode is the only network I know that does that. For  
>>>> the
>>>> same reasons you view a network setup with perma-ops and long  
>>>> bans as
>>>> stupid, I view Freenode's setup that invites drama, and attacks and
>>>> hinders ops, as stupid. Every other IRC network I've been on, from
>>>> big
>>>> ones of the EFnet/Undernet type, to smaller ones, the ops are  
>>>> always
>>>> opped so they are a) easily identifiable and we don't need a  
>>>> special
>>>> channel just to present issues to them; b) able to receive the
>>>> benefit
>>>> of commands like /onotice, c) much faster to react to !kb a user  
>>>> (all
>>>> an opped user needs to do is type !kb name, or right click ,  
>>>> kickban,
>>>> rather than /msg chanserv for ops, kick the user, deop self), d) It
>>>> shows to flooder types that there are ops in that channel,
>>>> discouraging attacks. For much the same reason, bans last for  
>>>> periods
>>>> of a few weeks unless specifically overturned, rather than banning
>>>> people and then allowing them back in a few days later to cause  
>>>> more
>>>> trouble.
>>>> On Feb 26, 2008, at 3:37 PM, John Reaves wrote:
>>>>> Catalyzing is bit lame some times, I'll give you that.  But being
>>>>> opped all
>>>>> of the time and keeping bans for longer than a few days for people
>>>>> without a
>>>>> history of abuse is just plain stupid and I would assume any IRC
>>>>> network set
>>>>> up by WMF wouldn't allow it either.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
>>>> foundation-l
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>> foundation-l
> -- 
> Casey Brown
> Cbrown1023
> ---
> Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal  
> emails sent to
> this address will probably get lost.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list