Comments on: Change in #defocus policy – and what do you think? http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/ Trying to prove we are human, too Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:40:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Nick http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-360890 Nick Fri, 04 Jun 2010 09:22:49 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-360890 This blog is probably long dead, but I anyway felt the need to say something, especially after reading all the comments and taking time to think about it. In theory, the idea of stopping trolls with such a policy is good, but practically, it still has its drawbacks. I know that the new bot "urd" appears to voice regulars as soon as they join, which is great. The problem is, there's still those new users which we get many of everyday, as the network grows. That, and those who don't frequently visit #defocus, still face a problem. In my honest opinion, the best way to deal with trolling is with standard mutes, as it has been with most channels for how long, as well as it is in #freenode today 9which appears to be doing fine). I understand that harsher punishments go against what freenode stands for, but lets face it, harsher punishments don't cause inconvenience to everyone else like a whole chan mute does. Besides, if someone has a deliberate intention to troll, commit personal attacks or other offenses against a channel's policy, is there a reason a harsher punishment should be avoided for that? We need to look at both sides of rule breaking: deliberate and ambiguous. There's no reason the former can't just earn a normal mute or ban. If a troll really wants to troll, they will usually just wait for voice, unless they have to wait for hours on end. In that case, the inconvenience for users with good faith still remains. To sum this up, Freenode is a large public network, you remove or add one factor, you're still going to have problems. In #Defocus's case, for anyone upon getting voice, #Defocus is a typical channel with a large number of users, with free access, no less. No matter what policy you have, you're bound to get idiots regardless. This blog is probably long dead, but I anyway felt the need to say something, especially after reading all the comments and taking time to think about it. In theory, the idea of stopping trolls with such a policy is good, but practically, it still has its drawbacks. I know that the new bot “urd” appears to voice regulars as soon as they join, which is great. The problem is, there’s still those new users which we get many of everyday, as the network grows. That, and those who don’t frequently visit #defocus, still face a problem. In my honest opinion, the best way to deal with trolling is with standard mutes, as it has been with most channels for how long, as well as it is in #freenode today 9which appears to be doing fine). I understand that harsher punishments go against what freenode stands for, but lets face it, harsher punishments don’t cause inconvenience to everyone else like a whole chan mute does. Besides, if someone has a deliberate intention to troll, commit personal attacks or other offenses against a channel’s policy, is there a reason a harsher punishment should be avoided for that? We need to look at both sides of rule breaking: deliberate and ambiguous. There’s no reason the former can’t just earn a normal mute or ban. If a troll really wants to troll, they will usually just wait for voice, unless they have to wait for hours on end. In that case, the inconvenience for users with good faith still remains.

To sum this up, Freenode is a large public network, you remove or add one factor, you’re still going to have problems. In #Defocus’s case, for anyone upon getting voice, #Defocus is a typical channel with a large number of users, with free access, no less. No matter what policy you have, you’re bound to get idiots regardless.

]]> By: david a lawson http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-346853 david a lawson Sat, 24 Apr 2010 11:35:19 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-346853 the voicing is coming faster and more consistent. I just think it had to come up to snuff. I think it is great the voicing is coming faster and more consistent. I just think it had to come up to snuff. I think it is great

]]> By: temhawk http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-324593 temhawk Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:06:56 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-324593 please voice me, thanks please voice me, thanks

]]> By: foxxyboy http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-299063 foxxyboy Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:08:08 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-299063 What about people who use starbucks for their internet conn.? I only get 2 free hours of internet, and i'm not wasting them waiting to be voiced. A change is needed asap What about people who use starbucks for their internet conn.? I only get 2 free hours of internet, and i’m not wasting them waiting to be voiced. A change is needed asap

]]> By: ivan http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-274481 ivan Sat, 01 Aug 2009 12:58:16 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-274481 .. as an addendum to my previous comment .. Apparently, the devoice wasn't permanent (I just did get voiced).. So maybe I was a bit too pessimistic about freenode... We'll see.. --Ivan .. as an addendum to my previous comment ..

Apparently, the devoice wasn’t permanent (I just did get voiced).. So maybe I was a bit too pessimistic about freenode…

We’ll see..

–Ivan

]]> By: ivan http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-274478 ivan Sat, 01 Aug 2009 12:55:34 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-274478 It's got worse than that now.. I was a gold supporter for 2 years.. I also came to freenode to support a OSI approved project with which I am involved. #defocus was the channel where I was expecting to find like minded people. To wind down after a hard day's work or after having spent hours on end the intricate workings of the project. And for a couple years, that's what it was... But recently, I got what seems to be a permanent devoice because of a *single* statement I made - which to me appeared completely benign - but which appeared to be completely out of line for a staffer (yes.. not your overheated/overworked channel OP.. a *staffer*). No warning.. no consideration for the 10 commandments published at http://freenode.net/channel_guidelines.shtml. No ill intent on my part(#1), no looking for the best in people from the person in charge(#2), no setting of a good example (#3), etc, etc... (that is, if the staffer in question would have told me I was out of line, and asked me to discontinue, I would have obliged (cf #1) - even if I would disagree.. but .. *NO* auto devoice (#2?, #3?).. no warning,). As a consequence, I have stopped using freenode as a support channel (or rather, I have stopped providing support on it). In an environment where even *staff* cannot hold to the values brought forth by the charter, I totally lost confidence in freenode as a media to I only log in once in a while to ensure my nick doesn't get pre-empted.. Of couse, I am only 1 in 50K+ users.. but there may be others who are feeling the same.. And I am afraid this marks the beginning of the end of freenode as a medium to support Free/Open Source projects... Such a waste.. --Ivan It’s got worse than that now..

I was a gold supporter for 2 years.. I also came to freenode to support a OSI approved project with which I am involved.

#defocus was the channel where I was expecting to find like minded people. To wind down after a hard day’s work or after having spent hours on end the intricate workings of the project. And for a couple years, that’s what it was…

But recently, I got what seems to be a permanent devoice because of a *single* statement I made – which to me appeared completely benign – but which appeared to be completely out of line for a staffer (yes.. not your overheated/overworked channel OP.. a *staffer*). No warning.. no consideration for the 10 commandments published at http://freenode.net/channel_guidelines.shtml. No ill intent on my part(#1), no looking for the best in people from the person in charge(#2), no setting of a good example (#3), etc, etc… (that is, if the staffer in question would have told me I was out of line, and asked me to discontinue, I would have obliged (cf #1) – even if I would disagree.. but .. *NO* auto devoice (#2?, #3?).. no warning,).

As a consequence, I have stopped using freenode as a support channel (or rather, I have stopped providing support on it). In an environment where even *staff* cannot hold to the values brought forth by the charter, I totally lost confidence in freenode as a media to

I only log in once in a while to ensure my nick doesn’t get pre-empted..

Of couse, I am only 1 in 50K+ users.. but there may be others who are feeling the same.. And I am afraid this marks the beginning of the end of freenode as a medium to support Free/Open Source projects…

Such a waste..

–Ivan

]]> By: Brandon Ros http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-259826 Brandon Ros Sat, 13 Jun 2009 03:41:49 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-259826 I think this is a bad system. Typically, I have always been voiced quickly, but it is 11:40PM and I have been waiting for over an our. I see attempts at blocking spam as unwise unless they are all or none. Either let everything be free, or block everything. Since it is impossible to block everything, let it be a regular channel, and if somebody trolls or spams, ban them. In my opinion, you are hurting the users who want to ask quick questions more than you are preventing spam. I think this is a bad system. Typically, I have always been voiced quickly, but it is 11:40PM and I have been waiting for over an our.
I see attempts at blocking spam as unwise unless they are all or none. Either let everything be free, or block everything. Since it is impossible to block everything, let it be a regular channel, and if somebody trolls or spams, ban them.
In my opinion, you are hurting the users who want to ask quick questions more than you are preventing spam.

]]> By: Ryan http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-254264 Ryan Sat, 30 May 2009 07:06:35 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-254264 The fact that this was posted in September and got a huge response but has no follow-up comments from staff is very sad. It's like joining in a chatroom and being unable to participate -- why let users post comments if you're unwilling or unable to engage in a two-way conversation? Ryan The fact that this was posted in September and got a huge response but has no follow-up comments from staff is very sad. It’s like joining in a chatroom and being unable to participate — why let users post comments if you’re unwilling or unable to engage in a two-way conversation?

Ryan

]]> By: onlyabit http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-241472 onlyabit Sat, 02 May 2009 06:55:03 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-241472 :) :)

]]> By: electrostatic http://blog.freenode.net/2008/09/change-in-defocus-policy-and-what-do-you-think/comment-page-2/#comment-229145 electrostatic Mon, 06 Apr 2009 21:11:45 +0000 http://blog.freenode.net/?p=87#comment-229145 I really think a bot might help in this situation.. Seriously, if someone is identified and using a nick that has been registered for several years, and is not on a ban list, is there any conceivable reason not to voice them? I really think a bot might help in this situation.. Seriously, if someone is identified and using a nick that has been registered for several years, and is not on a ban list, is there any conceivable reason not to voice them?

]]>