Author
|
Topic: IRC DiP (Read 1000 times) |
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.40
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
  
|
 |
IRC DiP
« on: 2003-10-08 10:40:50 » |
 |
I was reading a somehow interesting discussion in last night's IRC logs, just after the chat on the Disciplinary Process. It was personal, but at the same time civil and rational, trying to explore the issue as human behavior. It was interrupted in a somehow administrative way when a virian who was part of the subject took offence.
Since the discussion was just after our IRC chat on the Disciplinary Process (DiP), it occured to me that we shouldn't forget to include IRC in our considerations.
It so happened that when I first joined CoV last year it was a good time. All the talk was acceptably focused and rational. One of the first things that hit me as strange was something I read about IRC, namely "the foremost rule is, don't piss off the operators". I don't know much about IRC in general, but I never understood why an IRC action didn't need justification, just as any other CoV discussion.
How are difficult situation currenty resolved in IRC? There are "IRC operators" (IRCop), "Channel Operators" (SOP), and "Automatic Operators" (AOP). This constitutes a hierarchy, and some of these require certain technical skills too. From time to time, I hear about IRC rules there, asserting some authority for these kinds of operators and some countermeasures for annoying them.
The Meridion reputations could play a role there too for a temporary quick resolutions of difficult situations, although a good mechanism for that is yet to be devised. Of course, as in everything CoV stands for, rational justification for any action is still needed -- either immediately or, in case of an emergency, afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re: virus: IRC DiP
« Reply #2 on: 2003-10-08 12:06:45 » |
|
From: "rhinoceros" <rhinoceros@freemail.gr>
> I was reading a somehow interesting discussion in last night's IRC logs, just after the chat on the Disciplinary Process. It was
personal, but at the same time civil and rational, trying to explore the issue as human behavior. It was interrupted in a somehow
administrative way when a virian who was part of the subject took offence.
That unfortunate incident is now under investigation by the Sheriff and his trusty deputies.
In order to prevent escalation in the mean time, the participants are under a partial silencing,
their BBS accounts have been disabled, their op privileges on #virus have been removed, and
their messages to the list are now moderated.
Perhaps we'll discover that the whole altercation was staged to make some point about the
DisciplinaryProcess :-/
David
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.40
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #3 on: 2003-10-08 12:44:00 » |
|
[Lucifer]
That unfortunate incident is now under investigation by the Sheriff and his trusty deputies. In order to prevent escalation in the mean time, the participants are under a partial ilencing, their BBS accounts have been disabled, their op privileges on #virus have been removed, and their messages to the list are now moderated.
Perhaps we'll discover that the whole altercation was staged to make some point about the DisciplinaryProcess :-/
[rhinoceros]
Accounts disabled? I hope this investigation concludes really really fast.
Oh, and the investigation should not neglect to examine the possibility that the rhino was part of the plot (publicity department) :-/
|
|
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.40
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #4 on: 2003-10-08 19:08:24 » |
|
Clarification:
[Lucifer]
Perhaps we'll discover that the whole altercation was staged to make some point about the DisciplinaryProcess :-/
[rhinoceros]
Oh, and the investigation should not neglect to examine the possibility that the rhino was part of the plot (publicity department) :-/
[rhinoceros 2]
Since there has been some misunderstanding:
*This was a joke*
I didn't know anything more besides what I read in the chat logs about this incident, I didn't post any links to the incident, and I didn't refer to any names. Why? Because if I did, the point of my initial post (establishing rational conduct in IRC) would have been lost.
|
|
|
|
|
Ophis
Magister
Posts: 176
Reputation: 6.33
Rate Ophis
|
|
Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #5 on: 2003-10-13 11:27:58 » |
|
My only fear with the DiP is that we end-up using it too much.
I would suggest that an online community doesn't need to have immediate action taken against offenders like we might need to have in the "real world".
There are no life-threatening events here so The Council can afford to take the time to witness if a particular individual develops unwanted patterns of behavior before taking any disciplinary action (bans, suspensions, or even warnings).
For example, if I misbehave one evening on #virus and I offend someone, let that person take note of it. If I misbehave again on the next day, and the next week, then a formal complain can be sent to the Council. The Council can review these multiple offences and decide if the individual is acting in a way that is detrimental to the community or against specific community rules (no personnal attacks).
The idea is to allow people (offender, offendee, and maybe even the council members) to cool down, allow time to pass, and witness repeated offenses before taking any disciplenary action. Even something as "minor" as a 1st warning should only be used after a pattern of misbehavior has been observed.
|
|
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.40
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #6 on: 2003-10-13 15:00:44 » |
|
[Ophis]
My only fear with the DiP is that we end-up using it too much.
I would suggest that an online community doesn't need to have immediate action taken against offenders like we might need to have in the "real world".
There are no life-threatening events here so The Council can afford to take the time to witness if a particular individual develops unwanted patterns of behavior before taking any disciplinary action (bans, suspensions, or even warnings).
For example, if I misbehave one evening on #virus and I offend someone, let that person take note of it. If I misbehave again on the next day, and the next week, then a formal complain can be sent to the Council. The Council can review these multiple offences and decide if the individual is acting in a way that is detrimental to the community or against specific community rules (no personnal attacks).
[rhinoceros]
I agree. I have seen people who really fit in nicely after a "spectacular" first appearance. Well.. we are a church, of course, but not *that* kind of church. Being drunk online once in a while is relatively safe.
|
|
|
|
|
kirksteele
Anarch
Posts: 74
Reputation: 3.67
Rate kirksteele
I have never logged in.
|
|
Re: virus: Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #7 on: 2003-10-13 15:18:38 » |
|
Hi there.
Me again.
A couple of days ago, I was multi tasking with a couple of CoV windows open. One of them was with the end in mind of having a chat with Mermaid. When she poped up, I initiated a private chat window with her.
In the four or so lines that were exchanged:
First she made the assignation that she was "under surveillance."
I replied that I was waiting for her, that I "always leave a channel like this open for cases like this." (A case like this being the "spat" after last Tuesday.
Then she says that I am "harassing" her.
So I tell her I will quit the priv chat and go back to forum.
I did so.
No further attempts by me have been, nor will be made to talk with in chat until such time as she "lifts the ban."
Now. two points.
The assignations of "surveillance" and "harassment.”
1: Had I the capabilities of Lucifer, vis-ŕ-vis, a sys-op AND root owner, then there could be grounds for such a claim. As a LOGGED IN member of the CoV, whereby my presence is OPENLY declared by the system, well, this point is moot, since I don’t have those capabilities. Surveillance involves the person being surveilled not being aware of the process. Sorta invalidates it, ya know?
2: Harassment, well, …………. I approached her in a civil manner and when asked to leave, I did, and I committed no other action toward her. I left her alone. nuf sed...
Does any one in CoV have ANY instances where this course of action, this “civil regard for another” has not been followed?
Can ANY ONE point to a single instance where one member of CoV pursued another member of CoV when asked not to?
I hope not. Because that would be very uncivil, rude, self interested and hypocritical by Virian virtues were someone to act this way and then make baseless assignations of the same type against another member. And I would hate to think that anyone would form an opinion of precedent based on any such hypocrisy, let alone act on same.
So, My fellow Virians, whom do we allow to cry wolf and whom do we persecute for it? What are the exceptions in allowing such prevarication? Is gender a mitigating circumstance? Ask Zloduska if she would attempt that kind of behavior based on her genome. Is familiarity a mitigating circumstance? Ask Lucifer if he would attempt that kind of behavior based on his friendships with members. Ask any member in high standing if such prevarication is an allowable behavior. I hope it is not.
Kirk Steele
(in real life and in forum)
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
attached: index.html
|
"Howdy pawdna. Yeee-freakin-haw!! We got us another good ole boy in da White Wash"
-just shoot me
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.87
Rate simul
I am a lama.
 
|
|
Re: virus: Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #8 on: 2003-10-14 10:04:47 » |
|
Why not just have an anonymous nomination, quorum and voting system for booting people? I don't think it would be terribly difficult to come up with a system that we all could agree on.
-----Original Message-----
From: "rhinoceros" <rhinoceros@freemail.gr>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:00:45
To:virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: Re:IRC DiP
[Ophis]
My only fear with the DiP is that we end-up using it too much.
I would suggest that an online community doesn't need to have immediate action taken against offenders like we might need to have in the "real world".
There are no life-threatening events here so The Council can afford to take the time to witness if a particular individual develops unwanted patterns of behavior before taking any disciplinary action (bans, suspensions, or even warnings).
For example, if I misbehave one evening on #virus and I offend someone, let that person take note of it. If I misbehave again on the next day, and the next week, then a formal complain can be sent to the Council. The Council can review these multiple offences and decide if the individual is acting in a way that is detrimental to the community or against specific community rules (no personnal attacks).
[rhinoceros]
I agree. I have seen people who really fit in nicely after a "spectacular" first appearance. Well.. we are a church, of course, but not *that* kind of church. Being drunk online once in a while is relatively safe.
----
This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS.
<http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29476>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
kirksteele
Anarch
Posts: 74
Reputation: 3.67
Rate kirksteele
I have never logged in.
|
|
Re: virus: Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #9 on: 2003-10-14 17:24:43 » |
|
It already exists, Meridion.
Wiki is source. Read Wiki. Think Wiki. Talk Wiki.
Kirk
Erik Aronesty <erik@zoneedit.com> wrote:
Why not just have an anonymous nomination, quorum and voting system for booting people? I don't think it would be terribly difficult to come up with a system that we all could agree on.
-----Original Message-----
From: "rhinoceros"
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:00:45
To:virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: Re:IRC DiP
[Ophis]
My only fear with the DiP is that we end-up using it too much.
I would suggest that an online community doesn't need to have immediate action taken against offenders like we might need to have in the "real world".
There are no life-threatening events here so The Council can afford to take the time to witness if a particular individual develops unwanted patterns of behavior before taking any disciplinary action (bans, suspensions, or even warnings).
For example, if I misbehave one evening on #virus and I offend someone, let that person take note of it. If I misbehave again on the next day, and the next week, then a formal complain can be sent to the Council. The Council can review these multiple offences and decide if the individual is acting in a way that is detrimental to the community or against specific community rules (no personnal attacks).
[rhinoceros]
I agree. I have seen people who really fit in nicely after a "spectacular" first appearance. Well.. we are a church, of course, but not *that* kind of church. Being drunk online once in a while is relatively safe.
----
This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
attached: index.html
|
"Howdy pawdna. Yeee-freakin-haw!! We got us another good ole boy in da White Wash"
-just shoot me
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.40
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:IRC DiP
« Reply #10 on: 2003-10-14 17:43:03 » |
|
[Erik]
Why not just have an anonymous nomination, quorum and voting system for booting people? I don't think it would be terribly difficult to come up with a system that we all could agree on.
[rhinoceros]
A system that we all could agree on? You'd be surprised... :-/
Heh.. booting people is the least of our concerns now. In theory it could be done. Have you checked the quorum and voting systems we have now? The worst rating ever is held by someone who has received twelve '1's (1 = "must be banned") out of 44 votes. As a matter of fact, speaking out a problem and dealing with arguments is part of what CoV is about. We could still have a problem with the inveterate deaf, though.
There is already a vote running about whether the ratings should be secret or visible, and a quite big majority seems to think that they should be all visible. If it remains so, it will probably be implemented by Lucifer soon.
Should everyone be able to see all the ratings in the reputation system?
http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=;action=voteResults;idvote=13
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
