Re: foundation-l (was #wikipedia)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: foundation-l (was #wikipedia)

Dan Rosenthal
Sean and Dmcdevit,

Two basic questions for you:

1): We have a problem with lack of ops right now. This is  known and  
being worked on. I know Freenode discourages leaving auto-op on, but  
given the amount of vandalism that #wikipedia gets compared to other  
channels, (for instance, on my other network, the 4 or 5 50-60 person  
channels I co-own get spammed maybe once or twice every month), why  
don't we just leave auto-ops on? It will prevent questions of "Where  
are the ops", discourage spamming, and give the channel users a  
little more peace of mind that ops are actually there. I've never  
agreed with the "no auto-ops"philosophy: I know it's supposed to  
prevent it from becoming a status symbol, but people were still  
saying "give me ops!" before the rules change anyway, and personally  
I think people consider on-project admin status a bigger "status  
symbol". Summary: Why don't we just turn auto-op on?

2): There's obviously a LOT of criticism for these changes. Yes they  
were posted in topic. It's noted that for a lot of people, they don't  
check the topic. Or in my case, their client doesn't display the  
topic or  chanserv messages. Since there are a lot of people  
dissatisfied with the change, have you considered backpedalling (even  
more than the relaxation of the off topic rules)? Or if you're not  
considering a complete reversal, some greater steps?  
Possibly.....turning auto-op on ;) ?

-Dan Rosenthal




On Jun 20, 2007, at 7:46 AM, [hidden email]  
wrote:

> So, the idea of removing ops was primarily to create the opportunity
> for ratification of the guidelines. It was realised that the last
> attempt at guidelines had failed because those who were to enforce
> them were confused: if we had created a peaceful channel with them and
> then an inactive op came back and shattered things (in good faith and
> unintentionally) it would have been all for naught. By asking ops to
> reapply we can reaffirm we're all on the same wavelength.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l