Status of cloak requests

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
38 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Status of cloak requests

Sean Whitton (Xyrael)
Hey all,

I keep seeing lines in my away log complaining about me being lazy and
not setting IRC cloaks, and about people offering their assistance (in
response to kinder notes of me just being busy). I thought I would
clear the situation up. I am on wikibreak at present for most of my
roles but I am still completely dedicated to being our most active IRC
Group Contact (James is also active, but less so) and so this is not
the issue. The reason why no cloaks are being set at present is
different.

Essentially, James and I are trying to redo our paperwork with
freenode to make sure that we are allowed to set the cloaks we do and
also to add new namespaces by popular request, such as wikiversity/
cloaks. The freenode head of staff is the person responsible for
sorting this paperwork with us and unfortunately she has been
indisposed due to injury for some weeks now. This means that we have
been unable to do what we need to do and as a result cloaks are just
sitting in the request system. However, as soon as things are sorted
out *I will set every cloak (assuming it meets the requirements) in
the system in one fell swoop!*

Please be patient and considerate while these problems are sorted out.
Rest assured there is no laziness involved!

Thanks,

[[m:User:Sean Whitton]]
[[m:IRC Group Contacts|Wikimedia IRC Group Contact]]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Majorly
On 25/02/2008, Sean Whitton <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hey all,
>
> I keep seeing lines in my away log complaining about me being lazy and
> not setting IRC cloaks, and about people offering their assistance (in
> response to kinder notes of me just being busy). I thought I would
> clear the situation up. I am on wikibreak at present for most of my
> roles but I am still completely dedicated to being our most active IRC
> Group Contact (James is also active, but less so) and so this is not
> the issue. The reason why no cloaks are being set at present is
> different.
>
> Essentially, James and I are trying to redo our paperwork with
> freenode to make sure that we are allowed to set the cloaks we do and
> also to add new namespaces by popular request, such as wikiversity/
> cloaks. The freenode head of staff is the person responsible for
> sorting this paperwork with us and unfortunately she has been
> indisposed due to injury for some weeks now. This means that we have
> been unable to do what we need to do and as a result cloaks are just
> sitting in the request system. However, as soon as things are sorted
> out *I will set every cloak (assuming it meets the requirements) in
> the system in one fell swoop!*
>
> Please be patient and considerate while these problems are sorted out.
> Rest assured there is no laziness involved!
>
> Thanks,
>
> [[m:User:Sean Whitton]]
> [[m:IRC Group Contacts|Wikimedia IRC Group Contact]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

Sean, it isn't that you are lazy - far from it. It's the fact you and James
are probably two of the least active people on IRC/Wikipedia. James has been
absent for nearly a month now, your status is nearly always set to away (as
is his), and while we appreciate you are busy in real life, this is stuff
that needs doing. There are plenty of people trustworthy enough for this
role. In the past, we've had more than two contacts (Essjay, Fennec, Angela,
da_didi were all at the same time if I recall). What's the problem with
adding an additional person (or more), who will actually get the work done
well and without big delays?

--
Alex (Majorly)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Andrew Whitworth-2
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  Sean, it isn't that you are lazy - far from it. It's the fact you and James
>  are probably two of the least active people on IRC/Wikipedia. James has been
>  absent for nearly a month now, your status is nearly always set to away (as
>  is his), and while we appreciate you are busy in real life, this is stuff
>  that needs doing. There are plenty of people trustworthy enough for this
>  role. In the past, we've had more than two contacts (Essjay, Fennec, Angela,
>  da_didi were all at the same time if I recall). What's the problem with
>  adding an additional person (or more), who will actually get the work done
>  well and without big delays?

If the problem lies with the people at freenode, then it doesnt matter
how active either of these two people are. For what it's worth, when I
asked for my cloak a little while back, it was handled in a very
timely fashion. That says to me that these two volunteers are actually
very speedy, when there are no impediments.

I would be interested in volunteering to be a group contact as well,
if more were needed.

--Andrew Whitworth

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Majorly
On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >  Sean, it isn't that you are lazy - far from it. It's the fact you and
> James
> >  are probably two of the least active people on IRC/Wikipedia. James has
> been
> >  absent for nearly a month now, your status is nearly always set to away
> (as
> >  is his), and while we appreciate you are busy in real life, this is
> stuff
> >  that needs doing. There are plenty of people trustworthy enough for
> this
> >  role. In the past, we've had more than two contacts (Essjay, Fennec,
> Angela,
> >  da_didi were all at the same time if I recall). What's the problem with
> >  adding an additional person (or more), who will actually get the work
> done
> >  well and without big delays?
>
>
> If the problem lies with the people at freenode, then it doesnt matter
> how active either of these two people are. For what it's worth, when I
> asked for my cloak a little while back, it was handled in a very
> timely fashion. That says to me that these two volunteers are actually
> very speedy, when there are no impediments.
>
> I would be interested in volunteering to be a group contact as well,
> if more were needed.
>
>
> --Andrew Whitworth
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

Perhaps this time it is not our contacts' problem, and it is freenode. But
Sean even says in his original post... he is on a Wikibreak, and is busy in
real life. This problem comes up time and time again. Sean insists the
problem is under control. But I don't believe it is.

--
Alex (Majorly)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Majorly
On 25/02/2008, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Perhaps this time it is not our contacts' problem, and it is freenode. But
> Sean even says in his original post... he is on a Wikibreak, and is busy in
> real life. This problem comes up time and time again. Sean insists the
> problem is under control. But I don't believe it is.


And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them took a while, and
I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite smoothly. Other people
have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why we can't appoint
an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC and on a
Wikibreak.

--
Alex (Majorly)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Andrew Whitworth-2
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them took a while, and
>  I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite smoothly. Other people
>  have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why we can't appoint
>  an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC and on a
>  Wikibreak.

That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
especially if those additional contacts can make a more-persistent
online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people would
be willing to volunteer for it as well.

Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?

--Andrew Whitworth

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Majorly
On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >  And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them took a
> while, and
> >  I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite smoothly. Other
> people
> >  have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why we can't
> appoint
> >  an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC and on a
> >  Wikibreak.
>
>
> That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
> especially if those additional contacts can make a more-persistent
> online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people would
> be willing to volunteer for it as well.
>
> Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?
>
>
> --Andrew Whitworth
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

Andrew, I think the only person who we can talk to is Sean. As I said this
has been brought up in the past. Somewhere in this list's archives. Sean
simply said no more were needed, and he was handling it. I have a feeling he
will say the same again.

--
Alex (Majorly)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Sean Whitton (Xyrael)
Majorly,

I have the feeling you are ignoring me :)

The issue is that freenode are unable to sort us out thus we can make
no progress. If freenode were more available, I could set all the
cloaks in the queue. But this is totally beyond our control, and this
is why I ask for your patience.

Setting cloaks does not take long for me and I can definately do it.

Thanks,

Sean

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  >
>
>
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > >  And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them took a
>  > while, and
>  > >  I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite smoothly. Other
>  > people
>  > >  have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why we can't
>  > appoint
>  > >  an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC and on a
>  > >  Wikibreak.
>  >
>  >
>  > That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
>  > especially if those additional contacts can make a more-persistent
>  > online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people would
>  > be willing to volunteer for it as well.
>  >
>  > Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?
>  >
>  >
>  > --Andrew Whitworth
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > foundation-l mailing list
>  > [hidden email]
>  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >
>
>  Andrew, I think the only person who we can talk to is Sean. As I said this
>  has been brought up in the past. Somewhere in this list's archives. Sean
>  simply said no more were needed, and he was handling it. I have a feeling he
>  will say the same again.
>
>
>  --
>  Alex (Majorly)
>
>  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
>  _______________________________________________
>
>
> foundation-l mailing list
>  [hidden email]
>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
I am becoming concerned by this situation. Someone, from the Office if
necessary, should contact Freenode at a high level and have them
prioritize this matter. Because IP's can be easily harvested when
people go into the IRC channels uncloaked, this is a user privacy
issue and needs to be resolved at the earliest possible time.

Newyorkbrad

On 2/26/08, Sean Whitton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Majorly,
>
> I have the feeling you are ignoring me :)
>
> The issue is that freenode are unable to sort us out thus we can make
> no progress. If freenode were more available, I could set all the
> cloaks in the queue. But this is totally beyond our control, and this
> is why I ask for your patience.
>
> Setting cloaks does not take long for me and I can definately do it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sean
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >  >
> >
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >  > >  And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them took a
> >  > while, and
> >  > >  I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite smoothly. Other
> >  > people
> >  > >  have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why we can't
> >  > appoint
> >  > >  an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC and on a
> >  > >  Wikibreak.
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
> >  > especially if those additional contacts can make a more-persistent
> >  > online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people would
> >  > be willing to volunteer for it as well.
> >  >
> >  > Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > --Andrew Whitworth
> >  >
> >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > [hidden email]
> >  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  >
> >
> >  Andrew, I think the only person who we can talk to is Sean. As I said
> this
> >  has been brought up in the past. Somewhere in this list's archives. Sean
> >  simply said no more were needed, and he was handling it. I have a feeling
> he
> >  will say the same again.
> >
> >
> >  --
> >  Alex (Majorly)
> >
> >  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
> >  _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > foundation-l mailing list
> >  [hidden email]
> >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Michael Bimmler
I think the position of the foundation was and it that it does not
want to get officially involved with IRC (nota: the Group Contacts
were not appointed by the foundation, they act as representatives [or
benevolent dictators...] of the Wikimedia IRC community).

Thus, I presume the office won't want to make an official request to
Freenode, the only people who could do this are James and Sean.

Further, As Sean is also a Freenode staffer, I trust that he knows
what is going on and what we can expect of Freenode at the moment and
what not. I doubt whether any official request would speed matters
up...

Michael

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am becoming concerned by this situation. Someone, from the Office if
>  necessary, should contact Freenode at a high level and have them
>  prioritize this matter. Because IP's can be easily harvested when
>  people go into the IRC channels uncloaked, this is a user privacy
>  issue and needs to be resolved at the earliest possible time.
>
>  Newyorkbrad
>
>
>
>  On 2/26/08, Sean Whitton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > Majorly,
>  >
>  > I have the feeling you are ignoring me :)
>  >
>  > The issue is that freenode are unable to sort us out thus we can make
>  > no progress. If freenode were more available, I could set all the
>  > cloaks in the queue. But this is totally beyond our control, and this
>  > is why I ask for your patience.
>  >
>  > Setting cloaks does not take long for me and I can definately do it.
>  >
>  > Thanks,
>  >
>  > Sean
>  >
>  > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > > On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > >  >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]>
>  > wrote:
>  > >  > >  And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them took a
>  > >  > while, and
>  > >  > >  I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite smoothly. Other
>  > >  > people
>  > >  > >  have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why we can't
>  > >  > appoint
>  > >  > >  an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC and on a
>  > >  > >  Wikibreak.
>  > >  >
>  > >  >
>  > >  > That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
>  > >  > especially if those additional contacts can make a more-persistent
>  > >  > online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people would
>  > >  > be willing to volunteer for it as well.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?
>  > >  >
>  > >  >
>  > >  > --Andrew Whitworth
>  > >  >
>  > >  > _______________________________________________
>  > >  > foundation-l mailing list
>  > >  > [hidden email]
>  > >  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  > >  >
>  > >
>  > >  Andrew, I think the only person who we can talk to is Sean. As I said
>  > this
>  > >  has been brought up in the past. Somewhere in this list's archives. Sean
>  > >  simply said no more were needed, and he was handling it. I have a feeling
>  > he
>  > >  will say the same again.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >  --
>  > >  Alex (Majorly)
>  > >
>  > >  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
>  > >  _______________________________________________
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > foundation-l mailing list
>  > >  [hidden email]
>  > >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  > >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > foundation-l mailing list
>  > [hidden email]
>  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  foundation-l mailing list
>  [hidden email]
>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Effe iets anders
In reply to this post by Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
<quote> The freenode head of staff is the person responsible for
sorting this paperwork with us and unfortunately she has been
indisposed due to injury for some weeks now. </quote>

I doubt there is much to prioritize if you are injured and unable to
work. Nor do I think there is much of a "higher level" in Freenode as
Head of Staff (although I immediately admit that I am not that into
their working structure). We can either complain now, or just wait,
both will generate probably the same result, except that the first
brings sad and ugly faces, and the second doesn't.

BR, Eia

2008/2/26, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <[hidden email]>:

> I am becoming concerned by this situation. Someone, from the Office if
>  necessary, should contact Freenode at a high level and have them
>  prioritize this matter. Because IP's can be easily harvested when
>  people go into the IRC channels uncloaked, this is a user privacy
>  issue and needs to be resolved at the earliest possible time.
>
>
>  Newyorkbrad
>
>
>  On 2/26/08, Sean Whitton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > Majorly,
>  >
>  > I have the feeling you are ignoring me :)
>  >
>  > The issue is that freenode are unable to sort us out thus we can make
>  > no progress. If freenode were more available, I could set all the
>  > cloaks in the queue. But this is totally beyond our control, and this
>  > is why I ask for your patience.
>  >
>  > Setting cloaks does not take long for me and I can definately do it.
>  >
>  > Thanks,
>  >
>  > Sean
>  >
>  > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > > On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > >  >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]>
>  > wrote:
>  > >  > >  And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them took a
>  > >  > while, and
>  > >  > >  I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite smoothly. Other
>  > >  > people
>  > >  > >  have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why we can't
>  > >  > appoint
>  > >  > >  an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC and on a
>  > >  > >  Wikibreak.
>  > >  >
>  > >  >
>  > >  > That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
>  > >  > especially if those additional contacts can make a more-persistent
>  > >  > online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people would
>  > >  > be willing to volunteer for it as well.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?
>  > >  >
>  > >  >
>  > >  > --Andrew Whitworth
>  > >  >
>  > >  > _______________________________________________
>  > >  > foundation-l mailing list
>  > >  > [hidden email]
>  > >  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  > >  >
>  > >
>  > >  Andrew, I think the only person who we can talk to is Sean. As I said
>  > this
>  > >  has been brought up in the past. Somewhere in this list's archives. Sean
>  > >  simply said no more were needed, and he was handling it. I have a feeling
>  > he
>  > >  will say the same again.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >  --
>  > >  Alex (Majorly)
>  > >
>  > >  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
>  > >  _______________________________________________
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > foundation-l mailing list
>  > >  [hidden email]
>  > >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  > >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > foundation-l mailing list
>  > [hidden email]
>  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  foundation-l mailing list
>  [hidden email]
>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Adam Brookes
Whilst I appreciate the circumstances, it suprises me that one person being
injured brings the whole process of requesting cloaks to a grinding halt. If
this problem is with Freenode then perhaps it should be asked, why do we use
Freenode rather than another network or indeed our own official unofficial
IRC network. It seems as if there is an additional layer of burecracy that
could be removed by doing this ourselves. I'm sure we could find both the
hardware and the people to manage such a network and it would of course
offer us more control on other issues. Is there any particular reason why
the Foundation doesn't want to get invovled with IRC?

Regards,

Adambro

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:22 PM, effe iets anders <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> <quote> The freenode head of staff is the person responsible for
> sorting this paperwork with us and unfortunately she has been
> indisposed due to injury for some weeks now. </quote>
>
> I doubt there is much to prioritize if you are injured and unable to
> work. Nor do I think there is much of a "higher level" in Freenode as
> Head of Staff (although I immediately admit that I am not that into
> their working structure). We can either complain now, or just wait,
> both will generate probably the same result, except that the first
> brings sad and ugly faces, and the second doesn't.
>
> BR, Eia
>
> 2008/2/26, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <[hidden email]>:
>  > I am becoming concerned by this situation. Someone, from the Office if
> >  necessary, should contact Freenode at a high level and have them
> >  prioritize this matter. Because IP's can be easily harvested when
> >  people go into the IRC channels uncloaked, this is a user privacy
> >  issue and needs to be resolved at the earliest possible time.
> >
> >
> >  Newyorkbrad
> >
> >
> >  On 2/26/08, Sean Whitton <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >  > Majorly,
> >  >
> >  > I have the feeling you are ignoring me :)
> >  >
> >  > The issue is that freenode are unable to sort us out thus we can make
> >  > no progress. If freenode were more available, I could set all the
> >  > cloaks in the queue. But this is totally beyond our control, and this
> >  > is why I ask for your patience.
> >  >
> >  > Setting cloaks does not take long for me and I can definately do it.
> >  >
> >  > Thanks,
> >  >
> >  > Sean
> >  >
> >  > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >  > > On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >  > >  >
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]
> >
> >  > wrote:
> >  > >  > >  And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them
> took a
> >  > >  > while, and
> >  > >  > >  I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite
> smoothly. Other
> >  > >  > people
> >  > >  > >  have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why
> we can't
> >  > >  > appoint
> >  > >  > >  an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC
> and on a
> >  > >  > >  Wikibreak.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
> >  > >  > especially if those additional contacts can make a
> more-persistent
> >  > >  > online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people
> would
> >  > >  > be willing to volunteer for it as well.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > --Andrew Whitworth
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > >  > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > >  > [hidden email]
> >  > >  > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  > >  >
> >  > >
> >  > >  Andrew, I think the only person who we can talk to is Sean. As I
> said
> >  > this
> >  > >  has been brought up in the past. Somewhere in this list's
> archives. Sean
> >  > >  simply said no more were needed, and he was handling it. I have a
> feeling
> >  > he
> >  > >  will say the same again.
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >  --
> >  > >  Alex (Majorly)
> >  > >
> >  > >  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
> >  > >  _______________________________________________
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > >  [hidden email]
> >  > >  Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  > >
> >  >
> >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > [hidden email]
> >  > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  >
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  foundation-l mailing list
> >  [hidden email]
> >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Dan Rosenthal
A question that has been raised for some time. Freenode has issues  
beyond just the IRC cloaks.  Why aren't we having an  
irc.wikimedia.org?  There's really no good reason beyond "that's just  
the way it is."
-dan


On Feb 26, 2008, at 8:03 AM, Adam Brookes wrote:

> Whilst I appreciate the circumstances, it suprises me that one  
> person being
> injured brings the whole process of requesting cloaks to a grinding  
> halt. If
> this problem is with Freenode then perhaps it should be asked, why  
> do we use
> Freenode rather than another network or indeed our own official  
> unofficial
> IRC network. It seems as if there is an additional layer of  
> burecracy that
> could be removed by doing this ourselves. I'm sure we could find  
> both the
> hardware and the people to manage such a network and it would of  
> course
> offer us more control on other issues. Is there any particular  
> reason why
> the Foundation doesn't want to get invovled with IRC?
>
> Regards,
>
> Adambro
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:22 PM, effe iets anders <[hidden email]
> >
> wrote:
>
>> <quote> The freenode head of staff is the person responsible for
>> sorting this paperwork with us and unfortunately she has been
>> indisposed due to injury for some weeks now. </quote>
>>
>> I doubt there is much to prioritize if you are injured and unable to
>> work. Nor do I think there is much of a "higher level" in Freenode as
>> Head of Staff (although I immediately admit that I am not that into
>> their working structure). We can either complain now, or just wait,
>> both will generate probably the same result, except that the first
>> brings sad and ugly faces, and the second doesn't.
>>
>> BR, Eia
>>
>> 2008/2/26, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <[hidden email]>:
>>> I am becoming concerned by this situation. Someone, from the  
>>> Office if
>>> necessary, should contact Freenode at a high level and have them
>>> prioritize this matter. Because IP's can be easily harvested when
>>> people go into the IRC channels uncloaked, this is a user privacy
>>> issue and needs to be resolved at the earliest possible time.
>>>
>>>
>>> Newyorkbrad
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/26/08, Sean Whitton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Majorly,
>>>>
>>>> I have the feeling you are ignoring me :)
>>>>
>>>> The issue is that freenode are unable to sort us out thus we can  
>>>> make
>>>> no progress. If freenode were more available, I could set all the
>>>> cloaks in the queue. But this is totally beyond our control, and  
>>>> this
>>>> is why I ask for your patience.
>>>>
>>>> Setting cloaks does not take long for me and I can definately do  
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Sean
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>>> On 25/02/2008, Andrew Whitworth <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Majorly <[hidden email]
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> And in addition, I've had three cloaks before. One of them
>> took a
>>>>>> while, and
>>>>>>> I had to resend it, but overall they were done quite
>> smoothly. Other
>>>>>> people
>>>>>>> have not had such a good experience. Still, I don't see why
>> we can't
>>>>>> appoint
>>>>>>> an additional contact(s) who isn't almost always afk on IRC
>> and on a
>>>>>>> Wikibreak.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's fine, I don't see a problem with having more contacts,
>>>>>> especially if those additional contacts can make a
>> more-persistent
>>>>>> online presence. I've volunteered for it, I'm sure other people
>> would
>>>>>> be willing to volunteer for it as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who do we need to talk to about volunteering for this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Andrew Whitworth
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew, I think the only person who we can talk to is Sean. As I
>> said
>>>> this
>>>>> has been brought up in the past. Somewhere in this list's
>> archives. Sean
>>>>> simply said no more were needed, and he was handling it. I have a
>> feeling
>>>> he
>>>>> will say the same again.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alex (Majorly)
>>>>>
>>>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>> foundation-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Paul Williams-13
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Dan Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:

> A question that has been raised for some time. Freenode has issues
> beyond just the IRC cloaks.  Why aren't we having an
> irc.wikimedia.org?  There's really no good reason beyond "that's just
> the way it is."
> -dan
>

I have considerable experience in running IRC servers and networks. They
aren't particularly resource intensive - and the customisation facilities
are massive if you have backend access.

Just give me a shout if you need anything regarding this and i'd be more
than willing to help out.

~ Paul
~ [[n:User:Skenmy]]
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

David Gerard-2
On 26/02/2008, Paul Williams <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Dan Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > A question that has been raised for some time. Freenode has issues
> > beyond just the IRC cloaks.  Why aren't we having an
> > irc.wikimedia.org?  There's really no good reason beyond "that's just
> > the way it is."

> I have considerable experience in running IRC servers and networks. They
> aren't particularly resource intensive - and the customisation facilities
> are massive if you have backend access.
> Just give me a shout if you need anything regarding this and i'd be more
> than willing to help out.


Lots of people around Wikimedia and its projects use IRC very
effectively as a working tool, but the social project fallout on en:wp
in particular from IRC use and suspicion of it is ... remarkable. (See
the recent arbitration case for an example.)

One important and useful byproduct of the Foundation's hands-off
approach to Wikimedia IRC on Freenode is being able to tell people
complaining to the Foundation to go away and ask James or Sean, both
of whom are highly practiced in telling spurious complainants "no."

I suppose if we had our own server they could get the job there too
and do it in a similar way ... "Here, James, Sean, have this excellent
chalice. Only a little poison!"


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Dan Rosenthal
The underlying problem with that is they are also able to tell  
legitimate complaints no.  It beholdens one of the methods of the  
Foundation's communications (official or not) to a 3rd party's  
policies, with zero oversight or enforcement from the foundation. And  
then, we're presented with problems like relying on a third party to  
protect our privacy with cloaks; newcomers that are disgusted and  
turned away by coming into our channels and seeing bot attacks that we  
are hamstrung from preventing due to stupid restrictions on ops by  
freenode; group contacts that have been criticized as being  
unavailable and unhelpful; drama involving logging policies etc.

We could bypass all of this by simply hosting the IRC server ourselves.

-Dan




On Feb 26, 2008, at 9:36 AM, David Gerard wrote:

> On 26/02/2008, Paul Williams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Dan Rosenthal  
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>> A question that has been raised for some time. Freenode has issues
>>> beyond just the IRC cloaks.  Why aren't we having an
>>> irc.wikimedia.org?  There's really no good reason beyond "that's  
>>> just
>>> the way it is."
>
>> I have considerable experience in running IRC servers and networks.  
>> They
>> aren't particularly resource intensive - and the customisation  
>> facilities
>> are massive if you have backend access.
>> Just give me a shout if you need anything regarding this and i'd be  
>> more
>> than willing to help out.
>
>
> Lots of people around Wikimedia and its projects use IRC very
> effectively as a working tool, but the social project fallout on en:wp
> in particular from IRC use and suspicion of it is ... remarkable. (See
> the recent arbitration case for an example.)
>
> One important and useful byproduct of the Foundation's hands-off
> approach to Wikimedia IRC on Freenode is being able to tell people
> complaining to the Foundation to go away and ask James or Sean, both
> of whom are highly practiced in telling spurious complainants "no."
>
> I suppose if we had our own server they could get the job there too
> and do it in a similar way ... "Here, James, Sean, have this excellent
> chalice. Only a little poison!"
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

John Reaves
What freenode restrictions are enabling bot attacks?

--John Reaves

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:54 AM, Dan Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The underlying problem with that is they are also able to tell
> legitimate complaints no.  It beholdens one of the methods of the
> Foundation's communications (official or not) to a 3rd party's
> policies, with zero oversight or enforcement from the foundation. And
> then, we're presented with problems like relying on a third party to
> protect our privacy with cloaks; newcomers that are disgusted and
> turned away by coming into our channels and seeing bot attacks that we
> are hamstrung from preventing due to stupid restrictions on ops by
> freenode; group contacts that have been criticized as being
> unavailable and unhelpful; drama involving logging policies etc.
>
> We could bypass all of this by simply hosting the IRC server ourselves.
>
> -Dan
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 2008, at 9:36 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>
> > On 26/02/2008, Paul Williams <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Dan Rosenthal
> >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >>> A question that has been raised for some time. Freenode has issues
> >>> beyond just the IRC cloaks.  Why aren't we having an
> >>> irc.wikimedia.org?  There's really no good reason beyond "that's
> >>> just
> >>> the way it is."
> >
> >> I have considerable experience in running IRC servers and networks.
> >> They
> >> aren't particularly resource intensive - and the customisation
> >> facilities
> >> are massive if you have backend access.
> >> Just give me a shout if you need anything regarding this and i'd be
> >> more
> >> than willing to help out.
> >
> >
> > Lots of people around Wikimedia and its projects use IRC very
> > effectively as a working tool, but the social project fallout on en:wp
> > in particular from IRC use and suspicion of it is ... remarkable. (See
> > the recent arbitration case for an example.)
> >
> > One important and useful byproduct of the Foundation's hands-off
> > approach to Wikimedia IRC on Freenode is being able to tell people
> > complaining to the Foundation to go away and ask James or Sean, both
> > of whom are highly practiced in telling spurious complainants "no."
> >
> > I suppose if we had our own server they could get the job there too
> > and do it in a similar way ... "Here, James, Sean, have this excellent
> > chalice. Only a little poison!"
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
On 26/02/2008, Dan Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The underlying problem with that is they are also able to tell
> legitimate complaints no.  It beholdens one of the methods of the
> Foundation's communications (official or not) to a 3rd party's
> policies, with zero oversight or enforcement from the foundation.


Oh, absolutely. I'm just noting that running our own server involves a
lot more consequent work and issues than the mere technical issues.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Majorly
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
On 26/02/2008, Dan Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> A question that has been raised for some time. Freenode has issues
> beyond just the IRC cloaks.  Why aren't we having an
> irc.wikimedia.org?  There's really no good reason beyond "that's just
> the way it is."
>
> -dan
>

When Wikimedia's servers go down, freenode will still be up, so we can at
least get updates still. If we hosted it, it would go down with the site.

--
Alex (Majorly)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Majorly
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of cloak requests

Casey Brown-3
In reply to this post by Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Because IP's can be easily harvested when
> people go into the IRC channels uncloaked, this is a user privacy
> issue and needs to be resolved at the earliest possible time.

Most IRC users do not have a large problem with this.  However, if one
feels that they should still be cloaked before they receive their
Wikimedia-related cloak, they can request an "unaffiliated" cloak in
#freenode at any time.  (They have to set their nick up the same way
as you do to receive a Wikimedia cloak, though.)

>
> Newyorkbrad
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> 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
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12