On Wed, 03 May 2006, MJ Ray wrote:
> Peter Samuelson <email@example.com>
> > One might think private messages are useful in user support, but
> > #debian actually has a channel policy asking users not to send
> > them without permission. [...]
> So, one might think the current #debian is not actually as useful in
> user support as it could be?
You may have that opinion, but the rule has been put in place because
far too often people ask for help from one volunteer, and the
volunteer leaves to get on with their real life.... then the person
getting help has to repeat everything that they've said to a new
It also makes it more difficult for the channel to see the help that
users are getting, and make corrections or pitch in and help.
That said, you can ask to /msg someone privately, and if they agree,
they'll help you in /msg... but the default assumption is to keep the
conversation in the channel.
> > What aspects of Debian development warrant private conversations?
> Introductions, misunderstandings and conflict resolution.
None of these encompass development even though they may facilitate
> The first time I noticed this (the +q lunacy), the attitude seemed
> to be that IRC clients should change to cope with freenode, not that
> freenode should cope with clients.
+q is just one way of specifying the ban; the actual ban is
implemented as a +b with special syntax.
/quote MODE #foo +q bar!baz@quux
is equivalent to
/quote MODE #foo +b %bar!baz@quux
(and it's not like that even matters, because casual users won't be
using them anyway... and if you're in a position to use them and don't
like them, you can always use +b) I personally haven't seen a client
that had a problem with it... but given the way that some IRC clients
are written, it wouldn't suprise me much.
The beauty of the DRUNKENNESS subprogram was that you could move your
intoxication level up and down at will, instead of being caught on a
relentless down escalator to bargain basement philosophy and the
-- Rudy von Bitter _Software_ p124