Re: having public irc logs?
(this question was on debian-vote by purpose, and was directed to DPL,
I'll drop -vote on the next email)
>(Replies redirected to debian-project, since this has nothing to do
>with the DPL election anymore.)
sigh, I agree
(I would have used -devel to have a public discussion, this wasn't
the case, but meh, it is nice to discuss such things anyway)
>I guestion the usefulness of IRC logs for that kind of thing. The log
>shows that, say, a package was discussed three hours ago. Has the
>situation changed? It might have, but without anyone mentioning it on
>IRC, and therefor in the log. The kinds of things that are discussed
>on IRC tend be quickly changing. Logs are not useful for those. In my
>opinion and experience.
I had many times written something just some minutes after somebody else.
You might question it, I might agree with you, but in my life I have a lot
of use-cases of this being useful
(e.g. my uploads not being accepted, a quick look on -ftp channel logs
can show signs of dak sadness).
But anyway, I don't see any added value of discussing what I find useful
and what you find useful :)
>This does not match my observations of reality. People seem happy to
>behave quite badly using their own names in public fora as it is.
>Making IRC channels public is unlikely to have much effect on
>behaviour.
completely correct, this was an answer to some "hey we can't public
logs because people are using bad words here".
>If it did, nobody would be an ass on Facebook, Google+, or Twitter
>unless they've taken care to hide their identity well. Yet people are
>posting, using their real names, sexist and racist slurs, even death
>threats. Not to mention newspapers and TV.
sigh, true, unfortunately nobody seems responsible anymore for
his behaviour.
>If there's a problem with how people behave on IRC, that should be
>addressed directly.
sure, but this is not something I have to discuss, I don't have such
problem, I just think logs are useful :)
>> You want to protect privacy but you know privacy doesn't exist on
>> public places.
>I disgree strongly.
>
>If I sit on a park bench with a friend and we discuss something, we
>have an expectation of privacy. If you record our conversation and
>play it on the radio, you've violated our privacy.
true
>> (it would be nice if some removed developer going away after some
>> bad flame war over Debian would publish *all* the logs just for fun)
>> How will you protect the privacy then?
>
>You're suggesting that someone publish non-public discussions? Becuase
>it would be fun? Seriously?
I didn't suggest that, but privacy online is seriously something that
*doesn't* exist, and people not understanding that are simply wrong.
you can have some false idea of privacy online, the website gets
hacked, or a bug shows logs on the server, or somebody else hacks
your pc.
In a park the damage you can do is limited, online is really worse the situation
(I remember some leaks of some websites for adults, leaking real email addresses
and real passwords)
so, saying "somebody violating my privacy is wrong", when "somebody" can be "null" or
"really difficult to track because vpn/tor", doesn't protect you much more.
>> People should be responsible for what they say, regardless where
>> they say. We are not kids anymore.
>I'll be sending a handyman to install a webcam and microphone in your
>bathroom and bedroom. I've also engaged a private investigator firm to
>follow you and record all discussions you have with friends. The ones
>that mention or refer to Debian will be posted to
>meetings-archive.debian.net. A team of volunteers will transcribe them
>and post them to identi.ca. After all, ýou need to be responsible for
>anything you say, at any time, in any place, in any context.
well, bathroom and bedroom are more private than irc I would say, but
sometimes even the context has to be considered when saying something
>More constructively... if you have a point that specific disucssions
>about, say, release management should be made more public, then make a
>specific suggestion about that, with justificiations why it's a good
>idea. Saying that all Debian IRC channels should be logged publically
>is too broad to be acceptable to a large number of people.
And finally the point is there.
If you look closely to my first email I never said "all", and specially
I don't care about many channels (even -devel or -mentors might be useless
when not connected to the internet).
I even provided a list, -release, -ftp, -buildd.
so, the question still stands.
Dear DPL candidate, how do you feel about having *some* irc channels of public
interest being available for offline users?
Gianfranco
Reply to: