Commit
Co-authored-by: Andrew Lee <rasengan@Andrews-MacBook-Air.local>
- Loading branch information
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -46,7 +46,10 @@ Channel ownership | |
| Channels on freenode fall into one of two categories. Primary channels, which | ||
| begin with a single # character, are reserved for on-topic projects. If you’d | ||
| like to take over one of these channels, then you’ll need to be associated in | ||
| some way with the project in question. For abandoned project channels that | ||
| have moved or are no longer available to the public, you may request the | ||
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong. 
Oblomov
|
||
| ownership of the channel be transferred to you. Please make said requests in | ||
| the #freenode IRC channel. Topical, or ‘about’ channels, begin with | ||
| two # characters, and these are allocated on a first-come, first-served basis to | ||
| the first person who registers it with ChanServ. As with nicknames, however, we | ||
| reserve the right to remove or alter registrations where we believe they have | ||
|
|
@@ -81,10 +84,11 @@ applicable where freenode operates. Use of freenode and its facilities is a | |
| privilege, not a right, and may be withdrawn where we believe that this has not | ||
| been the case. | ||
|
|
||
| Off topic channels are required to act in good faith in accordance to the freenode | ||
| community as a whole. Unlawful activities and related support activities are considered | ||
| off-topic, as are inappropriate advertising such as unused channels for the purpose of | ||
| polluting the channel list results, transmission of illicit content such as warez or | ||
| illegal content, spam, or squatting a namespace preventing others from utilizing it. | ||
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong. 
TapeWerm
|
||
|
|
||
| In accordance with UK law freenode has no tolerance for any activity that could be construed | ||
| as: | ||
|
|
||
31 comments
on commit 1194a3e
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Expanded form of diff in the second section.
+Off topic channels are required to act in good faith in accordance to the freenode community as a whole.
Unlawful activities and related support activities are considered off-topic, as are
-inappropriate advertising,
+inappropriate advertising such as unused channels for the purpose of polluting the channel list results,
-heavy media file trading,
-proprietary game software modding,
-warez,
+transmission of illicit content such as warez or illegal content,
-porn and
-various forms of antisocial behaviour, including (but not limited to) political, racial, ethnic, religious or gender-related invective
+spam, or
+squatting a namespace preventing others from utilizing it.This is a monsterously large policy diff
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The world has records of your violations and follow-up cover-up commit. This does not change your actions, Andrew.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"violations" need to be taken in context. the channel that was "taken away" from the person who abandoned it, was purely a bot feed channel for hacker news.
that's it.
it's a bit different from what people are making it out to be - the previous admin left a note in the topic, and didn't plan on returning. only after they were alerted to what had transpired, they returned to see their channel access list had changed. and why shouldn't it be? it's a general purpose channel, and why should people have to go to Libera for it?
so, you're right, the policy doesn't change his actions. but his actions were reasonable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am amazed by the speed at which this news is travelling and by how quickly channels are migrating away.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so, you're right, the policy doesn't change his actions. but his actions were reasonable.
Nope. It was an abuse of power by Andrew Lee for his own benefit. Just because a channel has decided to move elsewhere does NOT make it an abandoned channel.
Supposing (if I had the money) I was going to buy a second home and closed my first home and locked it up, and moved to the second home, does that give the local mayor the right forcibly to take ownership for their own personal benefit? Perhaps after a few decades of no maintenance, when the roof had collapsed, the local council might decide that it had become a hazard and that - having tried and failed to contact the owner and get them to act responsibly - for the safety of the community as a whole, the council acting for the community (and not the mayor acting in their own personal interests) might take ownership - through due process and the courts - and demolish it.
Can you see the difference? One is an abuse of power for personal gain, the other a safety measure by the community for the community,
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are a guest at freenode and at the other irc networks, so maybe a better analogy is a homeless guy moving from tent to tent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No - more like a bit of a free-for-all land area, where people grab some land and build a house and soon you have a town. People invest time in creating a channel with a user community.
Freenode didn't say to people come along and use our services, but we can ban you for no reason and if you invest time in creating a channel we can take it over for our own benefit at any point. Instead they made promises about being welcoming to people, protecting their privacy, acting as responsible owners, and giving them channel ownership rights - and people trusted those promises.
And then some upstart gains ownership and decides to renege on those previous promises. Sorry - but just because your are a rich arsehole who gets legal ownership, that doesn't give you the moral or ethical right - and perhaps not even the legal right, though I doubt anyone is going to waste money on legal action - to renege on previous agreements.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh - and to be valid, changes to this policy need to meet the requirements of the previous policy, and this commit does not reach that standard for various reasons.
So, at this moment in time, the changes in this policy do not apply to the vast majority of freenode users, if indeed it applies to any. And therefore any actions by Andrew Lee or his staff that are contrary to the previous version of the policy - like taking over a channel they claim as abandoned - are therefore contrary to stated policy.
Additionally, the definition of an "abandoned channel" is not clearly defined - it can be argued that a channel which has been deliberately locked with a redirection notice is NOT abandoned as it is performing a valid function even though no one can join it. The policy clearly states that inactive primary channels do not expire, but does not state how long a channel needs to be empty to be considered "inactive" - is a channel empty for 1 second inactive and available (for that second) to be claimed by someone else?
So even if the policy changes in this commit were valid - and they are not because the previous policy's requirements for changes have not been followed - but even if they were, I do not personally believe that they allow Andrew Lee to take the actions he has already taken as described above.
In the end the bottom line is that communities operate on trust - and trust in FreeNode is evaporating faster than a teaspoon of water in the Sahara dessert.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"violations" need to be taken in context. the channel that was "taken away" from the person who abandoned it, was purely a bot feed channel for hacker news.
that's it.
it's a bit different from what people are making it out to be - the previous admin left a note in the topic, and didn't plan on returning. only after they were alerted to what had transpired, they returned to see their channel access list had changed. and why shouldn't it be? it's a general purpose channel, and why should people have to go to Libera for it?
so, you're right, the policy doesn't change his actions. but his actions were reasonable.
Please read the HN thread about this topic. It has, in fact been pointed out, that his actions were against Freenode policy. There is no conversation about that; that is what happened. Official channels are != Unofficial channels.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No - Andrew Lee's actions were not reasonable.
- They are NOT conformant with the existing policy or the changed policy source.
- They were for personal gain.
- They were done without any due process.
- How do you tell when a channel is "official" or "unofficial"? Who decides? On what basis? What are the rules?
- What is the definition of abandoned? What is the difference between closing a channel for a vacation and abandoning it? Is it clear cut? What are the rules? Who decides?
A lot of the ethics of open source are rooted in discussion, cooperation, due process and trust for community benefit. So Andrew Lee's unilateral and abrupt approach for personal gain seems pretty contrary to the fundamentals of FOSS.
And please note that all of this has happened in the first couple of days. We haven't yet had any examples surface of personal data being leaked or sold, but apparently there are examples of that from Andrew Lee's other IRC endeavours, so it wouldn't be surprising for such things to emerge in the near future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it just me or are we suddenly seeing a LOT of netsplits on Freenode since Andrew Lee took over? Am I being overly paranoid?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have now had emails advising of comments by two different people, but they are not appearing on this page - suggesting that they have been deleted. Am I being overly paranoid?
Edit: Yes I was being overly paranoid - they were at the top of the page in a different comment section. 😃
There was a problem hiding this comment.
People invest time in creating a channel with a user community.
People who make public statements defaming their host and tell their user community to leave, should feel no entitlement to ongoing help of any sort from that same host.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
People who make public statements defaming their host and tell their user community to leave, should feel no entitlement to ongoing help of any sort from that same host.
To be defaming, a statement must be untrue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am just amazed at the number of apologists on here who seem to think that the sun shines out of Andrew Lee's ass and will defy logic and all rational arguments made by others in order to declare his actions reasonable.
This is a cult of personality just like Trump - so just what does Andrew Lee need to do before his apologists will admit that he has crossed the line? "Shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
People who make public statements defaming their host and tell their user community to leave, should feel no entitlement to ongoing help of any sort from that same host.
That is such an immature and petty approach to life - what you are saying is that excessive retaliation for someone calling you out for your behaviour is acceptable - and consequently that people should be afraid of calling someone else out because of the risk of retaliation. This is nothing short of bullying, and demonstrates a lack of emotional and intellectual maturity for many different reasons.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@zonidjan Freenode policy has never been to kick out people and take over channels because the topic said the discussion had moved elsewhere. Which is how the new policy is being implemented.
But don't worry, the more aggressive the new behavior becomes, the more clear it becomes to people why the new Freenode cannot be trusted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So Freenode has totally hijacked the GamingOnLinux channel, removed it and redirected it to a ## room where we have no control.
Well done Freenode staff, you're terrible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So Freenode has totally hijacked the GamingOnLinux channel [...] where we have no control.
They LEFT freenode, so upon what basis are they hoping to keep control?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
They is me, hi, I run GamingOnLinux.
So if a channel decides they wish to open elsewhere, while keeping the other one open for many different reasons, that makes it perfectly okay for Freenode to just take it over, remove it and redirect it? If you don't see how that's a problem, you're an idiot and only enabling poor behaviour. That is a HOSTILE TAKEOVER, it was not approved by us and no communication went our way. The owners of Freenode just decided it was now their channel to do with as they see fit. Completely ridiculous.
How is ANYONE EVER going to trust Freenode again when they pull this shit?
Freenode is fucking dead to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So if a channel decides they wish to open elsewhere
That literally means that they no longer have an official relationship, which is what the # group-channel designates.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unsubscribing. I've said my peace. Freenode is dead. Any good will has vanished due to this ridiculously hostile behaviour.
It's only being done due to fear and a loss of control, it's pathetic.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So if a channel decides they wish to open elsewhere
That literally means that they no longer have an official relationship, which is what the
#group-channel designates.
That would imply that Freenode will not allow projects to host channels on multiple IRC networks, is that right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So if a channel decides they wish to open elsewhere
That literally means that they no longer have an official relationship, which is what the#group-channel designates.
That would imply that Freenode will not allow projects to host channels on multiple IRC networks, is that right?
Of course I can't speak for freenode, but MOVE implies DEPARTING. If a project has two official channels, I don't see why freenode would have a problem with that. Do you know of any group/project that is doing that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, if it's an actual move then the ops of the channel that is moving should close down the old channels when their move is complete. I don't think anybody has a problem with that.
But the statement I quoted was more broad than that, and would cover anybody with an official presence on more than one IRC network.
Yes I do know FOSS projects that are doing this. For reasons that should be obvious, I won't be listing them by name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Of course I can't speak for freenode, but MOVE implies DEPARTING.
When you move, you usually let people know where you can be found afterwards.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When you move, you usually let people know where you can be found afterwards.
Oh sure, such as on your main project web site that directs people to the new official channel, or hang out on the unofficial ##foo channel. Heck, not having an #foo official-looking channel here HELPS avoid misdirecting people, after all they may not read or believe the /topic, and just talk with others who are there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How is ANYONE EVER going to trust Freenode again when they pull this shit?
Freenode is fucking dead to me.
i have no clue, i've been wondering the same thing as I watch people leave the network for one started by those untrustworthy former Freenode staff.
they screwed up so badly that one of their own was able to sell it out from underneath them.
it was the former staff that allowed this to happen by dissolving the PDPC - how can anyone trust them to do it correctly, ever again? they've shown how incompetent they are.
honestly since the network has dropped from 75k to 62k users, it's actually become a better place to hang out and receive or provide assistance to others. it's almost like the really loud whiners who left were all holding us back.
for years after this, people are still going to be coming to Freenode to receive help. the Libera user base will remain an echo chamber - a small subset of the greatness that was once Freenode.
that's why we're unmuting and redirecting # to ##. because it's a great place where people know to come for help. and none of your drama will change that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LOL you guys are so scared to see the numbers drop that you've even hidden the information about number of registered channels and users from the MOTD. You're losing users at a growing rate, and most of those that remain behind belong to one of thee categories:
- idlers that haven't actually connected to their bouncer in years;
- people that keep a presence to warn other people about the migration, since it's the only safe way to do it without risking a hostile channel takeover from the current Freenode staff;
- matrix users that are waiting for the Libera.chat bridge to stabilize.
The only “drama” here is the massive incompetence in managing FLOSS communities that you've so brilliantly demonstrated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bghira
why are you upvoting your own post?
This is dangerously close to what got described in https://www.devever.net/~hl/freenode_abuse