policy update

[realrasengan]

No description provided.

[sonOfRa]

Is this the kind of unannounced policy change Freenode users should generally expect now? You see a behaviour you dislike, announce that it is against Freenode policy, and then retroactively change Freenode policy in order to make that statement true?

[dhjw]

Is this the kind of unannounced policy change Freenode users should generally expect now? You see a behaviour you dislike, announce that it is against Freenode policy, and then retroactively change Freenode policy in order to make that statement true?

Pretty much every site works that way and often changes its terms & conditions. If you actually read the change you see it provides a benefit to users in one part and in the other it removes rather than imposes limits on conversations.

[hanetzer]

Glad to know I can now use political, racial, ethnic, religious or gender-related invective on freenode, this is a move in the right direction!

[dhjw]

Assuming you're being sarcastic, why shouldn't people be allowed to talk about those things? Free speech is important. The answer to undesirable speech is more speech, not suppression.

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence." Justice Louis Brandeis in Whitney v. California

[joepie91]

That is indeed the view generally taken by those with a loud voice, who are not under constant threat.

[Superfreeze-automated]

If you actually read the change you see it provides a benefit to users in one part and in the other it removes rather than imposes limits on conversations.

I would disagree, but it's not obvious why from the rule itself. Esp., read:

For abandoned project channels that have moved or are no longer available to the public, you may request the ownership of the channel be transferred to you.

Nothing against such a rule in general, but the problem is the context:

• This rule was applied before it was merged here, i.e. the channel ##hntop was taken over (source: https://www.devever.net/~hl/freenode_abuse) and then the Freenode policy was retroactively changed. Also, the rule change was announced or discussed nowhere.
• Timing and this story suggest that the intention of the change is to keep people from leaving Freenode. If a project moves and e.g. sets the topic to "Moved to Libera.Chat", then they can take over the channel (I mean, it's abandoned) and revert the topic.

I believe that Andrew Lee (alias rasengan) is acting in good faith (also, Hanlon's razor, benefit of doubt and so on). And I understand that he doesn't want abandoned channels polluting the namespace. But, to use a service, I would like to be able trust in the operator's decisions, which I can't anymore here.

[realrasengan]

Please comment on issue #515 . Thank you.