On 07/04/2017 16:21, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > (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? >
I feel bad about that. As explained elsewhere, it is not the spirit of usage of IRC, at least in Debian. But ultimately, I think it is a project decision if (for example) we want to make a #debian-recorded channel but I would not support it, personally. There are simple technical measures that you could personally put in place to follow some channels. -- Mehdi
