[Theforum] policy for #evolt

Marlene Bruce marlene at members.evolt.org
Thu Jan 10 08:30:34 CST 2002

At 12:17 PM +0000 1/10/02, Garrett Coakley wrote:

This is an interesting page. Since OPN doesn't yet have a catalyst 
training program, I think everyone joining IRC should try to act as a 
positive catalyst for the channel (if this were an ideal world). IOW, 
perhaps we should encourage everyone joining #evolt to read this page.

>Can I also raise the point that it's all very well and good saying "do we
>want it to be more like evolt.org or IRC?", but while it's been hosted by
>an outside party (openprojects.net) then you won't have a great deal of
>leeway in the matter.

Are you sure? It states on this page that the guidelines offered are 
optional. Still, they're good community guides. The concept of 
"channel temperature" is interesting, and it seems to be a similar 
problem we're having on some of evolt's email lists.

However, the problem that recently arose with #evolt was the booting 
of someone for lurking. About halfway down the page on 
http://www.irchelp.org/irchelp/altircfaq.html, it states, "Channel 
operators are kings/queens of their channel. This means they can kick 
you out of their channel for no reason. If you don't like this, you 
can start your own channel and become a channel operator there."

In my opinion, this shouldn't apply to #evolt. To me, it goes against 
the spirit that we're trying to foster through evolt. For example, on 
any of the evolt lists a person can lurk indefinitely without being 
unsubscribed. If we want to be consistent, a person should be able to 
lurk on #evolt indefinitely without being booted off. So IMO this 
particular rule shouldn't be included in the #evolt policy (at least 
not as written and intended above).

Still, some people here who are used to IRC being run a certain way 
will undoubtedly disagree with my opinion. What I'm looking for is 
for people to state their preference, including somehow:

a) why the rule would be useful (this may seem obvious, but please 
state why anyway)
b) that the rule mirrors existing attitudes in other evolt 
communication venues, or
c) conversely, why the rule should diverge from current practices 
elsewhere on evolt.

Most of all I'd like to encourage any discussion on setting up an 
#evolt policy remain as ego-less as possible.

Just reviewed some of the discussion on bots previously on this list. 
What a headache! Was there ever a consensus out of your IRC vote, 

If there wasn't, maybe we shouldn't have an official #evolt channel. 
Maybe I'm wasting my time on something that we shouldn't "officially" 
associate with evolt. After all, after reading some more of the FAQ, 
it seems anyone can take the #evolt channel if they catch it at the 
right time. Unless there's a way to control that with certainty, this 
all seems to be a moot point.

What's the point of #evolt on top of everything else we offer our 
members? Do we really see it adding enough value to make all this 
discussion worthwhile? I don't want to waste any more of my time or 
yours if it's unnecessary.


More information about the theforum mailing list