Re: A few observations about GIMPNET

[Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress gmail com>]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Andre Klapper <ak-47 gmx net> wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 14:25 -0400, Liam R E Quin wrote:
>> On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 09:21 -0400, Allan Day wrote:
>> > It would be great to be able to run something like Bip [1] for GNOME IRC.
>>
>> Note, it's of course NOT OK to publish public logs of IRC channels (or
>> any other discussion forum) unless ALL the participants understand that
>> this will happen and agree to it.
>
> If people enter an IRC channel they likely understand that it's a public
> place, as other people are also around in that IRC channel.
> Mailing lists archive all postings and make them available for public,
> bugtracker comments are also visible for everybody. I think we state
> this piece of information when people subscribe/get an account.
>
> What makes IRC different so that it's "not ok" to have public logs?
>
> Which actions fulfil the need to make all participants understand that
> logging happens? An URL to the IRC log in the channel summary?
>
> Asking as I haven't seen a good argument yet against logging IRC
> conversations.


FWIW, Sugar Labs has an always logged channel called #sugar-meeting on freenode

The topic reads as follows:

The meeting channel for the Sugar learning platform | Meeting logs at
http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings | See also #sugar
| THIS CHANNEL IS ALWAYS LOGGED

Prior to that we had a meeting bot that could be turned on and off as
needed for logging.

The action of a channel op activating the bot is fairly explicit to
anyone in the channel at the time of activation.

cjl