From 4f88d880fafab7c7ac1c146b4001e650f1cf2d46 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mikaela Suomalainen Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:54:19 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] blog: Trying to be a better op --- _posts/2015-06-11-trying-to-be-better-op.md | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++ pages/irc.markdown | 1 + 2 files changed, 58 insertions(+) create mode 100644 _posts/2015-06-11-trying-to-be-better-op.md diff --git a/_posts/2015-06-11-trying-to-be-better-op.md b/_posts/2015-06-11-trying-to-be-better-op.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4aef305 --- /dev/null +++ b/_posts/2015-06-11-trying-to-be-better-op.md @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +--- +layout: post +comments: true +title: "Trying to be a better op" +category: [english] +tags: [english, irc] +--- + +*If ops are attacked, the channel is also hurt as much as if users were + attacked. Thus I am also taking action if op is attacked.* + +Usually when I am op, it's easy to take action when someone else or some +user is attacked. When op is attacked and they take action, they are +"unable to handle criticism" or "abusing ops" or *anything like that here.* + +From now, I will try to unlearn from that and be a better op at least on +channels that have clear (written or not) rules as on channels that don't, +there possibly no way to know what the ops are even supposed to do other +than look so scary that no one does anything bad. + +There are only two issues that I see immediately now that I am typing this: + +* What is an attack? +* What if it's not an attack and op makes a mistake? + +The second is easy to answer, if there are multiple ops, the user affected +by the mistake can discuss about it with other ops present and/or the +other ops can revert whatever was done. + +But there is still the question *what is an attack*? + +Trying to analyze logs of the previous case this happened, it looks like +attack is at least: + +* directly targeted to a person, not part of them, and not generally saying + that some part of them makes or doesn't make them X and neither it's + generally talking about that part and oneself own experiences of them. + * the *not*-parts still feel like attacks reading this, but other ops + say that it's assertiveness. +* talking about privilege for living in X where things are better and that + means that the attacked one cannot have any kinds of issues with anything + including mental health +* talking like the attacked one was attacking them + +* *additions welcome* + +Attack seems to also be when the attacked one communicates being +uncomfortable (which should be done clearly, but do they always remember +that) or when third party tells the people to calm down, but other party +still continues. I think the usual three warnings policy can be implemented +here. + +Further reading would be the two policies from freenode and I currently +don't feel like commenting them further as my opinions are known. + +* [Freenode's catalysts policy](https://freenode.net/catalysts.shtml) +* [Freenode's channel guidelines](https://freenode.net/channel_guidelines.shtml) diff --git a/pages/irc.markdown b/pages/irc.markdown index 68651c6..6e936df 100644 --- a/pages/irc.markdown +++ b/pages/irc.markdown @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ links.* * [IRC over TLS is not pointless.]({% post_url 2015-04-22-IRC-over-TLS %}) * [Forming irc:// or ircs:// links]({% post_url 2015-05-18-ircs_links %}) * [Making channel secret or private]({% post_url 2015-06-08-private_secret_channels %}) + * [Trying to be a better op: attacking op is no different from attacking user.]({% post_url 2015-06-11-trying-to-be-better-op %}) * Oper * [Channels & Hostmask groups: A Basic howto]({% post_url 2015-01-10-channels-hostmask-groups-a-basic-howto %}) * [Stay away from Anope IRC Services]({% post_url 2015-03-12-stay-away-from-anope %})