This is an info-post on a Forum Council Agenda Item that Thomas Ward posted. (me).
FORUM COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: Discussion on #ubuntuforums Moderation
In a private message with a member of the Forums Council, I stated this:
After a semi-lengthy discussion with IRCC, the jurisdictional control of #ubuntuforums was outlined as Forums Council -> IRC Council -> Community Council.
We had a small incident where there was a broken client in-channel, and ZERO moderators were around. I went to -irc and pinged for IRCC help, got nothing, ended up having to ping freenode staff for assistance.
There should be further discussion on whether additional IRC moderators are required to help handle misbehaving clients, and/or the correct steps of procedures for this.
Fortunately for the broken-client-user, they stopped flooding shortly before freenode staff responded. Therefore, incident averted, but I do believe further discussion may be prudent on this.
Given the small incident that had happened, with no moderators around, I believe further discussion should be done on how the channel can either:
- Have some type of bot or flood-protection system in place on the channel, or
- Have additional IRC moderators on the access list, or
- Have “ubuntu members” (ubuntu/member/* cloaked users) have emergency operator status to respond to such “emergency moderation” situations, or
- Some other solution decided upon by Forums Council.
While these incidents are rare, they do, however, pose issues for users who are in the channel, and for users who log everything such as myself. Flooding, even when caused by a broken client, is “spammy” and disruptive, which is why ops usually will ban-forward to ##fix_your_connection or similar.
I strongly believe that this needs to be discussed, because if it happens once, it’s likely to happen again. (And although its the holidays/end-of-year, its still a highly relevant discussion for future, whether the operators were busy with the holidays, or whether they’re just “not alive” in future).