← Back to team overview

ubuntu-lgbt team mailing list archive

Re: #ubuntu-offtopic policies kerfuffle

 

Hi Tony,
thanks for the detailed email, I totally understand the channel policy is
not intended as discrimination toward the LGBT community.

I do however disagree with the suggested connotation between 'sexuality' and
'none family-friendly'. I would like to think that a conversation
involving/discussing sexuality would be suitable for the '6 year old' you
mentioned, sexuality != sexual. If we continue to sweep the sexuality topic
under the carpet then how will things ever change? We will continue to
nurture a society where any sexuality other than 'straight' is considered a
taboo topic and isn't 'normal'.

It was originally brought to my attention that i was treading on the
channels policies toes when I asked if there were any lesbian ubuntu users
in the channel as I'd intended to ask them a few questions re:
discrimination. I was quickly told that the subject was not suitable and if
I don't like the rules i should leave & if I continued the topic someone
would help me leave.

I enjoy visiting the offtopic channel and have done on and off for a couple
of years. I think the op's do a fantastic job of keeping it a safe &
enjoyable environment, it's just this one issue of sexuality being an no-go
topic seems a little traditional, conservative & out of date to me.

All the best,
Jimmy


*** Sparkle Interactive ***
http://www.sparkleInteractive.co.uk


On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Tony Yarusso <tonyyarusso@xxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> It has come to my attention that there has been a bit of a
> misunderstanding of late about the polices enforced in the
> #ubuntu-offtopic IRC channel.  I'm writing this note in hopes of
> clarifying that a bit, and hopefully helping to settle down what has
> apparently become an occasionally heated argument for some reason.  I
> don't particularly feel like signing up to another mailing list at the
> moment, so if you deem it appropriate you are welcome to forward this
> to the ubuntu-lgbt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ML as well.
>
> First, to clarify the position I am writing from, I am one of the
> operators in that channel, and someone who has helped craft the
> policies of it.  I am not one of the current IRC Council members.  I
> am also a longtime user of that channel, having frequented it since
> 2005, so I've had the opportunity to watch it evolve quite a bit.
> I'll be addressing things both from the perspective of what our rules
> actually say, and even more importantly, how they are enforced.
>
> Okay, on to addressing the points previously raised:
>
> Jimmy wrote:
> "I was shocked when I was told in the official ubuntu IRC channels
> (#ubuntu-offtopic on irc.ubuntu.com/freenode to be specific) LGBT is a
> banned topic according to the channels terms of service. I think in
> this day and age that's appalling, what does everyone else think?"
>
> It is NOT anything LGBT-related that is a banned topic of discussion,
> but rather sexuality in general.  It has nothing to do with anyone's
> sexual orientation, but rather the fact that there's really no reason
> for people to be talking about sexuality-related things on an Ubuntu
> channel.  This stems from the same basic "family-friendly" principles
> as many other things, meaning that while the channel should be useful
> to a 60-year-old, it should also be appropriate for a 6-year-old.
>
> Scott wrote:
> "I hadn't heard about that, I'll investigate and raise this with the
> community council."
>
> While that's all well and good, normally procedure in IRC-land is for
> policies to first be discussed in #ubuntu-ops or on the
> ubuntu-irc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx mailing list, which are both publicly
> archived.  That allows the normal transparency and openness that is
> essential to our community operating effectively, as well as reaching
> the full audience that it should.  The Community Council operates by
> contacting sub-project councils, in this case the IRC Council, which
> is a small group of operators intended to handle unusual matters and
> has a private mailing list, which is great for the things they usually
> deal with, but not as appropriate for this in my opinion.  Part of the
> reason I'm addressing this e-mail to you directly is because I only
> have second-hand knowledge of what has happened so far, and no way to
> reply in the original medium.
>
> Doc wrote:
> "Now, I say that, at this point, not exactly having READ it so I may
> be talking out of my butt"
>
> Yes, it would be very much helpful to read things first.  :P
>
> "The issue is what is banned by this policy? If I say, "My boyfriend
> and I installed Ubuntu together last night and liked it" will that get
> me kicked out of the channel by this policy? Because I'm a boy with a
> boyfriend, is that not seen as an "LGBT topic." However, if you tried
> to kick me out for saying, "My girlfriend and I installed Ubuntu..."
> people would be in an uproar because no one sees anything wrong with
> that."
>
> No, there would be no kicking for mentioning your boyfriend installing
> Ubuntu.  We would take issue with someone discussing sexual activities
> with their partner regardless of gender (see above), but there is no
> problem with mentioning the existence of such a person (and in fact
> this certainly comes up with some frequency, both with the
> heterosexual and the significant number of LGBT members of the
> channel).  Again, it is sexuality, sexual activity, and sexual
> harassment that are the issue, not LGBT orientation.
>
> "There cannot be any LGBT policies on our lists. They are
> discriminatory. There are no Black policies. There are no Jewish
> policies. Why are there LGBT policies?"
>
> The !o4o factoid, which summarizes the topics we try to avoid, reads as
> follows:
> 'Some things are inappropriate for #ubuntu-offtopic. Controversial
> topics, which often turn into flame wars: war, race, religion,
> politics, gender, sexuality, drugs, questionably legal activities,
> suicide are not for here. Please discuss these rules themselves only
> in #ubuntu-ops. Microsoft software in ##windows (Please note Freenode
> Policy)'
>
> You'll note that race and religion are also on the list.  Again, this
> is not anything to do with someone mentioning their own or a friend's
> race or religion, but rather applies to arguments, harassment, or
> belittling based on those types of topics.  It has nothing to do with
> which people are accepted as users in our channels (ALL are), but
> rather what kind of discussions we want going on.
>
> "You need to have the SAME standards for Straight people and for LGBT
> people."
>
> I believe we do.  If there was ever a concern that someone had acted
> otherwise, that would be something to bring up in #ubuntu-ops to be
> remedied, and I would encourage you to do so if you ever felt wronged
> in that way in #ubuntu-offtopic or any other channel in the main
> #*ubuntu* namespace.
>
> "Within the spectrum of sexuality discussions, of course, if a guy and
> a girl are discussion [sic] how they got it on last night, I think
> that might be inappropriate to the forum, but not more so and not less
> so than if two guys or two girls were discussing the same thing."
>
> That is precisely what we're after, yes.
>
> Robert wrote:
> (various things) - I just want to note that he was pretty much spot on
> with his responses, which I would expect, as he is also a rather
> regular user of the channel.  Feel free to read his note again also.
>
> In more general terms, I want to let you know two things about the
> guidelines and policies used in the IRC channels, and #ubuntu-offtopic
> in particular:
>
> First, they are guidelines, and generally pretty broad, with
> enforcement up to the discretion of active operators.  The *intent* of
> the topics listed in !o4o being there is to avoid flamewars,
> harassment, and people getting hurt in rather un-Ubuntu-like ways, and
> enforcement follows intent.  From time to time there may be a
> discussion that touches on one of those, but with all of the
> participants being polite and considerate while doing so, and when
> that is the case it is generally allowed to continue if that remains
> the case.  However, when things don't look like they'll turn out well,
> we try to stop it early before things get nasty.  If you ever had a
> concern about unfair enforcement by a particular channel operator,
> that again would be an issue to take to #ubuntu-ops to discuss with
> other operators.  Usually if things look questionable users will be
> asked to stop or take it to another channel before any kicking or
> anything happens - whenever possible we try to catalyse the situation
> per Freenode recommendations, and kicks are best for when things have
> already gone too far or an operator shows up too late, particularly in
> the offtopic channels.
>
> Second, they are based on experience.  The operation of
> #ubuntu-offtopic has gone through several cycles of being more or less
> strict about the allowable topics and acceptable behavior.  We would
> generally prefer to be more hands-off in the channel, but current
> wisdom from experience unfortunately is that it needs to be controlled
> a bit more tightly, as when it has not the channel has rapidly become
> more hostile and unpleasant than both the operators and regular users
> cared for.
>
> I hope that has answered some of the questions and concerns raised
> thus far.  If you have others, I would be happy to address them,
> either with other members of the IRC operators team in #ubuntu-ops or
> privately (I'm also tonyyarusso on Freenode and always available to
> /query - even if I don't respond immediately, my client is always on,
> so I will eventually).
>
> P.S.  I was unaware until recently of the existence of the ubuntu-lgbt
> team, but am pleased to now see it exists.  It's always nice to see
> different groups of Ubuntu users coalescing, and the notion of
> community interaction is I feel what really sets Ubuntu apart.
>
> --
> Tony Yarusso
> http://tonyyarusso.com/
>

Follow ups