Request to be unbanned from #winehq

Jan Zerebecki at
Sun Oct 7 14:49:44 CDT 2007

On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 12:02:18AM -0500, Clarence Risher wrote:
> PS: I too have been the victim of heavy handed channel administration
> in #winehq.

If anyone is interested in making #winehq a place that is more
pleasant, I would urge them to try to accomplish what I suggest
in the last paragraph (read the rest for more explanation).

I'll copy&paste from a previous discussion about #winehq problems:

Though formulating proper communication guidelines is some work
(one can borrow text and wisdom from projects that may have
something like this; freenode, fedora, ubuntu, gentoo, debian
come to mind), the real work is discussing it, asking everyone
whose comments matter and getting everyone to agree.

> > On Thursday 16 August 2007 20:27:04 Jonathan Challinger wrote:
> > > but then what? How would they be enforced?

Obviously then the people with the authority will support the
needed enforcement. But IMHO the best atmosphere is when nobody
needs to wield their powers.

We have #winehq-social where anything can be discussed and nobody
gets banned (unless they do advertisement or/and malware).

Another problem is that we don't have a rule for when/how to unban.

So if we could agree on rules for when and how to ban and unban,
it would be a good start and our community should become a bit
more pleasant.


More information about the wine-devel mailing list