Merged #4. --ay
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Nick Ruest <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Starting the work.
> Remove poledance and euph: https://github.com/code4lib/**
> On 13-01-18 01:17 PM, Kevin S. Clarke wrote:
>> I think there has been general consensus that there are some offensive
>> plugins and that the bot should be held to the same level we expect
>> from a person, but noone (yet) has stepped up to volunteer to go
>> through all that's available and make an effort at cleaning things up.
>> As we all know, things don't get done in Code4Lib without someone
>> doing the work. Anyone want to step up and volunteer to go through
>> what's there and take a stab at it? Even a first pass might advance
>> us to the next level of discussion... or a list of plugins in question
>> could be farmed out to individuals interested in making the changes?
>> Kevin (taking a step backwards)
>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tim Donohue <[log in to unmask]>
>>> FWIW, there are a few zoia commands I've noticed that could come across
>>> sexist (especially if you see Zoia as being a "female" bot).
>>> I don't think they are used that frequently, but I have seen:
>>> @poledance (have zoia display a poledancer)
>>> @euph (have zoia respond in a euphemism)
>>> This isn't meant to spoil any of the fun of having zoia around. For the
>>> part, I don't take offense to zoia. But, I do find zoia annoying / noisy
>>> (which is why I'm rarely in code4lib IRC). Though there are some useful /
>>> helpful zoia commands in there.
>>> I like Jon Gorman's suggestion of having a friendly, helpful bot and a
>>> wise-cracking one. That way, those of us annoyed by the ongoing
>>> wise-cracking can ignore it, while still having access to the helpful
>>> (And it may be easier to turn off the wise-cracking parts during the
>>> conference if desired.)
>>> - Tim
>>> On 1/18/2013 10:26 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>>> Actually, I find the "playing" with Zoia itself offensive. As per my
>>>> response to my own message.
>>>> It objectifies women. Treats them as play-things. Makes me very
>>>> uncomfortable. If we want to have an information bot, perhaps like the
>>>> one used by W3C which takes minutes for meetings (Zakim, I believe it
>>>> is), that seems reasonable. But to have a "play-thing" that is gendered
>>>> is a really, really bad idea. In fact, to have a "play-thing" of any
>>>> kind on the channel might not be a good idea. I know that some folks
>>>> find it fun, but it is akin to the locker-room shenanigans (at least as
>>>> I experience it), and it's a HUGE in-joke that makes it obvious to
>>>> anyone new that they aren't "in".