I wish people wouldn't kick lurkers. Especially when they're not actually lurkers. It discourages them from hanging out with us more often. But that's solely my opinion; everyone with ops acts on their own authority according to their rationale. If people don't want you sitting there and not talking, they're gonna make that apparent.

I hope you at least got a few private messages that asked if you were there or not. Usually those will make your computer beep which is very handy for reminding you that you're on IRC in another window. If you get a bunch of those and don't reply, they're generally gonna figure you're lurking and act accordingly. Hopefully, they'll invite you to return when you're once again paying attention.

I hope to make it back to IRC at some point; maybe I'll see you there!

Well, with how full the channel gets, if lurkers weren't kicked it would be GIGANTIC!

I've been kicked once or twice, no biggie. You can understand if the 3 or 4 people actively having a conversation don't want to wonder which of the other names along the sidebar are going to be reading through what they discuss later on.

The lack of lurking is a real turn-off for me. It's probably why I'm so rarely in bunnies. I log in and find no-one there, so I feel there's no point in staying myself. Whereas, if people were lurking, they can tell when someone new has logged in and might come chat. And, the new person who has logged in has a reason to stay...all those people in the user list might be back any minute!

Just as IRC is not the place to play long and loose with passwords, it's probably also not the place to carry out private conversations you don't ever want anyone else to read. Kicking "lurkers" because you don't want them looking through their chat logs in the morning is ruder than lurking, as far as I can tell.

What name were you using, By the Grace of God?

I think the only lurkers that get kicked are those that never form a presence to begin with. Or only form a presence as a lurker. I suppose anyway--I've never kicked a lurker that I can recall.

I've kicked lurkers before, but usually only when a fair attempt has been made to get the person's attention, and they've failed to respond. I find something inordinately creepy about a channel full of silent lurkers, waiting and watching, but not participating. It makes me think of the Borg.

SassHat and other lurker-kickers: You should at least understand that lurking is the norm on many channels, and it usually only creeps out IRC newbies, and lurker-kicking turns off many IRC veterans.

Who cares if it's the norm on other channels? I don't think most of the regulars in #bunnies have been to other IRC channels and probably wouldn't like them. I know I found it annoying in my previous time spent on IRC channels.

Like I said, I haven't kicked lurkers but I can understand the impulse.

Agro, I've been told that it's the norm on other channels - it still bothers me and a fair amount of other bunnies as well. If that makes me (or anyone else) a newb, well, I'm fine with that label. When I go into #bunnies and find I have nothing to say or that the conversation isn't really interesting me, I leave (or don't enter the channel in the first place).

There are a few people who consistently lurk, never talk or participate in the channel, and they have been asked to at least put up an away message if they know they are going to be preoccupied with something else. That seems like a fair deal on all sides.

That being said, I'm off IRC for a bit and I'm not sure when the urge will return. I'm not going to wring my hands over a few lurkers in the channel if I'm not even there. But I do think that kicking should be left to people who are chan ops.

When people are hanging out in IRC, sometimes I kind of follow the discussion in background while doing other things, checking in with the group just periodically. If it looks like I'm lurking, people have beeped me, and I always respond. I think as long as you get a few attempts at contact before getting kicked, it's fair.

I'm one of those who has never chatted in any other channels and can't imagine wanting to; I know there are many others like that, so I do think we have our own chat culture here and it should be one we are all comfortable with, to encourage greatest participation. There are enough stories of unpleasant happenings that it seems fair to limit the channel to people who are present in some way. It's also good policy to try not to say things you wouldn't want logged - but hey, it happens.

I agree with Jimbob. I like the lurkers.

The whole lurking issue is why I stopped hanging out in #metachat, #bunnies, and eventually stopped regularly visiting the metachat web site.

In other IRC channels, I'll stay logged in for several days (usually until I need to kill firefox).

Last night, I asked a question in one of those channels; nobody there had an answer. This morning, I got up and saw somebody (who'd been lurking when I asked the question) had seen it when he de-lurked, and had answered it while I was "lurking" (actually sleeping).

So this morning, I then responded to the guy who'd answered, but he was lurking. A few minutes latter, he de-lurked and answered me.

What with different time zones, and things other than IRC to do, lurking facilitates "extended conversations". Kicking lurkers breaks that, and makes it harder for a "critical mass" of people to accumulate in the channel.

I think it comes down to exclusivity vs. openness: if you want to be inviting and to attract more people, you let them lurk until a conversation happens. If you want to be cliquish and make sure no "outsiders" are listening, you schedule when everyone in the clique will be available, and you kick lurkers.

A few people got ops in #metachat (and then #bunnies), and those people, by kicking lurkers, set the "customs" of the channel. Which is their prerogative, I guess. But I wish some of those people had been less autocratic, less quick to impose their preferences on the channel, without letting the rest of us have input.

And to be honest, I feel it made the IRC channel cliquish and uninviting and too much of a bother and it led me to stay away from IRC and metachat in general.

I was logged in as rats. I didn't see any PMs asking if I was there but I certainly may have gotten some, as I didn't have time to read the scroll this morning. anyway I don't disagree with kicking people - that's why I came in to apologise! If TPS is mad at me, and that's why I was kicked, I would request that she email me and at least explain why, though! If I said anything upsetting I apologise for that, too.

On preview: ortho, does your email work yet?

I know nothing of #bunnies, really, but I'm absolutely positive it was nothing personal BTGOG.

My better half installed Gentoo on this computer and there's not a lot of programs on it yet and I don't know where shit like OpenOffice and other crap I need for before my meeting is. Furthermore, the original windows XP stuff is on a detached hard drive that I am not touching with a 10 foot pole in case I look at it funny and it breaks.

so anyone trying to irc me right now, I'm involuntarily afk!

Pfeh.

Flub.

Mehrrrgh.

the drunken blowhard and his lunatic friend will be at the meeting too. whee!!!!

ICECREAM FOR EVERYONE!!

Grace: Yes, sorry, I've been heads-down on something (assembly routines for ARM chips, as it happens, which is very detailed stuff trying to save a few cycles here and there) and doing a really frustrating job search as well, and I really do apologize, but the gmail stuff has been at the bottom of my priority list, along with the Firefox plugin which people want updates to and translations into French added to and I should get back to them, especially the French guy who was kind enough to do the translations, if not the Brazilian guy who wants some extra features, and I should roll out some patches for Rockbox, because the patches really do speed things up, and a bunch of people want them, but when I'm concentrating on something I really like to just go heads down and do it until it's done to my satisfactioon and don't like to break my concentration and I'm sorry, I know that's rude, but I really can't schedule the time to give your email the consideration it deserves, so rather than do a poor job quickly I prefer to wait until I have the time to do it right, and all right, I'll do it before COB today, but I have a million other things to do before COB.

no worries ortho, take your time! My email is low priority indeed! And quit overscheduling yourself, you only live once!

I am afraid to even venture into #bunnies. I'm curious, but there seems to be so many "customs" I feel like I would immediately do something wrong and be asked to leave, or that I would not be welcome to join in the conversations in the first place since not very many "know" me. Which is kinda funny because triode said that is the place to get to know the others... Don't 'cha just love my circular thinking?

I don't know what the deal with ortho was, but I doubt that TPS would have kicked "rats" from #bunnies if she knew it was By the Grace of God.

I've left IRC running in the background for hours at a time and no one has kicked me. But I don't stay connected 24/7.

*waits patiently to get to know getoff*

*Thanks danostuporstar for the interest in her AFF profile*

Aspies for Freedom?

I was a bit intimidated at first too, getoffmylawn, but a couple of the bunnies showed me the basics the first time I was there, and everyone was very welcoming. Now, of course, I mainline it and may have to go to rehab. As mullacc pointed out, I think people find it confusing when people use a name that's unrelated to the one they use here, is all. Come on in some time!

People will be real nice-like, getoffmylawn. I had no idea what it even was when I started chatting. Now, I'm mainlining. MetaChat proper is a gateway drug.

Uh, I'm sure this is an "over share".

People actually use Adult Friend Finder? I always thought it was just porn/escort spam, pure and simple. There are "real" people on there?

I have met several nice, REAL, guys from AFF. There is a bit of BS to wade through, but if you learn how to work the system that place is an invaluable treasure trove... I even found a guy that wanted to be "bf/gf", not just get some. Now, granted it is completely different for women on there than it is for men. I have my complete pick of what I want as a female. Guys - eh, not so much.

Oh, and by the grace of god: I apologize for derailing your thread.

Huh. *learns something new everyday*

There are a few people who consistently lurk, never talk or participate in the channel, and they have been asked to at least put up an away message if they know they are going to be preoccupied with something else.

Right on. I fully endorse the |Away nick swapping convention (/nick rats|Away or whatever). But often, people just forget, or have an installation going on in the background, or what have you. So hit them with a private message or two just to be sure.

I'm curious, but there seems to be so many "customs" I feel like I would immediately do something wrong and be asked to leave

Nah, that's why IRC has a "kick" command. No asking necessary! Then again, it's also got a "protect" command, which means no one can kick you. I should start some sort of "protection" racket, where for $5 a pop, I will set a user's nick to "protect" status. To insure against any senseless and unmotivated kickings in this rough neighborhood. <Joe Pesci>"That's a real nice conversation you're having there. It would be a shame if anything were... uh... to 'happen' to it."</Pesci>

(psst... we're really friendly. But don't tell anyone I told you that.)

Grace, it would seem the best way to deal with this is be on IRC more often, so that folks know rats = btgog (if you read "best way" as "my cunning plan"). It also helps if you can set your Ident to something recognizable to us, but if you don't know how to do that, don't worry about it. Folks should be performing a /whois on you before they kick you, so if they see "rats is btgog@your.ip.block" they'll put 2 and 2 together.

One thing people should understand: The channel as a whole is very welcoming to new people, and there's usually a genuine effort to get to know them the first time they come in (unless something else is going on at the time). But in the past, there have been some ill-intentioned (and unknown) people who have come in, lurked, and caused some problems. The incident of Miko getting all sorts of unwanted email and having to change her address is a possible example.

When #metachat shut down and #bunnies started up, there was an agreement on the part of the ops that #bunnies should be a friendly and welcoming place, and that we should try to avoid some of the idiocies and meltdowns that seem to be a congenital IRC problem. Since outsiders have tried to start shit with us before, lurking strangers who never speak are, yes, a little suspect. That's an easy enough problem to fix for the lurking strangers -- just say hello. It's a friendly group.

And as for orthogonality's accusation of the ops being cliquish: When #metachat went away, a call was posted here for ANYONE who was interested to join an email list discussing how to make a transition to a new channel. Those people were added as ops because a) there weren't very many, b) everyone had valuable contributions. If you see that as a clique, I'll point out to you that all you had to do was act interested. And ortho, you'd sworn off IRC before, loudly and publicly, and if I remember correctly, back when it was still #metachat. So I think it's disingenuous of you to blame your absence on the people who are working to keep #bunnies as friendly as possible for the newcomers and the regulars.

And for the record, I've kicked a few lurkers lately myself, but I always attach a message that says something like "You're so quiet, hope to see you back soon."

I'm on the anti-lurker side of the fence. Not that that counts for much, being as I rarely IRC. But I think that lurking creates more elitism and cliquish-ness, not less, because then the same few people are always there (more than is already the case) and they become even more propietary about the channel than they already are.

But that's really a more general pet-peeve of mine. There is a personality type that, within the context of a community, becomes involved in a particular project or activity (that is intended to be egalitarian and open to the entire community) and then becomes increasingly propietary about it and their own participation. This almost always inspires in me a nearly visceral dislike which, I realize, is probably mostly irrational and has to do with my own personal issues.

"If you see that as a clique, I'll point out to you that all you had to do was act interested."

No, that's not completely true. There's a way to handle things like this in a non-propietary and non-cliquish way. Just by virtue of participation doesn't make someone cliquish and propietary. I recognize that investing a lot of personal effort and time into something inevitably inspires those sorts of feelings in any person, but some people fight those impulses while other people indulge themselves in them because (I suspect), for them that's a big part of their motivation for being involved in the first place.

/me votes mudpuppie.