<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">-1 Mel<br>
</blockquote><div> <br>Ah, sorry - I wasn't clear. I was agreeing with the statement that "nobody interested in comprehending the logs will not have<br>
(or be granted) a shell account from which they can just run irssi and
take care of the logging themselves," and submitting an alternative proposal based on that statement to see whether it clarified the arguments that people had on the topic - I was kinda hoping someone would take it out to a reductio ad absurdum, but should have just done that myself. (<br>
<br>My actual votes, for what it's worth:<br><br>+0 for the "publicly document/encourage the private logging process" proposal I put forth earlier. If privacy concerns really outweigh the overhead to individual loggers this would incur, we should at least make it so that <i>everyone</i> has private logs, at which point the argument against public logging is much weaker (see reductio ad absurdum, above).<br>
+1 for public logging of #sugar (and #sugar-meeting, which is already partially logged by meetbot).<br>-1 for logging without a clear "This channel is being logged at this URL" message in the channel topic.<br>+0 for allowing search engines to crawl logs, with the minor optional request that email addresses be obfuscated (handy-dandy regexp for finding emails: \b[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}\b)<br>
<br>In general, I value consensus on this topic more than I value my exact particular views being implemented, so this ends my chiming-in on this topic as well.<br><br>--Mel<br></div></div>