XSF Discussion - 2020-10-22


  1. intosi has left
  2. sonny has joined
  3. emus has left
  4. lskdjf has left
  5. intosi has joined
  6. Seve has left
  7. intosi has left
  8. intosi has joined
  9. Andrzej has joined
  10. intosi has left
  11. Arne has left
  12. intosi has joined
  13. Andrzej has left
  14. jcbrand has joined
  15. intosi has left
  16. Arne has joined
  17. waqas has joined
  18. intosi has joined
  19. papatutuwawa has left
  20. papatutuwawa has joined
  21. akkiko has left
  22. intosi has left
  23. intosi has joined
  24. adityaborikar has left
  25. adityaborikar has joined
  26. alex-a-soto has left
  27. alex-a-soto has joined
  28. sonny has left
  29. sonny has joined
  30. intosi has left
  31. jcbrand has left
  32. adityaborikar has left
  33. adityaborikar has joined
  34. intosi has joined
  35. papatutuwawa has left
  36. papatutuwawa has joined
  37. Andrzej has joined
  38. intosi has left
  39. Andrzej has left
  40. jrsmatt has joined
  41. intosi has joined
  42. jrsmatt has left
  43. arc has left
  44. arc has joined
  45. intosi has left
  46. Mikaela has joined
  47. intosi has joined
  48. Mikaela has left
  49. Mikaela has joined
  50. Seve has joined
  51. lorddavidiii has joined
  52. intosi has left
  53. Half-Shot has left
  54. Matthew has left
  55. uhoreg has left
  56. Rixon 👁🗨 has left
  57. Matthew has joined
  58. Half-Shot has joined
  59. Rixon 👁🗨 has joined
  60. uhoreg has joined
  61. emus has joined
  62. eevvoor has joined
  63. eevvoor has left
  64. intosi has joined
  65. Tobias has joined
  66. Andrzej has joined
  67. paul has joined
  68. papatutuwawa has left
  69. papatutuwawa has joined
  70. eevvoor has joined
  71. intosi has left
  72. neshtaxmpp has left
  73. j.r has left
  74. j.r has joined
  75. intosi has joined
  76. DebXWoody has joined
  77. lorddavidiii has left
  78. Andrzej has left
  79. j.r has left
  80. intosi has left
  81. j.r has joined
  82. wurstsalat has left
  83. neshtaxmpp has joined
  84. Andrzej has joined
  85. emus has left
  86. lorddavidiii has joined
  87. emus has joined
  88. intosi has joined
  89. wurstsalat has joined
  90. intosi has left
  91. jcbrand has joined
  92. Andrzej has left
  93. floretta has left
  94. waqas has left
  95. papatutuwawa has left
  96. lorddavidiii has left
  97. papatutuwawa has joined
  98. intosi has joined
  99. adityaborikar has left
  100. adityaborikar has joined
  101. nordmike has left
  102. nordmike has joined
  103. adityaborikar has left
  104. adityaborikar has joined
  105. Andrzej has joined
  106. mdosch has left
  107. mdosch has joined
  108. papatutuwawa has left
  109. mdosch >Personally I think it's correct as is. I don't like the current way most clients I've used send images (OOB and the URL in the body) and in my own clients I wouldn't want to do that because I personally expect to be able to send a separate message along with an image like most commercial messengers, MMS, etc. let you do. Sam on the ML. I'd really like to be able to send a caption together with an image/file too but using the message body might cause problems as afaik you have to put the URL of the uploaded file only there and not OOB if you use OMEMO as it only encrypts the body.
  110. adityaborikar has left
  111. adityaborikar has joined
  112. marc has joined
  113. marc has left
  114. Dele Olajide has joined
  115. Andrzej has left
  116. marc has joined
  117. papatutuwawa has joined
  118. j.r has left
  119. j.r has joined
  120. ChronosX88 has joined
  121. alex-a-soto has left
  122. emus has left
  123. alex-a-soto has joined
  124. emus has joined
  125. eevvoor has left
  126. debacle has joined
  127. Zash OOB does support a description, but I don't know if that shows up anywhere and you can't have it in the body with this undocumented body==url method.
  128. adityaborikar has left
  129. adityaborikar has joined
  130. Ge0rG I'm sure somebody will document the undocumented body==url method Real Soon Now™
  131. xecks has joined
  132. Link Mauve has joined
  133. eevvoor has joined
  134. eevvoor has left
  135. lskdjf has joined
  136. lorddavidiii has joined
  137. Zash Any day now
  138. Daniel after reading 66 again I too believe it should be a seperate informational xep
  139. Daniel because retrofitting 66 to cover the current usage is … bad…
  140. Ge0rG Daniel: you could change §6 into §6.1 under a new section "Application Use Cases", and add inline media as §6.2
  141. Ge0rG §6 already claims: > This section is non-normative.
  142. flow +1
  143. Ge0rG Daniel: did you have any pending further changes on CS'21 beyond the submitted and accepted PR?
  144. Daniel none written down
  145. Daniel i'd still like to mention styling
  146. Ge0rG Daniel: +1 to that
  147. Ge0rG Daniel: but now that XEP-0443 is in Last Call, it would be better to reply to standards@ with the suggestion
  148. Ge0rG I'm sure there will be plenty controversy.
  149. Daniel i don’t want to include it in the compliance part
  150. Daniel just mention it
  151. Ge0rG ...from the "UX is outside of the scope of the XSF" faction ;)
  152. DebXWoody has left
  153. MattJ Ge0rG [08:50]: > I'm sure somebody will document the undocumented body==url method Real Soon Now™ It's been documented on modernxmpp.org for months (years?) ;)
  154. Seve The face when you tell people they can't write a message along with the image they are sending
  155. edhelas send the picture, then send a message
  156. edhelas et voilà :p
  157. Seve Fixing the root cause might also be a solution ;)
  158. Ge0rG MattJ: next time you do an XMPP poll, ask the people whether they knew about modernxmpp.org before you asked.
  159. adityaborikar has left
  160. adityaborikar has joined
  161. Alex has left
  162. Andrzej has joined
  163. Ge0rG Daniel: would you write that email?
  164. lorddavidiii has left
  165. Daniel I can create a PR
  166. Daniel Never ask the people if you don't know the out come
  167. Daniel Or something along those lines
  168. lorddavidiii has joined
  169. Ge0rG > Daniel: but now that XEP-0443 is in Last Call, it would be better to reply to standards@ with the suggestion
  170. goffi has joined
  171. Ge0rG (it's no problem to say "no", I'd just like to know because otherwise I'd write that)
  172. Alex has joined
  173. pasdesushi has joined
  174. pasdesushi has left
  175. pasdesushi has joined
  176. pasdesushi has left
  177. pasdesushi has joined
  178. Nano4BeingYou has joined
  179. pasdesushi has left
  180. pasdesushi has joined
  181. wladmis has joined
  182. adityaborikar has left
  183. adityaborikar has joined
  184. pasdesushi has left
  185. pasdesushi has joined
  186. pasdesushi has left
  187. pasdesushi has joined
  188. pasdesushi has left
  189. pasdesushi has joined
  190. pasdesushi has left
  191. Ge0rG sorry, the email has arrived now
  192. Nano4BeingYou has left
  193. winfried has left
  194. winfried has joined
  195. lorddavidiii has left
  196. pasdesushi has joined
  197. winfried has left
  198. winfried has joined
  199. lorddavidiii has joined
  200. Steve Kille has left
  201. pasdesushi has left
  202. Steve Kille has joined
  203. pasdesushi has joined
  204. emus has left
  205. emus has joined
  206. pasdesushi has left
  207. adityaborikar has left
  208. adityaborikar has joined
  209. winfried has left
  210. winfried has joined
  211. stpeter has joined
  212. stpeter has left
  213. j.r has left
  214. lorddavidiii has left
  215. j.r has joined
  216. alex-a-soto has left
  217. nordmike has left
  218. LNJ has left
  219. LNJ has joined
  220. debacle has left
  221. lorddavidiii has joined
  222. serge90 has left
  223. lorddavidiii has left
  224. Daniel has left
  225. lorddavidiii has joined
  226. Daniel has joined
  227. wladmis has left
  228. wladmis has joined
  229. adityaborikar has left
  230. adityaborikar has joined
  231. mdosch Wouldn't it be helpful to give the reporter the ability to send the last (or last N) received messages with a 0377 report? How is a server operator supposed to know whether the complaint is legit or not if no debug logging is activated?
  232. mdosch Wouldn't it be helpful to give the reporter the ability to send the last (or last N) received message(s) with a 0377 report? How is a server operator supposed to know whether the complaint is legit or not if no debug logging is activated?
  233. Ge0rG mdosch: the problem is that a user could fake a spam report in that case
  234. Ge0rG I've already asked back in the day to include the stanza-id (not the stanza id, ha-ha) of the offending message, so that the server operator can pull it from the user's MAM
  235. serge90 has joined
  236. eevvoor has joined
  237. Daniel Ge0rG: technically you could probably put something in the privacy policy that by reporting a jid as spam you give the operator permission to access your MAM for that account
  238. Daniel Because in proper cases it's all spam messages anyway
  239. Daniel Or just one really
  240. Daniel No need to provide an individual id
  241. Ge0rG Daniel: as I'm not convinced of the current status of 0377 and I refuse to implement it because the current implementations are a mere simulation of handling the problem, no.
  242. mdosch Yes, I'd also say the "report this user" is giving you consent to access this particular chat.
  243. Ge0rG And my privacy policy already contains a statement about messages automatically flagged as spam
  244. Ge0rG Once 0377 can report actual spam messages / ensure that they are available in the user's MAM, and once there is useful admin escalation beyond writing something to the server log file, well, then we are talking.
  245. Zash That's implementation, nothing to do with the XEP itself.
  246. eevvoor has left
  247. Ge0rG Zash: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-September/033356.html
  248. mdosch Right now it's only "X reported Y for $reason", no message content or message id.
  249. Nano4BeingYou has joined
  250. Ge0rG I'm sure the current implementations are well-intentioned, but they don't work against real-life spambots with throw-away JIDs, which only spam you once or at most twice and then stop being used.
  251. Nano4BeingYou has left
  252. Ge0rG So a user will eagerly "block & report" the first one, then wonder why the same spam comes from a different user, then just give up in resignation
  253. Ge0rG So effectively you are teaching users that "block & report" doesn't yield the desired effect.
  254. Ge0rG Given a stanza-id, the server implementation could at least block the same message from being ever sent to the user again
  255. Zash That thread never turned into a XEP revision? Hrm
  256. Zash Anyone wanna volonteer to PR?
  257. Ge0rG Zash: you just did!
  258. Zash I have -1 spare cycles at the moment.
  259. eevvoor has joined
  260. Ge0rG Zash: do the PR, then you are at -2. Repeat often enough and you'll yield an integer overflow and have almost unlimited time
  261. Ge0rG Zash: while you are at it, please specify that the report may contain zero, one or many stanza-id references.
  262. peetah has joined
  263. Ge0rG FWIW, you could just allow stuffing a list of <stanza-id xmlns='urn:xmpp:sid:0'/> elements into the <report/>
  264. winfried has left
  265. winfried has joined
  266. winfried has left
  267. winfried has joined
  268. mdosch > Given a stanza-id, the server implementation could at least block the same message from being ever sent to the user again That would be a big improvement. 😃
  269. Ge0rG mdosch: oh really?
  270. Zash Does Sam still want to be author?
  271. Andrzej has left
  272. Andrzej has joined
  273. peetah has left
  274. APach has left
  275. MattJ Again, I think this is unnecessary and silly
  276. MattJ Users don't report individual messages in reality
  277. MattJ "This message from the spam bot was spam, but none of the other messages were"
  278. MattJ Seriously? :)
  279. APach has joined
  280. Kev If we were to use References it'd allow you to report which bit of the body of a particular message was spammy, excluding the rest of the message.
  281. mdosch MattJ: > "This message from the spam bot was spam, but none of the other messages were" > Seriously? :) It's for the operator to have a proof that it was a spambot and not a false complaint.
  282. MattJ How does it add proof?
  283. Zash Like Daniel said, could just fetch the last few messages (probably only one or two) with that "contact" (MAM 'with') and ????
  284. Zash Assuming these go in MAM
  285. MattJ If they don't, a stanza id is useless
  286. Andrzej has left
  287. mdosch > How does it add proof? You see the message was e.g. carder spam and not the ex-girlfriend which annoyed the user. In the latter case he can block her but there is no need for the server operator to take further actions.
  288. Andrzej has joined
  289. mdosch Right now the reports are not really useful for me.
  290. MattJ You can go and look up messages in the archive right now, you don't need an id
  291. Kev I think you mean evidence, rather than proof, FWIW. But I think Matt is right, at least for the type of spam we see at the moment looking at any messages in the archive would probably be sufficient.
  292. mdosch > martin@mdosch.de reported shark2@404.city as spammer: no reason given > martin@mdosch.de reported comprehend@default.rs as spammer: no reason given So I have to dig in the archive now?
  293. MattJ mdosch, and what do you think a stanza id will do for you?
  294. winfried has left
  295. winfried has joined
  296. mdosch > I think you mean evidence, rather than proof, FWIW. Maybe, no native speaker here.
  297. Kev But I also think that mdosch is right in that if you rely on whole-archive searching spammers will start sending legitimate-messages between themselves to make that more onerous, and highlighting where the admin should look helps.
  298. MattJ > martin@mdosch.de reported shark2@404.city's message 25ee8f48-851d-4cb9-8d81-3c34b1f892ce as spam: no reason given
  299. MattJ An immense improvement!
  300. mdosch > mdosch, and what do you think a stanza id will do for you? The server module could fetch it and add it to the notification I hope. 😃
  301. Kev Ah, righ,t what I say is false. You know who submitted the report, so you can look at the spammer's history with that entity.
  302. Kev So I'm mostly with Matt, I think.
  303. Daniel Just get the last three messages from Spammer to reporter and add it
  304. MattJ mdosch, as I and everyone else already said, you don't need an id to query the archive
  305. Ge0rG Kev: it's about automatic processing. Having a stanza-id or a list of stanza-ids will allow the server to automatically fetch the message content and to do smart content-based blocking
  306. Ge0rG While *technically* you could just fetch the message history of the user with the reported JID without explicit consent, you still don't know which of the messages are the ones that you'd like to auto-block, maybe even for other users.
  307. DebXWoody has joined
  308. marc has left
  309. marc has joined
  310. Ge0rG OTOH, the overhead of adding a list of stanza-ids to the protocol looks rather trivial
  311. winfried has left
  312. winfried has joined
  313. Daniel In the case or a real Spammer it will all be spam messages
  314. arc has left
  315. arc has joined
  316. Ge0rG how is the server admin supposed to know who's a real spammer?
  317. arc has left
  318. arc has joined
  319. Daniel You have to sanity check that either way
  320. Zash How is whatever receives the reports supposed to know that I'm not trying to game the reporting system?
  321. mdosch > In the case or a real Spammer it will all be spam messages I recently got a sub and totally innocent looking message prior to the spam.
  322. mdosch Some also send a simple 'Hello' first. You probably don't want to block this message content automatically.
  323. Daniel Yes. But that's independent of blocking with or without message I'd
  324. MattJ The premise of adding stanza-id(s) to the report: 1) it helps admins (false) 2) clients will expose per-message reporting in their UI (hopefully false)
  325. Daniel Yes. But that's independent of blocking with or without message id
  326. Daniel Yes exactly. The UX flow in my client will remain as 'block this user'
  327. Daniel Not report this message
  328. Ge0rG Daniel: "block this user and report the messages to the server admin"
  329. Zash You could have "report this conversation"
  330. MattJ Ge0rG, all that does it tell the server information it already has?!
  331. Ge0rG or "block this user // [ ] report message content"
  332. MattJ Ge0rG, all that does is tell the server information it already has?!
  333. Zash MattJ, it'd tell the admin about messages that got trough whatever spam filters are in place, so they can be further tuned.
  334. MattJ Zash, messages that are blocked go into the archive?
  335. Ge0rG MattJ: it's also about explicit consent
  336. Ge0rG MattJ: GDPR and things
  337. MattJ Ge0rG, it's absolutely not, the wire protocol has no bearing on consent at all
  338. Zash MattJ, ???
  339. Ge0rG yeah, right. Let the admin sort out the GDPR issues.
  340. MattJ Ge0rG, "the client sent me some ids, therefore the user consented to me reading them" is absolutely not going to stand up in the court of GDPR :)
  341. Ge0rG MattJ: given explicit message flagging (a sane UI for which is probably not too far fetched), the server could block the content of those messages automatically in the future
  342. Ge0rG MattJ: no, but a privacy policy where "messages flagged by the user as spam will be inspected" will
  343. MattJ Zash, I don't understand what you're saying - how would it tell the admin anything?
  344. MattJ Ge0rG, so when the user reports a greeting message, the server should block all greetings?
  345. Zash MattJ, messages that got trough the spam filter (and into the archive), those can be reported and let the admin see what got troguh
  346. Ge0rG MattJ: to that user
  347. MattJ Zash, but that is unrelated to whether stanza ids are included in the report, no?
  348. Ge0rG MattJ: I also wanted to make 0377 depend on the user having MAM
  349. Ge0rG MattJ: well, technically I don't care *how* it is technically implemented, as long as there is a way for the user / client to tell the server admin which messages are spam.
  350. Syndace has left
  351. Syndace has joined
  352. Ge0rG but the current combination of XEP and implementations is useless for me as a server admin trying to fight spam, and that hasn't changed in some three years.
  353. Ge0rG and now I'm back to doing real work.
  354. Zash MattJ, well, "this message right here" vs "some of the recent messages this user sent" can be useful?
  355. MattJ Zash, only if that's exposed in the UI
  356. MattJ which as we just heard from one of the leading client authors, it won't be
  357. Zash Long-press the spam, "report this" ?
  358. MattJ and I can understand why
  359. Ge0rG what Zash said.
  360. Ge0rG alternatively, have a list of the last N messages with checkboxes in front
  361. MattJ ...
  362. Zash Optional? If left out, its "something recently in this conversation"
  363. winfried has left
  364. winfried has joined
  365. MattJ <-- despair
  366. MattJ Add it to the XEP, nobody will use it for many reasons, but at least it's there and we can stop talking about it then :)
  367. Daniel But is 'only some of those messages are spam' a realistic scenario?
  368. MattJ It will change absolutely nothing
  369. Daniel That would require hijacking accounts right?
  370. Daniel Is this happening on a large scale?
  371. Zash If we only care about spam
  372. Zash 377 also has some stuff about "general abuse"
  373. Zash MattJ, one client author is not going to use it and another client author refuses to implement unless stuff... how2resolve?
  374. Ge0rG Daniel: yes it is, because many spam bots start with a "hi" and then only follow up with spam if you respond
  375. Daniel Well in that case the hi is spam as well
  376. Daniel Not something you might want to train your filter with
  377. Ge0rG Daniel: but not every hi is spam, whereas every spam message is
  378. Daniel But Spam nonetheless
  379. Daniel Yes. But it's part of a general pattern
  380. Daniel Ultimately you want to block that as well
  381. Ge0rG Yes.
  382. Ge0rG But I won't come closer to that goal by receiving spam reports about messages that are only "hi"
  383. Daniel If I was to report it manually I'd report that initial message as well
  384. Ge0rG Except maybe if I get full XML of those messages from which I can derive even more things.
  385. Daniel I often block people after sending me a single hi and nothing else
  386. Daniel We just don't have reporting enabled
  387. Ge0rG Anyway, if the server admins would rather fix the tooling than change the XEP, and if everybody is in agreement that all messages from a reported JID must be spam, then please just go on and implement the tooling!
  388. Ge0rG Anyway, if the server developers would rather fix the tooling than change the XEP, and if everybody is in agreement that all messages from a reported JID must be spam, then please just go on and implement the tooling!
  389. APach has left
  390. APach has joined
  391. Alex has left
  392. Alex has joined
  393. MattJ I look forward to your funding for that work :)
  394. Andrzej has left
  395. Daniel It doesn't seem too far fetched to actually do get some funding for that
  396. Andrzej has joined
  397. Ge0rG I've said time and again that user spam reporting is worthless for me without having full XML of the offending content. Actually I'd even want to see the full presence XML, but nobody is storing that anyway.
  398. Ge0rG MattJ: ironically, my existing approach works well enough without user reports.
  399. MattJ Sure, I don't blame you for not wanting user reports right now, as they're unnecessary for anything you are doing
  400. Ge0rG having to manually inspect user reports would actually worsen the situation for me.
  401. MattJ But we need to have the protocol there and implemented, because we can do useful things when it is
  402. Ge0rG MattJ: we also disagree on that poing
  403. MattJ and that includes capturing full XML if needed, even withot stanza ids
  404. Zash Ge0rG: Use it for metrics!
  405. Ge0rG MattJ: we also disagree on that point
  406. MattJ Well I'm not going into that one again
  407. Ge0rG MattJ: in that case please go on and implement useful things with the existing protocol
  408. Ge0rG it's been there since 2017 ;)
  409. MattJ I shall, at some point
  410. Ge0rG I'd eagerly use it once it is actually reducing the cost for me vs. what I'm doing now
  411. MattJ I've been doing a lot, but I have a lot to do in many different areas
  412. Ge0rG MattJ: yes, we all suffer under limited time
  413. MattJ I've put some serious research into this topic, including what existing tools and frameworks we can lean on (if properly integrated)
  414. MattJ We're not the first people to suffer from spam and abuse :)
  415. Ge0rG MattJ: yes, and there will be a time when xmpp spammers start to learn from other spammers
  416. Zash Also, how does reporting work in MUC/MIX?
  417. Ge0rG Zash: you can report and block the MUC
  418. Zash Myeah...
  419. Ge0rG well, you *could* implement 0377 on a MUC JID, but reports don't contain a timestamp or a message reference, so you'd end up reporting a random nickname.
  420. Ge0rG good luck finding out who owned that nickname from the server's MAM
  421. Zash Occupant IDs
  422. Ge0rG but of course you could add a XEP-0421 inside
  423. Ge0rG I still think that 0421 is a sort of a privacy violation
  424. MattJ Now for MUC... stanza-id would be useful :)
  425. Zash Vote-based XEP-0425?
  426. Ge0rG can you say that again, louder?
  427. Zash Detaching the reporting from the blocking also makes more sense with MUC
  428. Ge0rG would a report generate a popup on all logged in room moderators' clients?
  429. Zash There's prior art for that kind of thing, with asking for voice
  430. Zash I'd probably stick some ⚠️ symbol with a counter on the message or something, plus a notification
  431. Zash Said the server developer who isn't working on a client.
  432. moparisthebest has left
  433. floretta has joined
  434. moparisthebest has joined
  435. antranigv has left
  436. winfried has left
  437. winfried has joined
  438. neshtaxmpp has left
  439. lorddavidiii has left
  440. neshtaxmpp has joined
  441. lorddavidiii has joined
  442. floretta has left
  443. goffi has left
  444. LNJ has left
  445. DebXWoody has left
  446. LNJ has joined
  447. floretta has joined
  448. Dele Olajide has left
  449. Nano4BeingYou has joined
  450. lorddavidiii has left
  451. Seve 🕊
  452. MattJ Oh :)
  453. MattJ Guus?
  454. Guus here
  455. Nano4BeingYou has left
  456. MattJ Let's have a short one
  457. MattJ 0) Roll call
  458. MattJ Me
  459. lorddavidiii has joined
  460. Guus eye
  461. Guus aye?
  462. Guus me.
  463. Seve says "me"
  464. MattJ 1) Topics for decisions
  465. MattJ 1.1) Martin Dosch to be appointed to the Editor Work Team
  466. adityaborikar has left
  467. marc has left
  468. MattJ This is a motion from Ralph via email. Martin applied, and has been approved by Council per the process (who knew?)
  469. MattJ All that remains is that Board approves
  470. MattJ and Ralph also sent a +1 on this via email
  471. MattJ I am also +1, and thank Martin for volunteering :)
  472. Guus +1 for me
  473. Seve +1 too, thank you Martin
  474. pep. has joined
  475. pep. .
  476. MattJ Just in time, pep. :)
  477. pep. +1 for Martin :)
  478. jonas’ %s/Martin/mdosch/ for local mentions :)
  479. MattJ Excellent, approved unanimously
  480. MattJ XSF_Martin
  481. MattJ 2) AOB
  482. MattJ Looks like Trello has been tidied (thanks to Ralph/whoever did that)
  483. lorddavidiii has left
  484. MattJ There are a number of "Awaiting feedback" items that I'm not inclined to wade through right now unless someone wants to pick one up specifically
  485. pep. Just a note from me to say I'm not reapplying as member (membership expiring this quarter), nor for board.
  486. MattJ :(
  487. Zash :(
  488. Guus Sorry to hear that, pep.
  489. jonas’ oh
  490. Seve Sad to hear that, hope all is right pep.
  491. adityaborikar has joined
  492. jonas’ I follow the sentiments of Guus and Seve on this one
  493. pep. Yeah. I'm just spending my time differently. I'm more useful elsewhere
  494. MattJ You'll be missed, though I hope you're not departing the community :)
  495. alex-a-soto has joined
  496. MattJ Ok, let's wrap up the meeting
  497. MattJ 3) Date of next
  498. MattJ +1w
  499. pep. ok
  500. Seve +1
  501. MattJ 4) Meeting closed
  502. vanitasvitae has left
  503. Seve Thank you for picking up the steering wheel today MattJ
  504. MattJ I'll send minutes for this and the previous meeting shortly
  505. goffi has joined
  506. mdosch Thank you all. 😃
  507. emus Thanks Martin!
  508. MattJ mdosch, Github username? :)
  509. mdosch mdosch
  510. MattJ Shocking
  511. MattJ Invite sent
  512. mdosch Thanks
  513. neshtaxmpp has left
  514. jonas’ mdosch, also xmpp:editor@muc.xmpp.org?join
  515. marc has joined
  516. lorddavidiii has joined
  517. vanitasvitae has joined
  518. Dele Olajide has joined
  519. marc has left
  520. marc has joined
  521. vanitasvitae has left
  522. antranigv has joined
  523. vanitasvitae has joined
  524. vanitasvitae has left
  525. Dele Olajide has left
  526. Dele Olajide has joined
  527. alameyo has left
  528. alameyo has joined
  529. adityaborikar has left
  530. antranigv has left
  531. lorddavidiii has left
  532. Wojtek has joined
  533. Dele Olajide has left
  534. goffi has left
  535. goffi has joined
  536. winfried has left
  537. winfried has joined
  538. antranigv has joined
  539. wladmis has left
  540. wladmis has joined
  541. Mikaela has left
  542. antranigv has left
  543. arc has left
  544. arc has joined
  545. antranigv has joined
  546. arc has left
  547. arc has joined
  548. arc has left
  549. arc has joined
  550. debacle has joined
  551. arc has left
  552. arc has joined
  553. arc has left
  554. arc has joined
  555. arc has left
  556. arc has joined
  557. arc has left
  558. arc has joined
  559. Dele Olajide has joined
  560. DebXWoody has joined
  561. lorddavidiii has joined
  562. adityaborikar has joined
  563. lovetox has joined
  564. sonny has left
  565. sonny has joined
  566. adityaborikar has left
  567. adityaborikar has joined
  568. eevvoor has left
  569. focus121 has left
  570. focus121 has joined
  571. stpeter has joined
  572. stpeter has left
  573. lovetox has left
  574. sonny has left
  575. Dele Olajide has left
  576. Dele Olajide has joined
  577. jcbrand has left
  578. sonny has joined
  579. akkiko has joined
  580. focus121 has left
  581. focus121 has joined
  582. jcbrand has joined
  583. focus121 has left
  584. focus121 has joined
  585. sonny has left
  586. sonny has joined
  587. focus121 has left
  588. focus121 has joined
  589. sonny has left
  590. focus121 has left
  591. focus121 has joined
  592. sonny has joined
  593. focus121 has left
  594. focus121 has joined
  595. Ge0rG has left
  596. Ge0rG has joined
  597. alex-a-soto has left
  598. Steve Kille has left
  599. alex-a-soto has joined
  600. focus121 has left
  601. focus121 has joined
  602. Steve Kille has joined
  603. nyco has joined
  604. nyco has left
  605. nyco has joined
  606. Andrzej has left
  607. Andrzej has joined
  608. nyco has left
  609. nyco has joined
  610. xecks has left
  611. xecks has joined
  612. Andrzej has left
  613. Andrzej has joined
  614. nyco has left
  615. Mikaela has joined
  616. nyco has joined
  617. nyco has left
  618. nyco has joined
  619. nyco has left
  620. nyco has joined
  621. nyco has left
  622. nyco has joined
  623. nyco has left
  624. nyco has joined
  625. intosi has left
  626. nyco has left
  627. nyco has joined
  628. Andrzej has left
  629. Andrzej has joined
  630. antranigv has left
  631. nyco has left
  632. nyco has joined
  633. Andrzej has left
  634. Andrzej has joined
  635. nyco has left
  636. Andrzej has left
  637. pasdesushi has joined
  638. intosi has joined
  639. meeson has left
  640. meeson has joined
  641. antranigv has joined
  642. pasdesushi has left
  643. nyco has joined
  644. nyco has left
  645. nyco has joined
  646. intosi has left
  647. ChronosX88 has left
  648. paul has left
  649. lovetox has joined
  650. nyco has left
  651. pasdesushi has joined
  652. nyco has joined
  653. vanitasvitae has joined
  654. antranigv has left
  655. pasdesushi has left
  656. nyco has left
  657. sonny has left
  658. sonny has joined
  659. intosi has joined
  660. vanitasvitae has left
  661. Andrzej has joined
  662. vanitasvitae has joined
  663. paul has joined
  664. antranigv has joined
  665. alex-a-soto has left
  666. alex-a-soto has joined
  667. antranigv has left
  668. papatutuwawa has left
  669. papatutuwawa has joined
  670. Andrzej has left
  671. intosi has left
  672. marc has left
  673. emus has left
  674. Andrzej has joined
  675. Dele Olajide has left
  676. intosi has joined
  677. Dele Olajide has joined
  678. marc has joined
  679. marc has left
  680. emus has joined
  681. marc has joined
  682. nyco has joined
  683. werdan has joined
  684. nyco has left
  685. nyco has joined
  686. nyco has left
  687. nyco has joined
  688. antranigv has joined
  689. nyco has left
  690. nyco has joined
  691. Andrzej has left
  692. antranigv has left
  693. antranigv has joined
  694. inky has joined
  695. nyco has left
  696. nyco has joined
  697. Ge0rG MattJ: somebody complained that 313 still recommends storing MUC messages in user archives in https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html#business-storeret-user-archives - would be nice to change that
  698. Ge0rG Probably also something about last calls.
  699. nyco has left
  700. Dele Olajide has left
  701. nyco has joined
  702. antranigv has left
  703. adityaborikar has left
  704. paul has left
  705. paul has joined
  706. moparisthebest has left
  707. moparisthebest has joined
  708. intosi has left
  709. DebXWoody has left
  710. intosi has joined
  711. marc has left
  712. Zash has left
  713. Zash has joined
  714. MattJ Huh
  715. lovetox has left
  716. lovetox has joined
  717. MattJ As I suspected, that was added in the revision I wasn't involved in :)
  718. MattJ And doesn't MIX depend on this?
  719. MattJ (though we concluded that was generally not a good thing)
  720. antranigv has joined
  721. lovetox has left
  722. pasdesushi has joined
  723. intosi has left
  724. inky has left
  725. intosi has joined
  726. pasdesushi has left
  727. pasdesushi has joined
  728. Mikaela has left
  729. Tobias has left
  730. pasdesushi has left
  731. intosi has left
  732. goffi has left
  733. pep. has left
  734. wladmis has left
  735. pasdesushi has joined
  736. wladmis has joined
  737. pasdesushi has left
  738. intosi has joined
  739. meeson has left
  740. werdan has left
  741. pasdesushi has joined
  742. inky has joined
  743. edhelas has left
  744. edhelas has joined
  745. pasdesushi has left
  746. intosi has left
  747. pasdesushi has joined
  748. lorddavidiii has left
  749. pasdesushi has left
  750. pasdesushi has joined
  751. pasdesushi has left
  752. stpeter has joined
  753. stpeter has left
  754. pasdesushi has joined
  755. wladmis has left
  756. pasdesushi has left
  757. pasdesushi has joined
  758. intosi has joined
  759. jcbrand has left
  760. paul has left
  761. pasdesushi has left
  762. Dele Olajide has joined
  763. pasdesushi has joined
  764. intosi has left
  765. pasdesushi has left
  766. pasdesushi has joined
  767. pasdesushi has left
  768. deuill has joined
  769. alameyo has left
  770. stpeter has joined
  771. stpeter has left
  772. pasdesushi has joined
  773. Ge0rG What message type does mix use? Do I even want to know?
  774. deuill has left
  775. intosi has joined
  776. pasdesushi has left
  777. LNJ has left
  778. wurstsalat has left
  779. lskdjf has left
  780. inky has left
  781. Wojtek has left
  782. stpeter has joined
  783. stpeter has left
  784. alex-a-soto has left
  785. alex-a-soto has joined
  786. Dele Olajide has left
  787. intosi has left
  788. alameyo has joined
  789. intosi has joined
  790. intosi has left
  791. intosi has joined
  792. emus has left
  793. debacle has left