Session Start: Sun Jul 13 19:50:23 2008 Session Ident: #titan [21:07:53] So let's start [21:07:56] x <--- will freak out x [21:08:03] ~Ž~ LOL ~Ž~ [21:08:07] [ sorry, mIRC decided not to show me the channel ] [21:08:56] Just a quick note, if I leave suddenly, its normal Thunderstorm is running over my head in little FLA [21:09:05] x ...So... erm... how DOES this thing start? x [21:09:11] First of all I am looking for two volunteers who log this and who could sum up what is being decided later for everyone [21:09:16] Anyone? :D [21:09:20] okay [21:09:21] I can, if you need it. [21:09:24] <-- [21:09:24] me 03[21:09:39] * Alana (~alana_cat@stjhnf0120w-142163076020.pppoe-dynamic.nl.aliant.net) has joined #titan [21:09:43] sorry, who are you "BaPo"? [21:09:47] x I can, if its needed. x [21:09:48] Barbara Phoenix [21:09:53] ahh okay [21:09:57] If you want the log stripped of color codes, I can bring my bot in. :D [21:10:27] 0. 01[21:10:29] I automatically strip codes, Cosmo, I can send you my log if you want [21:10:30] er... [21:10:31] no, just someone who can sum up / write up the outcome of this meeting [21:10:44] my elbow hit the keyboard >> [21:10:48] <[A]ddy> +° ouch. °+ 06[21:10:51] * [A]ddy pats alissa [21:10:57] Guys, let's try to stay ontopic, hm? :) 01[21:11:03] lol [21:11:10] <[A]ddy> +° of course ^^ °+ [21:11:15] Thanks [21:11:25] so what we are going to do today is the following [21:11:39] 1. discuss behaviour and language rules for the HOL chat [21:12:06] mm [21:12:07] 2. make an official ops committee [21:12:35] 3. End of school year party (if it is not dawn already when the meeting ends) [21:12:49] (so this is what a school board meeting is like) 03[21:12:57] * PiperMcLaurin (cgiirc@ppp-69-237-101-77.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net) has joined #titan [21:13:11] I hope everyone has read the blog post :D [21:13:32] Does anyone have objections against changing the official hol channel to #hol from tomorrow on? 06[21:13:34] * NickFord read it twice already and is reading it again [21:13:41] ~Ž~ not me ~Ž~ [21:13:43] None here. [21:13:43] [ Nope, not at all. ] [21:13:44] no [21:13:44] I don't [21:13:45] no [21:13:45] no [21:13:45] Nope ___ [21:13:45] nope [21:13:47] Nope. [21:13:47] x Nope x [21:13:47] no [21:13:49] nope [21:13:50] <[A]ddy> +° no, that is better i think :) °+ [21:13:50] no [21:13:50] no [21:13:52] no [21:13:52] Nope [21:13:56] I think it's better than hpgalleries [21:13:56] no [21:14:01] I'd say rather #hol than #hpgalleries [21:14:01] It makes sense, I think. [21:14:08] x Itll get rid of a lot of confusion, I think x [21:14:14] go for it. It makes sense [21:14:23] okay, good - so the cgi chat link will lead to #hol from tomorrow on [21:14:25] I'm too new, I have no reason to disagree :p 06[21:14:33] * Ruben|Hereish nods [21:14:42] I'll miss hpgalleries, that's all :( ___ [21:14:48] x I will NOT. x [21:14:51] <_< [21:14:56] x ...moving no. x [21:14:59] good and bad memories XD [21:14:59] x (*on) x [21:15:08] oh [21:15:14] i'll be in the new channel, so you won't miss it, my lady [21:15:19] We're not closing it down, Allie. You can go in and play whenever you like. xo [21:15:21] you can still go to #hpgalleries if you like, but that won't be an official channel anymore :D [21:15:30] Yay *eg* ___ [21:15:33] it'll still be open for sentimental reasons, I'm sure ;) [21:15:33] So, that means I have to fix my favorites list now 02[21:15:33] * McGonagall (~mcgoogles@nv-71-55-105-76.dhcp.embarqhsd.net) Quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) [21:15:39] we can party in there Allie [21:15:52] x Would that mean that HOL rules will not apply in that channel? x [21:15:53] so now to the core of the meeting, heh [21:15:58] Haha XD [21:16:01] uh oh - chaos? 06[21:16:22] * NickFord gets up for some food [21:16:24] ~Ž~ Sophie, that channel will not be endorsed by HOL anymore ~Ž~ [21:16:36] x Thank you, Ulol. :) x [21:16:41] she got, she's just a bit slow [21:16:46] the task here is that we (as in the vast majority of us here in this room) can agree on a set of rules that will be posted in the handbook and on the site for everyone who is going to official HOL chat rooms 03[21:16:46] * EllieMuffin (cgiirc@pool-71-240-35-101.pitt.east.verizon.net) has joined #titan [21:16:50] x Andyou cant type a coherent sentence. x [21:17:02] *coughhavoccough* XD [21:17:02] the less rules the better [21:17:09] x hear hear x [21:17:12] ooh ___ [21:17:16] Agreed [21:17:17] I agree with this/ 03[21:17:17] * Kiri (cgiirc@118-92-154-150.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz) has joined #titan 06[21:17:29] * Pixel is a fan of less rules. [21:17:30] What are you talking about? [21:17:31] (psst, hi Ellie!) [21:17:34] >_> [21:17:38] Hey Ellie, Hey Kiri [21:17:40] fewer rules in the official HOL channels, Ellie [21:17:57] I agree that less rules are better [21:18:05] easier to remember [21:18:06] *nods* I concur xD [21:18:06] [ fewer rules, but probably more concise for the fact that there's less of them. :) ] [21:18:09] yes [21:18:10] Yea...easier to keep track of :) [21:18:11] True. The less rules, the better people remember them [21:18:12] I guess it depends on what rules :) [21:18:22] <[A]ddy> +° yeah, thats what i was thinking.. °+ [21:18:22] Mark, you spoil sport *grins* [21:18:24] of course it depends on how well the rules are written and how they're interpreted [21:18:25] As long as they enforce respect for others. [21:18:25] agree with Mark [21:18:35] I think we need to agree on certain behavioral rules regarding language and subjects but we don't have to set up a law book for this [21:18:36] I think there should just be a few important rules, like no spaming [21:18:50] I also agree with Mark [21:18:53] I think it's better to have a few well written rules, than a buch of confusing ones. [21:18:56] *bunch [21:18:56] no spamming - no netspeak - no cursing and fighting XD [21:18:57] there needs to be common sense 06[21:19:03] * EllieMuffin agrees [21:19:06] Respect... [21:19:08] No spamming with the exception of cheering for quiddy games. [21:19:16] And just the main topics that are absolutely not accepted [21:19:17] but there you have a special spam room XD [21:19:17] <[A]ddy> +° *nods* °+ [21:19:18] there needs to be *judgement* when you are "enforcing" these rules, and the correct attitude. 03[21:19:21] * McGonagall (~mcgoogles@nv-71-55-105-76.dhcp.embarqhsd.net) has joined #titan [21:19:22] if you have a general rule about respect, then people should be able to use their common sense [21:19:23] <[A]ddy> +° but then wont the ops have to judge too much? °+ [21:19:23] <[A]ddy> +° yeah. °+ [21:19:30] No nudity [21:19:32] <[A]ddy> +° if there arent exact limits. °+ [21:19:32] I guess there also needs to be enough clarity in the rules that we don't hit too many issues with ops with conflicting opinions ^^ [21:19:33] Perhaps we should let Rames talk for a second. 03[21:19:34] * Keira (~keira_ash@r190-64-177-250.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) has joined #titan [21:19:37] 'cause I have memories of those occasions >_> [21:19:37] i think faye's point is very important [21:19:40] discernment, not judgment [21:19:49] <[A]ddy> +° yeah, thats the right word ^^ °+ 06[21:19:53] * [A]ddy waits for rames [21:19:58] we know what she meant [21:19:59] so we will go through all of them now point by point and agree on those guidelines and a description for what is each of them [21:20:09] Maybe just some important rules that are inforced at all times [21:20:20] no, there is a distinct difference and it is important to bring it out [21:20:31] I did that in the post so I will copy them now into here and if anyone disagrees with what I said, speak up :D [21:20:46] :) [21:20:58] ~Ž~ don't discuss what is not still on the table, please ~Ž~ [21:21:12] No nudity [21:21:20] No nudity means there are no pictures of naked people posted anywhere on HOL. This is what this is about. It does not mean that the fact that there is naked skin somewhere under the clothes is a subject that is forbidden to talk about. It is not offensive to talk about nakedness when it is not in a sexual context, ever. [21:21:34] [ seems fine! ] [21:21:36] do I need to clarify this more? [21:21:40] no [21:21:40] I agree with that [21:21:43] [ nope. ] [21:21:43] no and agreed [21:21:44] Very good. [21:21:44] It's fine with me [21:21:44] Don't think so. [21:21:45] I agree [21:21:45] negative x3 [21:21:45] Sounds good [21:21:46] x That makes a lot of sense, yes. x [21:21:48] agree [21:21:49] I agree! [21:21:51] I agree [21:21:54] agree [21:21:54] sounds good [21:21:54] ok [21:21:59] ~Ž~ aye ~Ž~ [21:21:59] it sounds good [21:22:00] agree [21:22:01] yes 06[21:22:16] * Ruben|Hereish nods [21:22:17] I agree [21:22:17] <[A]ddy> +° yes :) °+ [21:22:22] good [21:22:23] I agree [21:22:27] next is "No sexual material" [21:22:34] If I disappear, its cause I'm folding laundry [21:22:45] stay on topic, okay? [21:22:50] I think this is one that might need a little bit of clarification. [21:22:56] No sexual material means pornography, sexually explicit texts or talk, discussing sexual acts etc. - it does not mean that talking about romantic relationships, kissing, love, feeling attracted to people and so on is a taboo subject anywhere on HOL. In fact, these are integral and important parts of the Harry Potter books and films, and rightly so because romantic feelings are nothing that is restricted to adults or older teenagers as most of [21:22:56] <[A]ddy> +° sexual material as in.. like, explicit? °+ [21:23:00] <[A]ddy> +° oh, just kidding. °+ [21:23:00] yes. [21:23:02] <[A]ddy> +° yeah :) °+ [21:23:07] [ that seems fine too. :) ] [21:23:11] agreed [21:23:14] It's clear to me [21:23:16] agreed [21:23:16] agreed [21:23:19] Agreed [21:23:20] I agree with this too [21:23:21] agree [21:23:21] It seems as though that and the nudity one could be combined some how... [21:23:21] I like the point about love being in the books. [21:23:25] agreed [21:23:26] agree [21:23:29] okay [21:23:30] I concur x3 [21:23:30] What about innuendo? How would that be handled? [21:23:31] I agree. [21:23:34] [ Not a bad point, Tegan. ] [21:23:37] clear [21:23:42] Thanks hehe :) [21:23:42] ok [21:23:46] Sounds good :P [21:23:46] x Yes... what *about* innuendo? x [21:23:46] innuendo is a good point [21:23:49] sounds good (it got cut off though after "as most of") [21:23:50] there are some folks who are very clever at innuendo [21:24:01] Yeah. That's a fair point. [21:24:02] that can be a really uncomfortable situation [21:24:10] elaborate a bit, Cosmo :) [21:24:18] exactly, and sometimes more uncomfortable than just plain right out words [21:24:22] what is innuendo? [21:24:23] Sorry I may be stupid but what is innuendo? [21:24:24] x To be fair, the idea of love and kissing could also be uncomfortable to some people. x [21:24:25] lol [21:24:37] <[A]ddy> +° like implying something that is sexually inappropriate °+ [21:24:39] insinuation rather than outright speaking [21:24:39] <[A]ddy> +° :) °+ [21:24:40] mhm [21:24:41] Sophie has a point - have been wondering that too [21:24:47] [ Then they can't even watch G-rated movies, Soph. :) ] [21:24:47] What do you mean by sexually inappropriate, exactly? [21:24:54] true [21:24:56] But I guess that's rather subjective... [21:25:02] I've asked Cosmo, I know what "innuendo" means [21:25:06] [ You can't make everybody happy, but this is just going by societal standards, I'm sure. ] [21:25:23] I sadly think innuendo is difficult to cut out ...because...if you do, people will probably just find a way around it >_> But I understand what you mean XD [21:25:30] ok so let me ge this straight : its something implying something sexual? [21:25:35] someone I mean [21:25:39] [ si ] [21:25:39] I think you can take the whole thing too far, as well, because honestly, it's life, and if someone doesn't want to talk about it, that's fine and they can ask to stop [21:25:41] An innuendo IS a way around it :P [21:25:41] but hey... [21:25:46] we said few rules [21:25:48] The descriptions of appropriateness are pretty clear though [21:25:51] exactly XD [21:25:51] sorry... I didn't understand [21:25:53] <_< [21:26:01] Well, it's just that there have been examples in the past of things that skirt sexual material showing up, often in the form of innuendo, so how should we handle that? Is it going to be an "in the eye of the beholder" thing or should we have a rule or something? [21:26:11] [ Actually, I think innuendo is fine... it's not going to affect a child who can't understand it. Just my opinion. ] 06[21:26:21] * Morag nods [21:26:24] x I think thats a good point x [21:26:24] yea.. [21:26:24] [ The rules should apply to implicit things. ] [21:26:26] I don't think sexual innuedos are a problem. If you're being vulgar, or explicit, that's one thing. If you're alluding to the fact that you're attracted to someone or that sex exists, I don't think that's a problem at all. 06[21:26:27] * EllieMuffin nods [21:26:29] [ Then it can't be subjective. ] [21:26:29] ~Ž~ yeah, Eve ~Ž~ 06[21:26:33] * Ruben|Hereish agrees with Eve [21:26:45] and we should trust people to use common sense? [21:26:53] yes Kiri [21:26:53] ~Ž~ we can hope, Kiri ~Ž~ [21:26:56] definitely [21:26:56] And if the innuendo is that apparent, the ops can handle it [21:26:57] I agree with Eve [21:26:58] I'm talking about things along the lines of that "Save a Horse" song. [21:26:59] I'd say so. [21:26:59] <[A]ddy> +° but then what if the people who *can* understand it feel uncomfortable about it? °+ [21:27:03] <[A]ddy> +° just a thought :) °+ [21:27:03] [ I've always thought it wasn't HOL's job to parent children. :\ That's the parents' job. ] [21:27:13] we need to get to a point where we do trust people and not feeling we should police everything [21:27:15] [ Then they should go to an op and make it an individual scenario. :) ] [21:27:16] I've seen ops using it too anyway >> [21:27:20] If your uncomfortable, then say so [21:27:22] I guess most of us here know how to take those rules as they are worded, those who don't are usually easily to pick out [21:27:25] agree with eve [21:27:29] Exactly. [21:27:36] Personally if someone feels too uncomfortable with another member, report it to an OP [21:27:42] agreed [21:27:44] [ agreed. ] [21:27:45] agreed [21:27:46] and they can deal in private [21:27:46] and if you are uncomfortable, there are kinder ways to suggest how the innuendo should stop, without making the people feel as if they've broken a rule [21:27:48] agreed [21:27:56] <[A]ddy> +° i agree °+ [21:28:00] And there is always the ignore option, if you feel you're the only one bothered by a certain thing [21:28:02] exactly as Faye said [21:28:03] Anyway, innuendos can be so diverse that you can't really have a rigid rule that will tell you how to deal with ALL of them. That's why we need common sense. [21:28:04] which goes back to the appropriate behaviour and attitude of operators 06[21:28:06] * Lissa nods [21:28:09] the same should go for the kissing/love thing [21:28:13] Even just not being afraid to speak out and say it is making them uncomfortable. We are all freindly here and most have no problem moving to a p2p [21:28:14] ~Ž~ and in any case, innuendos qill always make some people unconfortable ~Ž~ [21:28:21] that's what we can type for after all, to say things [21:28:31] [ May I bring up a suggestion about ops... and professors... and staff? ] [21:28:41] Exactly. The OPs are suppose to be friendly and open, so no need to be scared to talk about it [21:28:49] [ Can we make it so actions are always checked by another person? ] [21:29:00] ~Ž~ like a second opinion? ~Ž~ [21:29:02] later, Eve [21:29:02] ~Ž~ tricky ~Ž~ [21:29:05] we get to ops later [21:29:05] [ okedoke :) ] [21:29:21] x To be fair, the idea of love and kissing could also be uncomfortable to some people. x [21:29:23] [ (yeap ulol, but latah) ] [21:29:28] that is always true but for everything [21:29:34] Okay, the discussion went kind of quickly; Rames, how would you phrase the position on innuendo? [21:32:01] man, I should word this now, lol [21:32:13] well what Eve and Faye said is what I agree with [21:32:13] [ XD ] [21:32:26] Me too [21:32:34] Me 3 [21:32:46] x For those who have a short attention span and dont quite remember...? x [21:33:02] It is the intention that matters most to me - trying to offend others or make them uncomfortable is something the community should stop 06[21:33:16] * Ruben|Hereish nods [21:33:19] ~Ž~ yeah, I think intention is the key word ~Ž~ 06[21:33:20] * Morag nods too [21:33:23] x mmhmm x [21:33:27] okay 06[21:33:28] * BaPo agrees 06[21:33:36] * ArdeliahISH agrees [21:33:36] also, innuendo is difficult to assess or modereate, and it's such a fine line that some things can be interpreted many ways - even when someone doesn't MEAN it that way - thus, intent, as Rames said 06[21:33:38] * EllieMuffin agrees [21:33:39] Yes [21:33:40] *moderate [21:33:47] I agree too [21:33:54] and people just develop new ways otherwise >_> [21:34:03] and of course some things will always make people uncomfortable. and there will be operators to step in and try to dispel that 06[21:34:04] * Pixel nods serenly at Amy. [21:34:07] the only issue is HOW they do that [21:34:08] [ Yeah, basically, let's not *force* people to get to new lows. ;) ] 03[21:34:08] * LucyB is now known as Lucy|BRB [21:34:10] and in what manner [21:34:31] so, what's the next rule we're discussing? 03[21:34:42] * KateMonster (~elaineofa@adsl-074-237-239-077.sip.mco.bellsouth.net) has joined #titan [21:35:00] that includes above all asterixs - in my reception using asterixs or misspelling to make things like swear words acceptable just does the opposite and should not be tolerated 03[21:35:13] * TheAman (~aoster4@rrcs-72-43-162-242.nyc.biz.rr.com) has joined #titan [21:35:14] [ oh, yeah, i agree ] [21:35:21] Definitely [21:35:26] sounds logical [21:35:32] right - which is why intent is a huge part of what makes material "appropriate" or not [21:35:35] *nodsnods* 03[21:35:37] * Lucy|BRB is now known as LucyB [21:35:39] [ Can you specify which swear words are actually *not* allowed swear words, though? ] 06[21:35:46] * EllieMuffin nods in agreement [21:35:47] True - but again I think this depends on the situation [21:35:48] Yes I was wondering that [21:35:56] we get to that later [21:36:00] step by step :) [21:36:03] [ kk ] 03[21:36:13] * Aylarah (~aylarah.s@78.144.21.82) has joined #titan [21:36:23] so do we all basically agree on the "no sexual material" part? [21:36:29] *nods* [21:36:29] x as you defined it, yes x [21:36:30] I believe so XD [21:36:30] [ yup ] [21:36:30] Yes. [21:36:31] yes. [21:36:31] Yes [21:36:32] yes [21:36:33] agreed [21:36:33] agree [21:36:35] *shrug* [21:36:35] Agreed. [21:36:36] yes [21:36:37] ö mmhmm ö [21:36:37] Yes [21:36:38] yeap [21:36:38] agreed :) [21:36:38] ~Ž~ yes ~Ž~ [21:36:40] <[A]ddy> +° agreed °+ [21:36:40] yes [21:36:49] yes [21:36:50] okay then "No violence" [21:36:57] No violence should be pretty self-explanatory but let me try to briefly get into this as well. People who believe "The Simpsons" or "Tom and Jerry" are not suitable for children because they are "too violent" do not share the approach HOL is taking. We are not a site for first graders and we should not act like we were. If we go with standard movie ratings we will find huge gaps (Simpsons go from age 6 to age 16 for example), so this does not [21:37:03] let me elaborate this a bit more [21:37:18] (it cut off at so this does not...) [21:37:18] (it cut off after "so this does not") [21:37:24] work and it doesn't apply here anyway as we do not show movies on HOL. What applies is common sense: violence that is directly potentially harmful for people in the room or forum - explicit imagery, videos, threatening language, bullying - is forbidden. Mentioning a book or movie that is the current box office star but might not be PG rated is certainly not forbidden. [21:37:37] thanks Mark [21:37:40] whenever you check what is accepted in certain cultures you will find HUGE DIFFERENCES [21:37:49] I think bullying is a big one [21:37:52] so we need to agree on a standard here [21:38:02] my main points are THREATENING and BULLYING [21:38:04] For sure no bullying. [21:38:07] [ Uhm, yes. ] [21:38:17] yeap, intention again. *nods* [21:38:18] I think no bullying will be tolerated would be a good rule [21:38:19] agreed [21:38:25] I agree on that as well. [21:38:29] and yes agreed [21:38:32] indeed [21:38:34] threatening is the worst as we had that in the past [21:38:38] agree.. no bullying allowed [21:38:46] agreed [21:38:47] <[A]ddy> +° yes. :) like ruben said, though, intention still might be key in some places XD °+ [21:38:49] None of either [21:38:49] Agreed. [21:38:50] on both accounts [21:38:51] basically - no malicious intent *nods* [21:38:54] [ yup ] [21:38:57] Exactly. [21:39:00] yup [21:39:01] Depending on your definitely of bullying, I think it is very easy for members of #hpgalleries to end up bullying a new student that comes in without even realizing they are doing it. [21:39:04] [ including on the part of any op... please, no bullyng. ] [21:39:14] I agree with you Pixel [21:39:15] <[A]ddy> +° *nods* °+ [21:39:18] <[A]ddy> +° totally agree. :) °+ [21:39:20] Yes - indeed [21:39:21] some people do it without realizing it [21:39:22] and sometimes the comments made [21:39:23] Now how does this relate to when we are chatting and we Thwap each other with fish and water ballons? Or is it a different category? [21:39:28] after a newbie has left [21:39:28] yup, I agree as well [21:39:29] Especially if english isn't their first language, they aren't as smart as some others, or they're a bit weird, netspeaking, spammy, etc [21:39:33] x I believe thats intent, again x [21:39:35] that -are- made in the public channel >_> [21:39:35] [ That seems fine, Liah! ] [21:39:41] x the intent in those cases is clearly joking... x [21:39:43] ~Ž~ Liah, intention again :) ~Ž~ 06[21:39:45] * Faye nods [21:39:53] I agree with it be intention [21:39:56] Sometimes things people normally say to each other can be taken differently by someone who is not in that kind of "language" to call it that way - and might feel insulted [21:40:07] but yeah, with newbies...there can be issues [21:40:13] and this also includes ganging up on people's naivety (however you spell that) or youth or maybe even "stupidity" in public chat 06[21:40:14] * Morag nods [21:40:15] especially when too many people try to jump in enforcing rules >_> [21:40:17] well, they are feel free to contact an operator again - and again an operator should be tactful enough to deal with these things [21:40:20] <[A]ddy> +° im just wondering.. but if intention *does* matter, how would one figure out the intention? °+ [21:40:29] I totally agree, Rames. [21:40:34] you use common sense, addy [21:40:35] [ Well, that's what ops are for... if someone feels insulted, they can go to an op and the op can be an intermediate for the two chatters. ] [21:40:40] And I think it can even be a problem amongst the OPs [21:40:43] If you see behaviours you think are innapropriate what do you do? Report or sort it yourself? [21:40:51] <[A]ddy> +° *nods* its just its hard to figure out tone on the internet.. °+ [21:40:51] report it to an operator, Kiri [21:40:56] they should be there to help you [21:40:56] x but i believe that would be the common sense matter again... if a person is new, theres no reason to jokingly be "violent" towards them - how many people would slap a person in the face with a fish if they didnt know them? x [21:40:57] Exactly, Faye. [21:41:03] [ I've seen bullying coming from ops, unfortunately... no offense to any OP, but it's definitely happened. ] [21:41:09] okay here is what you should do - let me just type for a minute [21:41:10] and help the people who offended you as well [21:41:13] lol - yes sophie, good point XD 06[21:41:29] * Ruben|Hereish agrees with Eve [21:41:58] [ (But I'll get to my ops question later, like Rames said. :D) ] [21:42:04] if you get threatened, harrassed etc. this is NOT just limited to in-channel behaviour but also if someone P2P's you with such things. We unfortunately had that in the past. [21:42:13] oh dear [21:42:23] oh my [21:42:37] If something like that happens the person MUST tell someone in charge immediately and action will be taken - as we did before [21:42:47] Rames 02[21:42:53] * RachelS (~rachel.sa@78-69-217-186-no70.tbcn.telia.com) Quit (Ping timeout) [21:42:56] may I say soemthing? [21:42:58] Same for stalkers? [21:42:59] sure [21:43:00] May I ask what actions where taken in the past? [21:43:11] we expelled people Ellie [21:43:14] expelled depending on the severity [21:43:15] banned them [21:43:17] etc [21:43:39]