spyked: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-04-02#1023573 <-- aaand done
ossabot: Logged on 2020-04-02 16:35:22 diana_coman: spyked: can I have in #o the article feeds for: younghands.club; ossasepia.com; bingology.net; dorion-mode.com; fixpoint.welshcomputing.com; krankendenken.com; ztkfg.com; trilema.com; thewhet.net; bimbo.club; ave1.org; bvt-trace.net; thetarpit.org
spyked: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-04-02#1023570 <-- it occurs to me that maintaining a (per-channel) list of nicks that are allowed to issue commands in-channel wouldn't be too much of a problem, since that doesn't change too often. it'd act like a sort of local wot for the bot too.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-04-02 16:22:15 diana_coman: !1 list
spyked: and then e.g. !1 subscribe and !1 unsubscribe would be accessible here too, but only for diana_coman
spyked: only when called here, it'd update the channel's subscriptions
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-04-03#1023598 - possibly it's enough to have one person able to do that rather than a whole wot really; otherwise sure, it could work similarly to voice-wot, basically a feeds-wot but it seems overkill to me.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-04-03 05:53:50 spyked: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-04-02#1023570 <-- it occurs to me that maintaining a (per-channel) list of nicks that are allowed to issue commands in-channel wouldn't be too much of a problem, since that doesn't change too often. it'd act like a sort of local wot for the bot too.
spyked: diana_coman, agreed, no need to overload the implementation with a whole "wot" (unless, arguably, the bot in question is also a mirror of deedbot). the principle however remains there, once the bot makes decisions based on user "ratings" (e.g. diana_coman is the owner of #ossasepia), it's stuck maintaining a (perhaps primitive) version of its wot
feedbot: http://trilema.com/2020/toxic-feminity/ << Trilema -- Toxic feminity
diana_coman: spyked: hm, I guess I saw it more as a sort of multi-feeds per user; ie not as much that "diana_coman is owner of #ossasepia" but that diana_coman has a feed in pm and another feed in #ossasepia (and possibly whatever, yet another feed in #nosuchchan etc)
diana_coman: squinting a bit I can kind of see it as a sort of wot too if you take it by location but it doesn't come naturally to me because uhm, what's poor location to do really.
spyked: hm. could you expand the "by location" bit? I'm not sure what you mean
spyked: what I meant is that the set of commands you can issue to the bot denote the relationship between you and the bot, as seen from the bot's perspective
spyked: but yes, there's indeed the added bit "in #ossasepia, #nosuchchan etc." which makes this more of an access control thing, hm.
diana_coman: spyked: isn't it the *same* command though?
spyked: yeah, but the channel's an implicit parameter (much like the "this" in OOP languages)
diana_coman: spyked: so is the pm if you think of it; it's still in the pm "chan", no?
spyked: diana_coman: in ircspeak, "channel" denotes the more general "channel of communication between a and b". when you pm the bot, the channel is "diana_coman"
spyked: when it receives a message from in #ossasepia, the source is still diana_coman, but the channel changes to #ossasepia
spyked has to grok this "bot-wot" thing a bit, not claiming it to be the correct model
diana_coman: hm; you mean that currently bot provides feed to anyone asking *in the channel where they are asking* while this requires a change of "maintain list of who can change feeds in where"
spyked: yes, and there's no restriction re. pm 'channel', i.e. if the channel coresponds to the source, the bot will honor commands
diana_coman: spyked: but is the feed-in-chan a separate/anomaly thing currently, then? basically it needs a sort of alias #ossasepia = diana_coman
diana_coman: aha, as I was typing ^
diana_coman: anyway, might require some more thinking, I guess.
spyked: diana_coman, when I initially wrote the thing, I thought I'd just have feedbot ask deedbot for ratings and only limit access to in-channel commands to #trilema's L1. apparently that's a bit of a hassle, because I couldn't think of a way for feedbot to wait for a response from deedbot that wouldn't add a ton of complexity
spyked: so I decided to do the operator-maintained version, not like requests for changes come too often
spyked bbl
diana_coman: well, requests for changes are indeed unlikely to come all that often but it's still at best a workaround than a solution and moreover, a rather poor one in that it basically banks on the idea of .. little use of the bot? lolz; not like I mind the operator-maintained version but I'd have thought you rather mind it, tbh; anyways, no rush or anything.
diana_coman will be back later
feedbot: http://ztkfg.com/2020/04/thefleet-next-steps-with-data-collection/ << whaack -- TheFleet - Next Steps With Data Collection