[wowaname]

They remain unchanged for now (as I write this post):

>Topical channels [ones that begin with ##] are given out on a first-come, first-served basis. They will expire if unused for a long time, see our policies for details regarding when this occurs. You can contact us on IRC with a request to take over an expired topical channel.

—from https://freenode.net/kb/answer/namespaces

>Topical channels expire after 60 days in which no user on the access list for the channel has joined it.

—from https://freenode.net/policies

Historical precedent shows that channels (both primary ones in the # namespace, and topical ones) are closed when they conflict with policies and there is no way to resolve the conflict, and closures are enforced by services, which restrict access to such channels for any users trying to join. I've both been in channels closed by staff, as well as had one of my channels closed due to such policy conflicts. My channel has since been reopened, once I showed legitimate interest to staff in complying with network policy.

[sfhsfhrhrehrhrh]

It doesn't matter what the written rules say if the group with administrative access just ignores them when convenient.

The rules as used in practice seem to have changed according to the original blog post.

[wowaname]

Please keep track of the thread.

Parent post made a claim that this was not an "abuse of power" and I was clarifying how it was indeed an abuse of power.

Apparently the policies are in the process of being redrafted in response to this, so in the future, what Lee did with ##hntop may very well reflect the actual policies of the network.

[xena]

https://github.com/freenode/web-7.0/pull/513