Re: CD

[Slaygon <slagge@xxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 10 Sep 1997, Christophe Kalt wrote:

> On Sep 10, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> | On Tue, 9 Sep 1997, Christophe Kalt wrote:
> | 
> | > On Sep 09, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> | > | 
> | > | Is it according to "plans" that if you kill off the last op on a channel
> | > | (using /kill) then that channel is channel-delayed?
> | > | 
> | > 
> | > yes.
> | > same as a /kill'ed nick gets nick-delayed.
> | > 
> | > /kill == KILL == nick collision (as far as delays are
> | > concerned)
> | 
> | Yes, I noticed that the nick also got NDed. 
> | 
> | I can understand the nick being NDed, but to make an empty channel CDed is
> | harder to understand. It's not like there was a split and the channel will
> | be "split back".
> 
> if the channel wasn't delayed, that would mean that all you
> need to hack ops is nick collide all ops.

If the ops gets collided, they are gone. If the ops get /kill'ed they're 
gone. CDing the channel doesn't make a difference really, since the "real" 
ops need to nethack themselves to ops anyway. What is there to stop the 
colliders from doing the same?

Anyway, if someone would want to take over a channel, they wouldn't (in 
most cases) use /kill to get rid of the ops. I suppose the ircd sees a 
difference between a /kill and a collide? And in the case of a /kill, CD 
is, IMHO, just plain stupid.

/Slaygon@IRCNet