Re: invites

[Q <Q@xxxxxxx>]

Ville wrote:
> 
> On 23 Mar 1998, Kaspar Landsberg wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> 
> > you (Christophe Kalt) wrote:
> 
> > | right now, /invite only overrides +i mode,
> > | I'm thinking of having it override +b and +l modes as well,
> > | when issued by a channel operator.
> 
> > | comments?
> 
> > making it override +b will drive some script/bot coders mad whose scripts/
> > bots are (until then probably) checking for bans on join (and kick banned
> > users). [Because until then you can be sure that a banned user joining a
> > channel is evading his ban.]
> 
> I agree.. It makes it quite difficult to see if someone is just
> evading bans (with a split or so) or was invited to the channel by a
> chanop.

I have to agree on the invite not overriding +b too. On the other hand
it could be handy to overwrite it for friends who just happend to be
banned to. Maybe an other mode could be used for that.

> > But well, the benefit of making it the proposed way should be greater than
> > this little 'problem'. So go for it. :)
> 
> Hmm. I wonder if I am the only one with the opinion of not making it
> override +b. But overriding +l/k would imho make sense. What do people
> think about the +k overriding? Do you think it comes naturally with the
> overriding of +b or that it shouldn't override +k ..or ?
> 
> > Kaspar Landsberg, <kl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> - Ville/viha@xxxxxx

It should override +l. Can't see why not.

About the +k. If I invited him, I should could just as well have told
him the key. So if he asks for the key, I could invite him instead.


Q