Re: Anonymous mode for !-channels

[Ville <viha@xxxxxx>]

On Wed, 9 Dec 1998, Michael Neumayer wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 05:00:04PM +0100, Robert Martin-Legene wrote:
> > So in general... don't set this bit if you want to be able to kick + ban
> > kids^H^H^H^Hpeople acting like idiots?

> So better don't allow +a at all. It's good for abuse. *Nothing* else.

Uh huh.

Well, at least for myself, I'd say that's not the case. I frequent one
&channel that is +a. It usually averages 5 to 10 users. Anonymous
!-channels are IMO a good thing (and occasionally fun). That way, the
people interested in it won't have to bother jumping to the correct
server to join the &+a-channel in question (or even start up an extra
client).

As !-channels are uncollidable (and very theoretically takeover-proof),
it is assumed that the original owners (eek) do know what they want to do
with their channel and thus +a does not provide lusers with such a big
load of new means for abuse.

About the (un)removablity of +a on !channels, hmm. Obviously an ethical
question, but on the other hand - I'd say some people would get quite a
bit upset, if they accidentally set +a and are unable to unset it.

I'd say +a should be unsettable to avoid this, but nothing else.



> |    Eumel@IRC             ! LinuX inside !             pgp-key available    |

See ya,

- Ville/viha@xxxxxx