Re: [Re: [Re: nick collide prevention ideas]]

[Christophe Kalt <kalt@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jul 06, m de`jour wrote:
| If you have little or no roots, no community bonds, your "bail out/abandon
| ship" principle makes sense.  But if you have an established community worth
| having it is worth preserving and protecting.
[..]
| > if you beat the troublemakers by not giving them what they want,
| > pretty soon you'll see that you don't need bots and you don't need to
| > be on IRC 24/7.
| 
| By abandoning an established, well known channel, you give them what they
| want: 1] an established namebrand channel and 2] bragging rights which feeds
| the infantile mentality of those who play takeover games.  You beat them by
| surviving their attacks, not by capitulating and letting them have their way. 
| To do that only encourages them to be more abusive, more aggressive.

no.


(okay, okay.. i'll write more than a single "no")

by using the terms "bail out", "abandon", "beat", "survive",
"capitulating", you show everyone that you have the same
infantile mentiality as troublemakers do.
you show it to us, but more importantly, you show it to them.

IRCNet (and the IRC Software these lists is about) has long
ago decided to go with the "channels and nicknames are not
owned" mantra.  (Bjørn's way of dealing with troublemakers
fits this perfectly.)

May be it should be revisited, may be it is wrong, but you
may not ignore it, and i may not allow features in the IRC
servers which go against it.