Re: gac experiment

[Diane Bruce <db@xxxxxx>]

Christophe Kalt says:
> 
> On Feb 02, Diane Bruce wrote:
> |   TimeStamp and Nick Delay/Channel Delay have both been dismal failures.
> 
> i don't know about TS, but the Delay stuff hasn't been a
> failure, as long as one remembers the goal.
> They've both dramatically improved things, buying us time to
> do better.  This is pretty good, especially considering how
> simple they were to put in place.

  I think they've both been failures for different reasons.

  Without DoS, TS and CD/ND did some good.. You know my long term
standing on this. The combination would have been twice as effective.
Oh well.

  The fact is, neither TS or CD/ND prevent nick collides or channel
takeovers. Thats why I boldly stated they both were dismal failures.


> 
> i don't think they were ever presented as an ultimate solution.


  We work towards it. ;-)

> 
> !channels on the other hand might be a failure; or may be
> they simply prove that users don't want takeover free
> channels.
> unlike many, i don't claim to know what users want, and i'm
> still trying to figure that one out.
> 
> 


-- 
Diane Bruce, http://www.db.net/~db  http://www.db.net email db@xxxxxx
--- I wonder how many people know what an aphorism is.