Re: wishes (Re: gac experiment)

[Thomas Kuiper <engerim@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> one first thing before, Engerim... I guess, u don't really know very much
> about irc, protocol, users, psychology and politics, but that's my personal
> notion based on your previous mails. Just for thinking about it...

I classify this as a typical flame. Your guess is wrong of course.

> The main key is, kiddies are killing servers in every way they know to take
> channels.

and? thats normal for abusers isn't it?

> This means, if we could establish some way that makes it useless to flood
> servers for taking channels, these attacks would shrink noticeable.

tell me something new...

> So far for the administrative concern.

> +gac tries exactly this. And it works - not good ... maybe, not complete
> ... maybe. No mention about the way it does, but it does and this is more
> than every other thingy can provide at the moment and this is the reason
> for admins to use it. Btw. please stop shouting against the author of +gac.
> Guenthi just wrote one thingy, that protects his users and let them chat.

exactly, HIS users. Remember its a net. If you want to prefer your local
users you just could hack your server not to react on a collide at all.
gac saves local users life while my users have to quit?

> If we do nothing against this DoS, we do not offer our service anymore.
> Then, we offer a service to harass chatters but not a service to chat.
> This is the reason for admins to protect their users against this DoS, this
> is the reason for admins to use +gac for example.

yes, but its definetly wrong to use it, even as temporary fix. You can't
fix #channels attack with it! Get the point.

> This is even the reason for admins to merge in channel matters, to fight
> against the abusers, to neutralize the DoS ... to play with the abusers,

playing with them is wrong, removing them is better, and thats
nearly impossible.

> In germany, we have a law, that impresses such things, it's called
> "Gewohnheitsrecht" - the right to follow it's habits. Not that I suggest to
> apply rights to users, I only suggest, that this fact is also respected by
> laws, so it seems to be an important fact.

they still can stay on #channel and use their "Gewohnheitsrecht", this
will also include its negative sides. !channel will get used more and
more with the time.

> > wake up! why they play with you? it always takes two to play.
> 
> They play, because it's fun for them.

and its fun for them cause "you" join them.

> > It's a diffrent thing fighting abusers and hunting abusers.
> 
> I don't wanna play and I don't wanna fight and I don't wanna hunt.
> I just want a way, that makes it impossible to attack my users or better
> (I don't care about users :)) I just want a way, that makes it impossible
> to Denial my Service.

you maybe. thats ok, but read the mail of your frieds from uni-erlangen.de.
They want total oper channel control or a even chanserv. you want chanserv
too? Registration is the only solution if you want to fix #channel, but,
you will still get abused.

sad but true.
Engerim