It is currently Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:22 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




 Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:32 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 3:09 pm
Posts: 268
Location: Cyprus
Ok i'll be a bit more clear so you understand better.

For a start lets see if I understood correctly. You suggest a command like /msg x set <#Channel> HIDDEN <On/Off> [450+] that will hide the output of the /msg x access <#Channel> * by a user that hasnt got access in the particular channel.

I have some questions to do.
1) Let's say a CService Official would like to see the access list of your channel. It's quite anoying that he/she has to force him/herself in that channel in order to take a look of the access list fast.

2) You said
Quote:
It would prevent further packeters and/or conflicts.
I doubt that the command you are suggesting will prevent any DDoS attacks.

3) You said
Quote:
If the access list is hidden, noone besides the chann mamanger and 450 + members can use the /msg x access #channel * command to see the first 15 entries don`t u think?
So how can someone who is a part of the channel which you gave access (lower than 450) can see the output of /msg x access #channel *? Shouldnt all users that have access be able to access the access list?

4) What is the need for such a command since the Web Interface would show the full list disabled or not?

In conclution, maybe this command is good in some cases and can be very useful in some channels but I dont think it would benefit the network or the UnderNet Users in general. The less commands are added, the simplest it gets for people that want to use Channel Services. A regular user does not care if he can or cannot see the access list, or any complicated command, he just wants to use the commands are basic for the management of his channel.

Regards,
TheAbyss



_________________
~ He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an Abyss, The Ábyss gazes also into you. ~
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:48 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 38
Location: Stars Hollow
I'm still suggesting you should try an english tutor. As for the globals, the coders could just put in a simple line so that the flag doesn't apply for logged in officials.

PS: the third quote isn't mine.

So when you'll actually understand what i'm saying, or when you'll post something constructive in here, it's fine by me. Until then , stop doing it just to argue or to become a top poster.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:18 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 3:09 pm
Posts: 268
Location: Cyprus
As about my english i know, i'm not so good and i'm sorry. The "officials" problem can be solved easy as you said but i cant stil find a reason why to enalbe such a command. However this is just my oppinion, let's see what others think about it. I think that i'm allowed to have an oppinion in a matter, last time i checked it was a free country.

PS I dont care about the quantity of the posts, the quallity is what it matters. Being a bit more polite won't do any harm :)



_________________
~ He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an Abyss, The Ábyss gazes also into you. ~
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 1:07 pm 

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:11 am
Posts: 2
I think a lot of these new 'feature' requests are getting away from the spirit of IRC. Forget about ops, forget about who has access and who doesn't, and just enjoy chatting with one another. :)

In short, this proposed 'feature' does nothing which benefits the users of IRC.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:32 pm 
Undernet IRC Operator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:11 am
Posts: 67
Location: Atlanta GA, USA
In my mind its quite useless, as said before it would bring attacks to SERVERS and NOT users. I think weve hidden enough on undernet over the years. (server names, hostnames, emails, CService roundabout routing) etc. Also about the bandwidth issue, the addition of this command would balance out because bandwidth would be saved by not having to output full channel access lists for hidden channels.

However as far as I know, the likeliness of this command being implemented is slim because it 1) Isn't that much of a priority and 2) Wouldnt benefit other users as a whole as much as other items in the TODO list would. The reason I say its not really much of a priority is because this isn't addressed much.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron