Do you know/could you imagine how hard it could be to create a cookie between X and the Channel Service Website? If you want to be automatically redirected, as in X to give you the COMPLETE link where you can see the rest of the matches, well, as far as I am concerned, you are just giving the coders some extra quite exhausting work and probably useless. This way they have to create a cookie "manager" or something that actually saves the session and allows you to access the section within a period of time. Anyway, X and the Website are two different things, they work together but they should not be strictly together because there could be security branches, which are not such a wise idea.

Yeah. Was thinking on what Panzer said, thought you were referring at the same thing.

I still believe allowing the senior admins +450 or +490 would be the perfect fit. Since we all know IRC is fading and that managers are failing to login daily, that could allow the other in charge to see the history and manage the channel properly.
Its the manager's call to add senior admins if he wishes so its nothing made by force.

You probably failed to understand that both Eenie and I were reffering to a standard default message that redirects people to the website in order to find out more details on 15(10) max replies on X command.
Furthermore it's being taken into consideration as I understood to be implemented alongside and allow users to know the website (and it's link) gives out the entire feedback on inquiry.
And no, it's not an exhaustive task, don't worry.

From the BOLDed part I understand that you want X to give you a reply such as:

-X- There are more than 15 matching entries.
-X- Please access http://cservice.undernet.org/live/link_ ... hp?cookies for the entire list.

That's how I got it. Now I understand that you want X to say something like this:

-X- There are more than 15 matching entries.
-X- Please access http://cservice.undernet.org/live/, login, and click on Channel Information (adding the channel name) to see the entire list.

Eenie was confused too. So I didn't "fail" to do anything

Furthermore, I don't think this is the right place to discuss it, a suggesion should be placed where it's supposed to be, I think we should concentrate ourselves on the new feature which is going to be released pretty soon.

There are 9460 users and 73115 invisible on 31 servers - right now on Undernet (I know that drones and bots won't join the forum to vote but maybe half of them are real people which most do not join the forum)

There are 129 votes and few debates about the subject.

I wonder how much time will this thread requier to achieve something important to be casted as a real vote.

These votes were sent by people who usually know each other from frequent channels (usually help channels) as they (we) are the most active on forum aswell.

So, only them voting does NOT count for the other thousands of users who have no clue about this poll or any other modification which is about to take place (in progress). (let them know that you're willing to do some modifications and you are asking about their opinion, a global notice, something, I don't know - that if you haven't done it already)

This goes to all other polls which have been opened or any other new poll which will be opened.

Some might consider this offtopic, not my intention but thats how I think about the polls from Undernet's forum.

LOL, all registered users to undernet forum can vote. Still those who are unregistered here and know about forum existence, can see the thread and if they wanna vote they will register or/and respond to thread with their suggestion/idea/opinion or whatever.

And i believe the vote session come to an end. You can no longer vote

P.S: I'd like to thank Simba for the new design of undernet forum, it looks way better than before.

I'm an idiot, I forgot to include simple Yes/No options... anyway, this feature is now in the hands of the Undernet Admins.


Topic Locked, I will post their decision once I know it.

Basically this feature has privacy issues (let alone storage issues), in short, The Undernet Admins have seen the idea, barely discussed it, and basically chosen not to put it to a vote, which essentially kills this idea completely.