I have been following the various debates concerning recent security patches
to ircu. Many users seem to resent the loss of ability to check on and
follow other users around the network. I can see why server information is
useful, this information can be used to help users reduce connection lag.
However, being able to use server or cservice commands to be able to locate
and track a nick seems wrong. Having access to a particular channel with X
should not enable any users of that channel to track or follow a user just
because they have access. This is stalking. Stalking is at the very heart of
abuse issues. It is not healthy behavior.
I realize this posting is slightly off topic for this particular userlist.
And I will not persist on this topic. But I see so many posts here that seem
to focus on being able to track and follow a user through servers and X, and
I really question the need for all of this information.
pzl
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mark Foster
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 8:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] Status command
I second this; if a channel op is using their position as an op via X from
outside the channel it'd be nice to see where they were authed from !
Whilst i see the logic to the move perhaps this needs to be coupled with
something else - when /msg x adduser #channel <username> - this needs to be
acknowledged and approved by <username> before theyre actually added (and
then seen in the channel status info?)
This would at least let chanops know where theyre visible as authed even if
theyre deliberately trying not to be seen, and makes it clear that if you
have ops in a channel, and are logged into X, you can be seen by other ops
of 200+ level...
At 22:25 6/09/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>Please allow this letter to serve as my suggesstion that you change the
>way you are handling the presentation of logged-in users to your
>registered channels using the status command. As of now one can see the
>actual nick of someone logged in only if both the person doing the
>status and the person you are looking for is on the channel.
>
>Perhaps this was done because status is a low level command. In any
>event my suggesstion is:
>
>Make 200+ status able to see the present nicks of those logged into
>their channel, irrespective of whether either or both are on the channel
>(the same as 200+ can see a channel key).
>
>I have been a part of helping to run many channels. If someone wants to
>hide they simply have to reconnect and deauthorize. It is a great
>benefit to the channel operators of channels to be able to see the nicks
>of fellow channel operators who may be available, but for whatever
>reason, are not using their regular nick or are not on channel.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Stewart Bass (Season`d)
>
>.
