Ack! you and Isomer killed another thread :P
Once again a thread here was dealt with "professional" and served to teach
the less enlightened. You guys are taking all the fun out of flaming :P
stoney`

At 08:33 PM 5/17/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>banning *!*@* has some advantages.
>
>When you ban *!*@* from a channel, only voiced and opped people will be able
>to talk, to change their nicks, and no one will be able to join.
>
>In chans like #class, it's sometimes useful to have that ban enabled.
>
>Anyway, if someone wishes to lock a chan, he can +sntmilk and kick everyone.
>Theres no need to remove the possibility to ban *!*@*. It's up to the
>manager to choose his ops. And like Isomer said, it's hard to determine what
>is too wide.
>
>I think we should just forget about making changes on banning *!*@*.
>
>regards,
>
>
>Hidden
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Dave C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 5:16 PM
>Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] level 500 command proposal
>
>
> > I agree....  The ability to ban *!*@* should be either (a) limited to
> > cservice staff only, or (b) blocked completely to everyone.
> > In my opinion, 9 times out of 10, a *!*@* ban is considered abusive and
> > probably used to maliciously lock up the channel.
> > I don't really see a need to allow anyone to ban *!*@*, so I believe it
> > should be limited to cservice staff only or totally blocked to everybody.
> > But, leave the ability to quickly clear the X banlist by unbanning *!*@*.
> >
> > >
> > > Nice idea, but there is one problem. If you have looked at the
> > > mailingarchive you would see this problem has been discussed before
> > > and noone seems to care about it. Sounds harsch and is a personal
> > > opinion. But likely to be a fact.
> > > Stolen usernames are considered a lack of security on the clients side
> > > where the user has not put enough efforts into securing his data. Thus
> > > in case of a compromised client the client is on his own and needs to
> > > act damn quickly in immediately mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
> > > The problem that accompanies it that this mailbox receives massive
> > > amounts of mail, so before they read it could take a couple of days.
> > >
> > > My opinion is to completly remove the option to be able to use *!*@*
> > > as kick/ban mask. (Run: you stated you would use it to clean up your
> > banlist, so it
> > > would only be needed to UNBAN, no need to use it for BAN/KICK in this
> > > matter)
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > >  Alexander                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >

Py Fivestones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to