I think i have a soloution to your problem which would requier much less upheavel
first you add a channel mode which redirects limit blocked clients to another channel then you have a bot which replicates the traffic >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] Patch idea.. any thoughts? >Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 01:42:31 +0100 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from mc2-f17.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.237.24]) by >mc2-s14.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Sat, 27 >Jul 2002 17:48:01 -0700 >Received: from trek.sbg.org ([66.134.137.28]) by mc2-f17.law16.hotmail.com >with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Sat, 27 Jul 2002 17:47:47 -0700 >Received: (from undernet@localhost)by trek.sbg.org (8.12.1/8.12.1) id >g6S0gbRd032709for coder-com-outgoing; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 17:42:37 -0700 >Received: from mercury.stbarnab.as ([212.115.48.196])by trek.sbg.org >(8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g6S0gZJs032706for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; >Sat, 27 Jul 2002 17:42:36 -0700 >Received: from ground.stbarnab.as ([212.115.48.200] ident=mail)by >mercury.stbarnab.as with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #2)id 17Yc8o-00027l-00for >[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 00:42:34 +0000 >Received: from davidm by ground.stbarnab.as with local (Exim 3.35 #1 >(Debian))id 17Yc8l-0001UP-00for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 >01:42:31 +0100 >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Precedence: bulk >Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jul 2002 00:47:48.0052 (UTC) >FILETIME=[64CE8140:01C235D0] > >On Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 02:43:11AM -0400, Py Fivestones wrote: > > > Doesn't that pretty much destroy the concept behind IRC, that is to >allow > > people to chat with each other? Also, don't people on a channel have the > > right to see who they are keeping company, and thus being associated >with? > >The mode under discussion is only for use for very large channels (and if >implemented would probably only be settable on channels at least 500 users >or something). Under these circumstances the points you mention are less >important (particularly if without the mode the users can't stay on the >network!). > > > The other question is, will this channel mode break IRC clients? > >If the implementation works as I envisage it, not really. There would be >users on the channel that the ircd knows about but the client doesn't, but >there is no way for the client to find out about them anyway (they can't >talk or anything, and nick changes etc. would be supressed). Enabling ops >to see all channel members would allow bots to function normally, too. > >splidge _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
