> > It'd be nice to have a brainstorming session over how to calculate the
> > "recent" numerical size of a channel and what the proportionality should
> > be--should it be linear? Quadratic? Advantages? Disadvantages?
>
> I didn't study any details (yet), but perhaps we can make it more of a
>
> If "we" think 40 will be enough for most channels, would it be possible to
> have a higher limit for very large channels on a request basis? Let 40 be
> the normal max and allow the limit to be raised only on channels that need
> it. I may be wrong, but I doubt many channels will find a need
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:owner-coder-com@;undernet.org] On Behalf Of Kev
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:51 PM
> [...] An automatic scheme like I suggest,
> where the number of bans is made proportional to the size of the
> channel, is a much better s
If "we" think 40 will be enough for most channels, would it be possible to
have a higher limit for very large channels on a request basis? Let 40 be
the normal max and allow the limit to be raised only on channels that need
it. I may be wrong, but I doubt many channels will find a need to petiti
