Logs should say enough:
*** Opened query log for TGS at 11/26/2001 6:08:34 PM
[18:08] Do you want to be back in #Coder-Com ?
[18:08] [OUTsider] not as long as you have access there
[18:08] *** TGS is away: afk
[18:08] Ok
[18:09] [OUTsider] because you will always look for a reason to set the ba
I'm currently working on a new tcl for cyclebots,
the tcl itself is actually done, but the issue is that because of the joinamount
it triggers throttles and the bots get 439's, my questions are:
- Are those throttles host based or client
(numeric) based ?
- What is the optimal joincount/min
> Isomer wrote:
> yes don't we have enough ISUPPORT tags already?
perhaps add CFV165 or PARANOIA into the tags so scripts know they won't
function well because of heavy restrictions :)
grtz,
OUTsider
---
CFV-165 is for the foolish that want to stay blind.
Since an upgrade to a new postgres I get the following issue:
ccontrol.h:25: libpq-int.h: No such file or directory
In file included from ccontrol.cc:31:
ccontrol.h: In method `int gnuworld::uworld::cmDatabase::getPID() const':
ccontrol.h:69: invalid use of undefined type `struct pg_conn'
/usr/in
mod.cservice seems not to be affected by this, guess beanie needs to have a
look at it since this problems only seems to be with mod.ccontrol, lucky
there is /opmode in 2.10.11 :)
Lol, I told Iso about that already in the channel, but isn't it +r for
registered channel and +A for auth-required in most of the ircd's ?
- Original Message -
From: "Mathieu René" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:35 AM
Subject: [Coder-Com] Cha
Short and simple question: How about rejecting spam in this list ? And
simply filter out /deny HTML posts.
not so easy to reject. I'll try to keep up with filtering better
> >though. And HTML, sure if you want me to outright reject it, fine.
> >
> >On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Alexander Maassen wrote:
> >
> > > Short and simple question: How about rejecting spam in thi
You can use = to have x translate it to userid, same for a lot of
other features, but when it comes to the neccessary like op/deop/kick/voice
you can't, how about the option to do the reverse effect in those commands ?
E.g. if =bla is used in the command X will translate userid to nick and
perform
How about chanmode +B to be able to ban users based on there userid
(the lower would be for ban, the higher for userid, simply check on AC token
if it matches, in combination with chanmode +r you should have a nice system
to keep certain users out without the option to evade such a ban.
Sorry to say, but I'm not attacking what you call your 'technical idiocy',
I'm just surprised to see that you are communicating with known to the
network abusers, while I know you have something against abusers, hence I
also know that fireball is one of those that even performed DDoS attacks
again
Dave, ya right, but there is still an issue within the +x model undernet
will use, issue is a users hosts gets 'hidden' *AFTER* he successfully
authed with X, so that system is actually kinda useless in my opinion.
Reason:
Problem is that users will still be 'nukable' since there IP does not get
list is actually
bullshit in my opinion, just hide the IP for christ sake).
Little sidenote to fireball, 192.168.* is *NOT* microsofts lan default, they
tend to use addy's in the 169.* section, just unhook your wintendo PC from
the net and refresh the IP addy and you'll see.
Kind Rega
Suggestion to reenable /map and /links.
Specifications:
Opers:
- Usual behaviour like now
Users:
- Display only endpoint/client servers (no hubs)
- Do not show the lag between servers (always 0)
- Do not show the amount of hops (always 1)
- Do not show how they are li
*** Mode change [+b *!*@more.and.more.people.are.anti-bobskc.com] on
#coder-com by X
*** X has kicked OUTsider from #coder-com [(net) no explaination needed]
I think everyone has the right to choose the host he wants, I don't think
that notnet has a decent reason of even issueing this ban at all.
I got that, so do others, coded it ourself, issue is, the command has been
rejected by cservice, so just forget about it, it won't be implemented, not
even #define'able.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 4:15 PM
Subject:
Oh wait, sorry, you mean where only a certain level can adduser to a channel
? Well, thats possible, in order to make it work a channel would need a new
setting called minaddlevel for example, there he could define the minimum
level required to adduser (ranging 400 - 500), only a 500 should be abl
This means that during cvs update there where some issues with certain files
getting updated, since you probably did not watch what happened during the
cvs update you will probably not know wich files where affected. So the only
solutions are to or fix the files (find them through fgrep -ir "=
Problem:
*!*@* masks strongly mess up channels when used in kick/ban
Example:
- Get level 100 in a channel (so you can ban)
- Issue a ban on *!*@* at level 20
Result:
Flood away, coz noone can op himself since he is no longer allowed to be op
(*!*@* matches all users and equals NOOP that way wit
>>Hidden:
> Easy to remove the *!*@* ban OUTsider,
> In my case, I could: /msg X unban #chan Hidden
> X will then check wich bans are matching me and will remove *!*@* and
other
> bans matching me if there are any, but X will not remove ALL bans as if
you
> were doing /msg X unban #chan *!*@*
I a
> Better make it the new .11 style conf file then if you want it to
> be useful for a while.
>
> --
> Chris "_Shad0w_" Crowther
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.shad0w.org.uk/
>
I thought the new conf style is part of the .12 tree ? Anywayz, first let's
make it work to generate old style ircd.con
Splitfest ? I just had a nice lagfest (>20 minutes)
68 operator(s) online
Question is: Where are those 68 opers if they don't help users (wich they do
not need to, ok), wich means they would have plenty of time for this.
Graz had another one of the nice bandwidth usage spikes again. If I'm not
w
Hello mr.volta,
Monday, May 13, 2002, 8:29:11 PM, you wrote:
Channel admins (>>400) are able to remove users with lower access, that are suspended
with a higher level than the admin's. That's really an easy way to unsuspend someone,
because the user is no more
Channel admins (>>suspended after
Hello Kev,
Wednesday, May 15, 2002, 4:36:57 PM, you wrote:
K> The u2.10.11 server (still in beta--we have a crash in s_conf.c somewhere)
K> allows an operator to use /opmode and /clearmode to manipulate modes on a
K> channel. Admins may wish to restrict operators from manipulating modes on
K> c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: MD5
Hello Chris,
Wednesday, May 15, 2002, 6:06:13 PM, you wrote:
CC> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Alexander Maassen wrote:
>> My other question regarding this is: Why would you want to limit
>> opmode's in certain channels ?
CC>
Hello Cosmin,
Friday, May 17, 2002, 2:50:20 PM, you wrote:
CM> Hello.
CM> Almost everybody knows that if you have sufficient
CM> access in a channel to set a ban through X and you set
CM> that ban on *!*@*.* X will kick all users from that
CM> channel. You need access level >= ban level to remo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: MD5
Hello cArLiLLoS,
Wednesday, May 29, 2002, 9:02:42 AM, you wrote:
c> My inquiry was why this happens and how to deal with it from a simple user point of
view.
c> Thanks for your concern
c> cArLiLLoS
Use another server wich does not run 2.10.11 as
Friday, June 7, 2002, 7:27:07 AM, hidden wrote:
H> Hi people,
H> I heard some CService people have a little mIRC script that checks on every
H> logins if they were added to channels they were not at last login.
H> I scripted a script that works really fine. It tells, on every logins, if
H> was
Hello Imad,
Sunday, June 16, 2002, 6:22:41 AM, you wrote:
Ie> hi , some one reported that on #coder-com
->> *x* access #close tracker2 -modif
Ie> -X- USER: Tracker2 ACCESS: 420 LU
Ie> -X- CHANNEL: #close -- AUTOMODE: None
Ie> -X- ** SUSPENDED ** - Expires in 0 days, 05:08:30 (Level 400)
Ie> -X-
It shouldn't even be settable by the user himself, it should be set on P10
networks by services for example, botowners would need to get permission to
use this flag, in this way you can also control what a bot can do and what
he can't do. Giving the user himself the ability to use it only leads to
Let's put it this way Kev, you know I run botlending, and if there would be
any feature that would make it possible to be able to use the same bot for
more then current (e.g. perhaps in the way I proposed earlier many times) I
would do it, in fact I'm already working on it, just need to implement
*** Mode change [+b *\*!*@*] on #key2peace by OUTsider
*** Mode change [-b *\*!*@*] on #key2peace by OUTsider
*** Mode change [+b *\\*!*@*] on #key2peace by OUTsider
*** Mode change [-b *\\*!*@*] on #key2peace by OUTsider
351 OUTsider u2.10.10.pl18.(release). Haarlem.NL.EU.UnderNet.Org
:B32eEFfIK
- Original Message -
From: "Majdi S. Abbas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EQU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 3:20 PM
Subject: [Coder-Com] Re: [Bugs] ircd resolver issue
...
>
> Generally speaking, I'd recommend running a current rev
> of BIND or
33 matches
Mail list logo