Question of the day

[qurve]

And while at it, i want channel mode +c so we can strip away he color shit.

channel mode +c eats up lots of cpu cycles as it has to parse every privmsg that goes through the network (a lot). As wundr said is easily handled by most irc clients simply by selecting the option. I would be against seeing this in the ircd.

[Pills]

As seiki said, we'll likely be voting on it shortly. Keep your pants on!

+e is good. +I isn't as necessary, because it just takes one channel bot that can invite people anyway. However, it's still a nice addition.

[qurve]

In this vote, I would like to note that I would like to see the addition of channel modes e, I, d, and have all the limits for them raised significantly. I would like to see at least 50 bans. e and I don't need that many, but 25 bans is just not enough.

-qurve

[Hardy]

Admins: don't wait for the hype, enable +e on your server now.

Yes, that would be the totally ignorant way to do it. Much better just to force your own changes thru by starting to use it on a production network instead of actually calling a global vote on it and see if the majority agrees. </sarcasm>

Adding features on EFnet should never be a hype, it should be something that the majority agrees on and feel would be a good feature for the network. As mentioned in earlier posts, this is what the admin community is doing now ( and the reason i started this poll ) and if the majority wants it then it will be done.

[Hwy]

Hey. You're completly wrong. All servers does not have to support it.
As long as the hubs support it leafs can do as they want. Homelien has had +e enabled since the dawn of time and has been to pleasure for a lot of users for a long time.

Enable it on hubs, ban *!*~@* all you want and let clients who need to make use of a exemption use an examption enabled server. The more, the merrier.

Admins: don't wait for the hype, enable +e on your server now.

Hybrid and ratbox hubs will both propagate +e even if they themselves don't support it. All that matters is if the client the user is on doesn't support +e.

[Hwy]

In this vote, I would like to note that I would like to see the addition of channel modes e, I, d, and have all the limits for them raised significantly. I would like to see at least 50 bans. e and I don't need that many, but 25 bans is just not enough.

-qurve

The server stores them all in the same list, so the MAXLIST=beI:25 005 token simply means 25 b, e, and I together.

[deww]

So.. Heh. What would be a sane limit since the limit is a total of them all? 50? 100? 200? 1000?

[Hardy]

So.. Heh. What would be a sane limit since the limit is a total of them all? 50? 100? 200? 1000?

25 on a banlist have been to low, and now we might add two new functions to the same list. I would say 100 is a good number.

I`m not sure if it will cause much more load on the server or if it will use more bandwith synching after a split ?

[Guest]

Well while were all pluggin for + modes to be implemented I'd like to see +h. +h would be nice because you could give have 4 different user levels instead of 3 in channels. +o for the bots and bots owners|masters and clients needed to be counted in the chanfix data base, +h would then actually beccome the channel operators and help deal the channel functions without them being able to do take overs. Which in turn would cut down on #chanfix having to deal with internal take overs and trying to decide if it was actually an internal take over, etc. course that is not a 100% solution to the previous situation, but at the same time should cut down on that issue. +v then could in turn then be used to recognize channel regulars and registered users of channels and they could still have very limited things activated by the bot such as topic change with no real harm being done to the channel. And then of course the users who dont wish to be anything other chatting and joining once in a while etc are left with no mode.

The whole issue of implementing these features is it's like pulling teeth to get a vote or answers to why we cant have these modes other than because we said no ( and yes I see there is gonna be some actual voting taking place finally). Which was the case on many of these issues we been debating for what a year, two years, longer. While I dont mean to get anyones tail feathers in a uproar as no one is getting paid for adminning or oppering but two years to deal with a simple mode implementation that wont hurt or put a burden on the servers or some form of standardization on things such as topic legnth, quit msg legnth etc , is a bit over drawn in my opinion. Standardizing things network wide still leaves lots of individuality for servers while at the same time making things flow better and standard. Its not like were asking moses to part the red sea or anything. Just give people who want to use certian modes the option to do so if it doesnt cause havok with the servers. If you dont want to use them dont use them.

And while were at it.........whats up with /list these days can any server other homelien handle a full list without disconnecting your or only sending a partial list?

[qurve]

And while were at it.........whats up with /list these days can any server other homelien handle a full list without disconnecting your or only sending a partial list?

It's not really the server's fault. The server sends you data at a certain speed, if you receive it as a slower speed it puts the backlogged data into your sendq, once you hit a certain sendq it disconnects you (SendQ Exceeded). If you can receive as fast as it can send, there is no issue. Since that isn't likely, the only other solution is to up the sendq. The problem there is that a high sendq for users can eat up a lot of memory I would think.

[Guest]

And while were at it.........whats up with /list these days can any server other homelien handle a full list without disconnecting your or only sending a partial list?

It's not really the server's fault. The server sends you data at a certain speed, if you receive it as a slower speed it puts the backlogged data into your sendq, once you hit a certain sendq it disconnects you (SendQ Exceeded). If you can receive as fast as it can send, there is no issue. Since that isn't likely, the only other solution is to up the sendq. The problem there is that a high sendq for users can eat up a lot of memory I would think.

Well maybe but I am on cable and it never happens on homelien. Even when I was on dial up back in the day it never did that.

[corrupt]

This is getting way too complicated. Pretty soon, we will start having to use numbers and other characters for channel modes, cause A-Z will all be taken! I do see how +e would be useful, but +h, and especially +c (your client can do the damn control code stripping, the servers have enough stress already on them from the damn kiddies and their drone nets) are overkill.

My two cents.

[Guest]

This is getting way too complicated. Pretty soon, we will start having to use numbers and other characters for channel modes, cause A-Z will all be taken! I do see how +e would be useful, but +h, and especially +c (your client can do the damn control code stripping, the servers have enough stress already on them from the damn kiddies and their drone nets) are overkill.

My two cents.

+e would be useful til the user found out what some of the exmepts were and flew right thru the ban, although if people want it let em have it. Still dont see the real burden of +h+d though as it is with +c.

[prefect]

Yes, that would be the totally ignorant way to do it. Much better just to force your own changes thru by starting to use it on a production network instead of actually calling a global vote on it and see if the majority agrees. </sarcasm> 8)

You totally missed my point being that as long as hubs support it, there's no need for all servers to support it. If you need the +e functionality, get on a +e server.

[deww]

+e would be useful til the user found out what some of the exmepts were and flew right thru the ban, although if people want it let em have it. Still dont see the real burden of +h+d though as it is with +c.

Well, same applies for bans too, but they let us have it! Heh.