home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!po.CWRU.Edu!gjm5
- From: gjm5@po.CWRU.Edu (Gregory J. Meyers)
- Newsgroups: alt.irc
- Subject: Re: Waxing nostalgic without much of a point. Was: Re: Why people care so strongly about IRC (sorry, a bit long)
- Date: 12 Dec 1992 08:21:57 GMT
- Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
- Lines: 69
- Message-ID: <1gc7f5INNkbb@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
- References: <Bz42rt.7px@access.digex.com> <9212100353.AA25829@hrt213.brooks.af.mil> <1g5r5aINN1hk@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1g842vINNjnm@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
- Reply-To: gjm5@po.CWRU.Edu (Lord Maximilien of Myragorthia)
- NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu
-
-
- In a previous article, mattm@digex.com (Matt Mosley) says:
- >In article <1g842vINNjnm@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> gjm5@po.CWRU.Edu (Gregory J. Meyers) writes:
- [my stuff deleted]
- >Oh, wonderful - now you're suggesting that an automated client handle
- >things that require human intervention. This sound really great for the
- >IRC network.
-
- Maybe keeping the system optimized doesn't necessarily require human
- intervention. Everyone on alt.irc keeps saying how the IRC is an anarchy,
- and how the operators can't agree on what should be connected to what--
- especially in the ol' U.S. of A. Rather than just asking everyone to come
- to an agreement, we ought to pick someone to make a final decision. And
- since we're probably never going to choose a single person to do this, a bot
- would be the logical alternative. A bot would, in fact, be the only com-
- pletely unbiased judge of things.
- The next problem is, of course, who should write it. Well, let everyone
- who wants to give it a try, and their resulting suggestions can be tried out
- and compared. Whichever produces the best performance (Surely there is some
- way this can be measured in an absolute fashion, e.g. average reaction time
- for all servers?) would then be tested further--still only making suggestions
- to operators of course--and only THEN, if it had already proved its worth,
- might it be given the ability to make the changes itself. It could be moni-
- tored thereafter to make sure nothing went wrong; I'm certain all operators
- would be scrutinizing it quite carefully. The whole thing could be dropped
- at any time.
-
- >> I wouldn't call kicking bots a service; more of a challenge.
- [more of my stuff deleted]
- >I'm really disgusted with this kind of logic. Can't you realize that some
- >of us are _paying_ for network links, and you're sending hundreds of useless
- >mode/kick commands over the net? Don't you know that they are propogated
- >_everywhere_? Obviously you've never been a system administrator, and
- >don't understand the damage this can really do.
-
- This has been brought up many times. But I think eliminating bots is
- not the answer. After all, mode wars and kick wars can proceed without
- unmanned clients. Perhaps a better way to organize IRC would prevent those
- kick wars and mode wars being sent to servers that do not need this infor-
- mation anyway. Does anyone out there have an idea about how this could be
- done?
- I know that each server has to have its own copy of all the channel-
- mode data for every channel. This makes processing of each individual user
- go much more quickly; if there were only one master server with this info,
- things would run much too slow. The positive effect of such an arrangement
- would be the elimination of server disjunctions completely. What about some
- sort of compromise, an in-between distributed sort of arrangement? What
- about some other setup completely, having to do with whether anyone from a
- given server is on the channel or not? Anyone have any ideas?
-
- >You're forgetting one very important point. IRC always has been and always
- >will be an __Anarchy__. You figure out the rest...
-
- This has also been mentioned, and not everyone agrees. It seems to be
- worse in the U.S. At any rate, it's one of those things that needs to be
- addressed, and not just dismissed. Obviously I don't know enough about
- the political side of IRC to make many intelligent suggestions, but there are
- others on this board who clearly do, and I'd like to encourage them to speak
- up if they haven't already. It's a matter that should be discussed. If we
- talk about it rationally we might come to some sort of agreement.
- >
- >--
- >Matt Mosley <> "Think for yourself, and feel the
- >Digital Express Group <> walls.. become sand beneath your
- >mattm@digex.com <> feet." - Queensryche
-
- Lord_Max
- Greg Meyers
- meyers@alpha.ces.cwru.edu
-