home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!manuel.anu.edu.au!coombs!phone
- From: phone@coombs.anu.edu.au (matthew green)
- Newsgroups: alt.irc
- Subject: Re: A new (very simple) bot solution
- Date: 20 Dec 92 06:54:23 GMT
- Organization: Australian National University
- Lines: 19
- Message-ID: <phone.724834463@coombs>
- References: <1992Dec5.143833.28877@aston.ac.uk> <avalon.724248910@coombs> <1992Dec15.025308.22432@nuscc.nus.sg> <1gqne3INN9mb@mirror.digex.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2
-
- mattm@digex.com (Matt Mosley) writes:
-
- >>under such a system, if you have a mode "+b *!*@*" it would be the
- >>*only* ban there, since it would replace any other bans on the channel,
- >>so of course it would be the *only* one you want removed...
-
- >Actually, this really should be done. A "+b *!*@*" should replace all
- >other bans, and remove them. Same thing with "+b *!*@my.host.edu" removing
- >"+b *!*@*.host.edu" ... it's called redundancy, folks.
-
- So you have a channel, with bans set up nicely for certain domains..
- and you then do a mode b *!*@* .. and you have to re-type the all
- in again.. no, I don't like this at all... if you want to remove a
- ban on anyone, then you should have to remove it explicitely (sp).
- Why make the server larger ...?
-
- phone..
-
- say NO to non-local operator KILLS..
-