Your EFnet wishlist

General talk about EFnet

Moderators: Website/Forum Admins, EFnet/General Moderators

Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Postby 4518 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:14 pm

only thing i would change is to add ssl to at least a few servers
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Postby 4511 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:14 pm

I've been around efnet for 9 years.

keep things simple. i like the way things are right now.

long nicknames = waste of chat window. i really don't think its needed.

nickserv - worried about losing your nickname? who cares, its just a nickname. owning nicknames is the most retarded thing i've ever heard. who the FUCK cares if someone has "Zer0cool".

host masking means more flooding and trolling. if you want to hide your host, get a shell. showing the actual host is a good step to prevent abuse.

I think a lot of people are on efnet because of the lack of regulation it has. Nickserv/Chanserv/host mangling and all that crap would drive a lot of people way.
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Postby 4504 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:19 pm

I've been on EFnet since 1995 or so.

I would like to see a nickserv of some sort, honestly. Chanserv would be nice, too, but nickserv is the thing that really would be überkeen for me to see.
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm


Postby 4520 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:30 pm


After following this thread, and from some personal thoughts, here is what I think:

* The topic/quit length needs to be uniform across servers.
* EFNet needs to be kept as simple as possible.

Things I wouldn't mind seeing in the future:

- Nick length 9 ---> 10 (not anything insane)

- passwd
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Postby 4515 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:35 pm

This post got more involved then I originally planned, so bare with me.

I've been on this network since 96-97 somewhere. The one thing that really bugs me is spam, although it's not a real huge problem, in large part due to a lot of channels being +s.

One possible "solution" for the spam problem could be to implement a network-wide anti-spam service similar to QuakeNet's "S" service. I'm not sure exactly about the inner workings of this particular bot but I'm sure more intelligent people can figure it out. For people unfamiliar with it, it basically sits in large channels and watches for spam. Then when it detects spam it kills the spammer.

Another thing that's always been bugging me is how chanmodes +s and +p, and usermode +i works. And in extension /list, /names, /who and /whois. I won't go into details on how it works now since it's really confusing (and different from server to server if I'm not mistaken). Basically +s hides a channel from all of the previously stated commands, while +p doesn't hide a channel from /names and/or /who depending on which server you're on.

I'd like +s and +p changed so that one of them hides a channel from /list and another from /whois. Both of them respectively should hide people inside a channel from /who and /names coming from people outside the channel. Or even better, always hide users inside a channel to people outside a channel, no matter what chanmode or usermodes are in place.
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm


Postby 4468 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:40 pm

I'm really turned off to the idea of any major changes, just some small additions might be nice (though not necessary), just extra modes and flags at the most.

I support the suggestions to increase the topic length and to create a muted user flag. I agree that keeping a channel moderated and voicing everyone that joins is a pain. I've seen it not work a lot if people don't have their bots under control or if the owners get confused.

I don't agree with increasing nick length. Not more than 1-2 characters at least. If it's one thing about other networks that pisses me off, it's when people change their nicks every 10 minutes to reflect their latest impulse...

* Barry is now known as Barry|EatingASandwichLOLBRB

As far as half-ops is concerned, I don't see why you shouldn't add it, but I don't think many people will actively use it to its real purpose. Most of the time I see hop used, the people who have it are trusted enough to have op status anyway (and are sometimes given op status interchangably anyway). So much depends upon people's flags on a bot anyway.

I like exemptions as well to prevent collateral damage from bans.

Edit: Sorry, I forgot possibly my most two important positions. No nickserv or traditional chanserv (chanfix is alright, but nothing more please). If something, be it channel or nickname, is not being used at this time, someone else should be allowed to use it. Locking channels is ridiculous. I've always felt that if you have less services like that, more of your users will be able to learn how things work, they'll be more likely to use their own bots and won't just lean on the channel and nickname services.
Last edited by 4468 on Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 826
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 4:54 pm
Location: Phoenix AZ

Postby munky » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:41 pm

In God we trust,
Everyone else must have an X.509 certificate.
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Love Efnet

Postby 4522 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:41 pm

Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Postby 4515 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:43 pm

Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Postby 4514 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:44 pm

Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2003 10:04 pm
Location: San Diego

Postby lordares » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:57 pm

User avatar
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2003 12:03 am

Postby Garion » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:58 pm

Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 3:49 am

Postby Alien88 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:05 pm

Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Postby 4514 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:33 pm

Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:50 pm


Postby 4524 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:38 pm

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests