0003270: kickthrottle and banthrottle (kbhrottle).

(0013360)
XtSchon (reporter)
2007-04-09 10:54

Maybe better to add this to the +f command's possible configurations? Could be thrown in with a few new additions to it, I'll look into adding it unless someone objects.

(0013362)
Shining Phoenix (reporter)
2007-04-10 01:39

Halfops and higher are exempt from channel mode f, so you can't use f to do this.

(0013363)
syzop (administrator)
2007-04-10 06:49

My initial reaction is nooo, so.. don't start coding :P

(0013365)
Shining Phoenix (reporter)
2007-04-11 00:05

Hmm...if someone's kick flooding, you're either not good at choosing staff, scripts, bans or any combination of those.

(0013366)
XtSchon (reporter)
2007-04-11 15:40

*waits for syzop's approval*

(0013378)
aquanight (reporter)
2007-04-14 12:13

My $0.02 on this is: why not just allow modules to define flood types and actions? That way this could be done in a module if someone really wanted/needed it that badly (even though they really ought to just reconsider who they've given (half)ops to), plus other things could be added if wanted.

Also: why +f would be bad for this? Because then +f would end up being something like: after X kicks, set +Q. At this point, it's only useful on halfops because ops can just -Q and carry on, and ops can also do -f killing the whole antiflood deal, unless mlocked service-side. A seperate +q-only kickthrottle mode (btw, that modechar is taken by core (no /knock) - pick something else) would be necessary if both ops and halfops are to be covered.

Not that kick/ban throttling is needed (see above: get better (half)ops), but being able to do some other nice things with +f might be fun (I can't think what right now, I really think everything is covered except maybe a topic-change flood for the channels that don't use +t - but that's another thing entirely).

(0013579)
stskeeps (reporter)
2007-04-19 03:03

Confirmed on basis on what aquanight says

(0013604)
craftsman (reporter)
2007-04-19 08:32

not necessarily +K can be another one, +K is an example.

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2007-04-09 01:53	craftsman	New Issue
2007-04-09 10:52	XtSchon	Issue Monitored: XtSchon
2007-04-09 10:54	XtSchon	Note Added: 0013360
2007-04-10 01:39	Shining Phoenix	Note Added: 0013362
2007-04-10 06:49	syzop	Note Added: 0013363
2007-04-10 21:05	tabrisnet	Issue Monitored: tabrisnet
2007-04-11 00:05	Shining Phoenix	Note Added: 0013365
2007-04-11 15:40	XtSchon	Note Added: 0013366
2007-04-12 04:25	Ldunda	Note Added: 0013368
2007-04-14 12:13	aquanight	Note Added: 0013378
2007-04-15 04:27	Ldunda	Note Deleted: 0013368
2007-04-19 03:03	stskeeps	Status	new => acknowledged
2007-04-19 03:03	stskeeps	Relationship added	child of 0003049
2007-04-19 03:03	stskeeps	Note Added: 0013579
2007-04-19 03:03	stskeeps	Status	acknowledged => confirmed
2007-04-19 08:32	craftsman	Note Added: 0013604
2007-05-27 05:26	craftsman	Issue Monitored: craftsman
2007-05-27 05:27	craftsman	Issue End Monitor: craftsman

Notes
(0013360) XtSchon (reporter) 2007-04-09 10:54	Maybe better to add this to the +f command's possible configurations? Could be thrown in with a few new additions to it, I'll look into adding it unless someone objects.

(0013362) Shining Phoenix (reporter) 2007-04-10 01:39	Halfops and higher are exempt from channel mode f, so you can't use f to do this.

(0013363) syzop (administrator) 2007-04-10 06:49	My initial reaction is nooo, so.. don't start coding :P

(0013365) Shining Phoenix (reporter) 2007-04-11 00:05	Hmm...if someone's kick flooding, you're either not good at choosing staff, scripts, bans or any combination of those.

(0013366) XtSchon (reporter) 2007-04-11 15:40	waits for syzop's approval

(0013378) aquanight (reporter) 2007-04-14 12:13	My $0.02 on this is: why not just allow modules to define flood types and actions? That way this could be done in a module if someone really wanted/needed it that badly (even though they really ought to just reconsider who they've given (half)ops to), plus other things could be added if wanted. Also: why +f would be bad for this? Because then +f would end up being something like: after X kicks, set +Q. At this point, it's only useful on halfops because ops can just -Q and carry on, and ops can also do -f killing the whole antiflood deal, unless mlocked service-side. A seperate +q-only kickthrottle mode (btw, that modechar is taken by core (no /knock) - pick something else) would be necessary if both ops and halfops are to be covered. Not that kick/ban throttling is needed (see above: get better (half)ops), but being able to do some other nice things with +f might be fun (I can't think what right now, I really think everything is covered except maybe a topic-change flood for the channels that don't use +t - but that's another thing entirely).

(0013579) stskeeps (reporter) 2007-04-19 03:03	Confirmed on basis on what aquanight says

(0013604) craftsman (reporter) 2007-04-19 08:32	not necessarily +K can be another one, +K is an example.