View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0003309 | unreal | ircd | public | 2007-04-30 06:09 | 2015-08-08 17:54 |
| Reporter | Shining Phoenix | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | feedback | Resolution | open | ||
| Platform | i386 | OS | Linux | OS Version | 2.6.10-1.771_FC2 |
| Product Version | 3.2.6 | ||||
| Summary | 0003309: Exempt channel operators from +V | ||||
| Description | Channel operators can (un)set CNTV. One of these is not like the other...</sesame_street> If I were to set +V for a reason, it would be to stop someone /invite flooding. That person would not have op ;) | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| 3rd party modules | |||||
|
|
I guess we should (indeed) first find out why a channel would be set +V. And what those people using it would think of such a change like this. (I've never used it) |
|
|
i always set +V on my channel(s) coz unreal allows everyone with or without ops to use /invite. |
|
|
Why do you not want people /inviting others to your channel? |
|
|
Because its my channel and i dont want to. |
|
|
and remember, these are the kind of things that mlocks are for. To prevent an op from removing the mode. |
|
|
vonitsanet, please don't get defensive, I was just asking a question. Could you please give the real answer? |
|
|
Shining Phoenix is very simple to me. I'll use +V and mlock it (as tabrisnet said already) to stop /invite because i dont want it on my channel for my personal reasons. |
|
|
I want to know those reasons...then I'll know myself why someone would not want ops to override +V. |
|
|
Shining Phoenix: you need to quit getting on his case of his "personal reasons" as its a personal reason. Maybe its a +s channel and you dont want users inviting someone, or someone by mistake. or you dont want it to be abused and the channel look like its spamming for users, or abused with a mass invite script. Either way, users use it, so thats that. |
|
|
Mmm, setting +V on a +s channel does make sense...but still, stopping your ops from /inviting too? |
|
|
I have to agree with Shining Phoenix here. Since ops are exempt from +CNT, it doesn't quite make sense that they can't invite on +V. A bit too inconsistent. [Edit] Maybe it's time for a configuration/compile time option that defines whether or not ops can over-ride modes that they have access to set/unset. This comes into play when thinking of services and mlock. |
|
|
No it does make sense. If we change this, guess how meaningful +V becomes if you set +i? Yup, it'd be totally useless. +V is good for stopping the ocassional idiot from using your channel to launch an invite flood (silently at that! the whole "blah invited blah into the channel" snotice doesn't spew for non-chanop invites so chanops are none the wiser that someone is making their channel look like it's spamming for users). +V is also good in a +i channel to cork down on (half?)ops inviting people they shouldn't be (ie: you want them to go through services). This kind of behavior is already doable. +i blocks /invite for non-chanops. You can then add *!*@* to invite-except (+I) list to allow everyone in. You can still ban people normally with this approach. |
|
|
>+V is also good in a +i >channel to cork down on (half?)ops inviting people they shouldn't be (ie: you >want them to go through services). In that case you may as well do /cs set # restricted on >This kind of behavior is already doable. +i blocks /invite for non-chanops. >You can then add *!*@* to invite-except (+I) list to allow everyone in. You >can still ban people normally with this approach. I never thought of that. |
|
|
[quote]In that case you may as well do /cs set # restricted on[/quote] 1) Services don't need to enter the equation here. Unreal doesn't have a strict requirement for having a ChanServ (or indeed any services at all). Of course in that situation the op can just -V but making them do the extra step does kind of make them think a bit more about what they're trying to do. (Though ops can still set a +I mask to "invite" someone without actually using /invite.) 2) A channel might very well be doing that. So they mlock +iV so the ops don't (accidentally?) spam the channel trying to invite people that'll just get kicked. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-04-30 06:09 | Shining Phoenix | New Issue | |
| 2007-04-30 08:14 |
|
Status | new => feedback |
| 2007-04-30 10:09 | syzop | Note Added: 0013949 | |
| 2007-04-30 15:49 | vonitsanet | Note Added: 0013954 | |
| 2007-04-30 22:25 | Shining Phoenix | Note Added: 0013960 | |
| 2007-04-30 22:37 | vonitsanet | Note Added: 0013962 | |
| 2007-05-01 01:57 | tabrisnet | Note Added: 0013965 | |
| 2007-05-01 06:38 | Shining Phoenix | Note Added: 0013968 | |
| 2007-05-01 12:26 | vonitsanet | Note Added: 0013969 | |
| 2007-05-01 22:25 | Shining Phoenix | Note Added: 0013972 | |
| 2007-05-01 22:57 | Bricker | Note Added: 0013973 | |
| 2007-05-02 06:15 | Shining Phoenix | Note Added: 0013977 | |
| 2007-05-02 06:22 | WolfSage | Note Added: 0013978 | |
| 2007-05-02 06:23 | WolfSage | Note Edited: 0013978 | |
| 2007-05-02 18:09 | aquanight | Note Added: 0013979 | |
| 2007-05-02 21:15 | Shining Phoenix | Note Added: 0013984 | |
| 2007-05-02 22:19 | aquanight | Note Added: 0013987 | |
| 2015-08-08 17:54 | syzop | Severity | tweak => feature |
