Maybe this is true, maybe it’s just some crybabies whining, but one thing is for sure: On networks without registration, oper/admins have no “magic” powers over channels and you are free to run them any way you want. You know the saying, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely”? On networks with registration, there are often allegations of IRC oper/admin abuse, such as taking over a channel just because they disagree with the policy of the channel or the people who run it. By necessity, registration services give the IRC operators or administrators who run the IRC servers the “magic” ability to give or take away ownership of a channel/nick. Some people think this is confusing, we prefer to say it’s fair. On networks without registration, everything is first-come first-served, and nothing is permanent. Most of the “good” channel/nick names are already taken, since anybody can register a name and keep it even when they aren’t online. EFnet tried to compromise by coming up with a pseudo-chanserv called CHANFIX which effectively helps reasonably large, stable channels to deal with occasional opless or takeover problems. Imagine the outrage and chaos that would ensue. ![]() For example, if registration took effect on a day when somebody just took over “your” channel/nick temporarily, then that channel/nick would be permanently owned by him instead. Even in the unlikely event that everybody agreed to adopt registration now, it would be very difficult to establish who owned which channel/nick. ![]() Implementing services now could be quite controversial. Some networks like EFnet and IRCnet are so old that they actually predate the idea of services, which were in fact developed specifically for newer networks like DALnet.If every network had the exact same services and policies, there wouldn’t be any reason for them to all exist separately. Every network is independent and different. ![]() The remaining of this guide will focus on the philosophical question of why other nets have no registration services.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |