From: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: yes or no? (bot deopping)
Date: 18 Dec 92 06:25:14 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer) writes:

>In article <mrgreen.724296161@munagin> mrgreen@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (matthew green) writes:
>>avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed) writes:
>>
>>>>   3) Reduce the number of kills.
>>
>>>Just mean less operator kill...and this wont happen while at least
>>>1 operator can issue /kill (in this, the real politicans leave us way
>>>behind - they at least are willing and see need to disarm).
>>
>>>Consider the recent case where person A (an operator) was killed by
>>>person B (another operator) who was then killed by person C (another
>>>operator) and to end it all, person B then squit'd the server that
>>>person A was on.
>>
>>>Given this, can you see person C or B ever giving up oper in
>>>fear that they may not be able to retaliate ?
>>
>>#define A Page
>>#define B Spur
>>#define C Gywdion
>>
>>..

>According to the above, the following is claimed to be the sequence
>of events:

># Consider the recent case where person Page (an operator) was killed by
># person SpUr (another operator) who was then killed by person Gwydion
># (another operator) and to end it all, person SpUr then squit'd the
># server that person Page was on.

>It is not correct.

>What actually happened was that SpUr /ignored page, at which point
>page /killed him.  SpUr complained to Stale, who is the admin of the
>server that Page has oper on; Stale was not interested in SpUr's
>opinions.

So ?  If I were Stale, I wouldn't be interested in them either.

>Page continued to harass SpUr, and eventually SpUr was /killed by
>Page.  At this point, I /killed Page.  SpUr came back on and /squit
>Stale's server as well.  This seems to have resolved the situation
>to SpUr's satisfaction, because it now seems that Page is no longer
>harassing him.

So everyone should /squit a server to resolve a problem with another
operator ?  What an excellent show of maturity.  Can you imagine what
would happen if all operators started doing this because someone else
killed them ?  Squit is not a toy for operators to exercise control
over other operators/users with.

>At no point did I kill SpUr, as you have claimed.

Read it again.  No such claim was made.  Maybe you got your pronouns
mixed up, Page was the subject of the first sentence and to which the
"who" is refered to.  But that is just a trivial point.  If my
grammar is lacking and I've got it wrong then I'll rewrite it for
you:

Page killed Spur (stupid reason);
Gwydion killed Page for killing Spur (another stpuid reason);
Spur squits the server Page is on (the most stupid reason of the three).

Whether Page killed for the right reason or not is not the issue.
The following blatant abuse of both SQUIT and KILL, combined with the
original KILL is.

Now if anyone had any sense, they'd make it clear to ALL THREE that such
action won't be tolerated in the future and that something should be
done to stop it happening again if it does.  I believe that can be
done without using KILL or SQUIT and more effectively too.

Avalon
Newsgroups: alt.irc