HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: s_titz@ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Proposal for Bot Owners (V1.00).
Date: 12 Dec 92 14:53:21 GMT
Organization: Fachschaft math/inf, Uni Karlsruhe, FRG
NNTP-Posting-Host: irau30.ira.uka.de

In article <avalon.724161797@coombs> avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed) writes:
>...
>A good motivator is to send all the hack messages to the bot(s)/person(s)
>causing the noise.  They often don't know about it and when they get
>dumped the hack notices they make they soon stop.
>
>Or even dump/echo the hack messages to the channel..:)

Have you already applied for a patent on this sort of Bandwith-Waste
(tm) ?

Olaf
-- 
| Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student  |   o     | uknf@dkauni2.bitnet | old address |
| univ. of karlsruhe - germany |  _>\ _  | s_titz@ira.uka.de   | is still    |
| +49-721-60439                | (_)<(_) | praetorius@irc      | valid       |
  "My heart is human - my blood is boiling - my brain IBM" - Mr. Roboto
From: aw2t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Alex R.N. Wetmore)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: A new (very simple) bot solution
Date: 19 Dec 92 15:09:24 GMT
Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Excerpts from netnews.alt.irc: 17-Dec-92 Re: A new (very simple) bot..
by Matt Mosley@digex.com 
> Actually, this really should be done.  A "+b *!*@*" should replace all
> other bans, and remove them.  Same thing with "+b *!*@my.host.edu" removing
> "+b *!*@*.host.edu" ... it's called redundancy, folks.

Yeah, but once you remove the "*!*@*" ban you loose the older bans too. 
There might be a reason that I channel wants to always ban one person,
but someone (most likely as a joke) wants to ban "*!*@*".

alex (htoaster)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: cc4507@u.cc.utah.edu (Chucki Carpinello)
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Organization: Oh honey.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 11:41:54 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.185533.27811@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>cc4507@u.cc.utah.edu (Chucki Carpinello) was telling me...
>>In article <1992Dec16.070728.13523@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>
><notes that chucki needs to trim those attribution lines>
 Like you don't?
>>Well, for christs sake, if a user wanted to know what patriot was
>>THAT BAD, he could just ask!
>
>Shouldn't have to ask.  By your logic I could put up ANY fake host name I wanted
>to and say 'WEll if a user wanted to know what machine I was on THAT bad he could
>just ask!'
>
>I don't think so.
>
Hey look..  if it bother's you that much, don't /whois or /who dog3..
That's all there is to it


-- 
Chucki Carpinello
__
\/	Chucki.Carpinello@M.CC.Utah.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: yes or no? (bot deopping)
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:57:38 GMT

dougmc@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Doug McLaren) writes:

[A very good article (IMO) that really should be sent to ircd-three....]

>My proposal:
>   No bans.  No opping people.  +i, s, t, n, p all still in effect, able to
>   be changed by anybody on the channel.
>   Anybody on the channel can 'kick', but all the kick will do is do a
>   server-level ignore on that person.  So I kick you, and it keeps ME
>   and only ME from seeing you.  Perhaps if 1/2 or more of the people on
>   the channel kick a single person it ought to become 'real' ...
[...]
>These changes would do several things:  
>   1) reduce the bandwidth used by IRC.  (fewer mode changes ...)

Actually, I think that doing away with channel ops, and making mode changes
accessible to everyone might actually *increase* the number of mode changes.
I can already see the #hot* crowd having /mode +istnp and /mode -istnp
fests.

How about going to a one channel/one op scheme, where the channel creator 
is the channel op?  Sie can pass opship to one person, but deops hirself
in the process.  Yes, it could still be abused, but I think it might have
a better shot at reducing IRC bandwidth.

Also, do we still need channel topics?  It seems to me that bandwidth could
further be reduced by doing away with topics, thereby eliminating the
ever-popular sport of topic wars.

The /kick idea is interesting, but I'm not completely fond of it.  An 
alternative (in the one chan-op scheme especially) would be to give /kick
a few more teeth -- add an automatic ban as an after-effect of a kick. 
Possibly /kick would then be abused less often, since it would take more
work to undo a /kick.

>   Leave /kill in, as it DOES have it's uses.  But make it kill yourself
>   too, so people will only use it when it's really needed.  Also, add a
>   K-line for 60 seconds on anybody killed, both the killer and the kilee.
>   This will make it a bit more inconvienient to kill and be killed.

Oooooooh!  Evil!  I *like* it!  But will it play in Peoria?

>I don't promise that these ideas are perfect, or foolproof, or a panacea for
>IRC.  But they strike me as something to consider ...

Ditto that.
--
Michael Adams				| Science without religion is lame;
Actuarial Science Program @ UIUC	| religion without science is blind.
StarOwl@uiuc.edu (NeXTmail OK)		| 		-- Thomas Edison
an692@anon.penet.fi (anonymously)	| NBCS: B1f+t-w+g+k++s+me+h-qv	     
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: mattm@digex.com (Matt Mosley)
Subject: Re: Waxing nostalgic without much of a point.  Was: Re: Why people care so strongly about IRC (sorry, a bit long)
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:11:51 GMT

In article <1g842vINNjnm@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> gjm5@po.CWRU.Edu (Gregory J. Meyers) writes:
>     I like NickServ.  It does fulfill a needed service, and it does it     
>elegantly.  Perhaps bots like NickServ could be used to economize the IRC,
>by watching the load on the system and suggesting improvements to the IRCops.
>It could help to cut down on the number of netsplits.  With time it might
>even be allowed to make those changes itself.

Oh, wonderful - now you're suggesting that an automated client handle
things that require human intervention.  This sound really great for the
IRC network.

>     I wouldn't call kicking bots a service; more of a challenge.  Those of
>us who partake in warbot battles from time to time are striving to write the
>best program to beat out all the others.  Code must be at a premium, for the
>bot that is quickest on the draw is sure to win the battle.  And the program
>has to be hardy, too, to cope with any situation rapidly.  It's all too easy
>to trick most bots.  But writing a bot that can't be fooled takes hours and
>hours of work, and then we get on a channel and try to see whose program is
>the best.

I'm really disgusted with this kind of logic.  Can't you realize that some
of us are _paying_ for network links, and you're sending hundreds of useless
mode/kick commands over the net?  Don't you know that they are propogated
_everywhere_?  Obviously you've never been a system administrator, and
don't understand the damage this can really do.

>     I'm thinking of a sort of loose democracy.  The details are nowhere
>clear in my mind yet, but definitely anyone should be allowed to vote.  Maybe
>IRCops should be given more than one vote; maybe users who demonstrate their
>competency on the subject should be given more votes.  Since we have to start
>somewhere, I'd probably suggest that the admins decide how many votes people
>get.  (Each user would have to apply individually to his admin; I'm sure a
>lot of people just wouldn't bother so there shouldn't be an excessive number
>for any admin to handle.)  And to provide yet another way for bots to be
>useful, a VoteServ could be set up to do the tally.  In the end, the panel
>of bot judges could be assembled, and they would then be given complete power
>concerning whether bots live or die, and which ones.

You're forgetting one very important point.  IRC always has been and always
will be an __Anarchy__.  You figure out the rest...

-- 
Matt Mosley			<>	"Think for yourself, and feel the
Digital Express Group		<>	 walls..  become sand beneath your
mattm@digex.com			<>	 feet."   -  Queensryche
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: andreww@win4.vut.EDU.AU (Andrew Watts)
Subject: Re: Bots, Newsgroups, Protocols, Whatever
Organization: Victoria University Of Technology, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:04:36 GMT

mrgreen@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (matthew green) writes:

>Yes you are.  You told me just now.

Am not. Read my Circuit lights, I AM NOT A BOT.

>Sorry, but you are sadly mistaken,

Nope, your the mistaken one, one big mistake really :>

>say NO to non-local operator KILLS..

I think i shall have to begin killing you so you will push harder
for kills to be taken away :>

later.

Andrew.
andreww@win3.vut.edu.au
tz @ irc.
From: asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:29:23 GMT
Organization: Nothing worth mentioning...

hachec@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Greg Patterson) was telling me...
>In article <1992Dec15.015224.16530@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>
>You said it...
>
>>>  That's not a fake hostname, gee, dont know know tat sometimes that
>>>heppens whhen somone from the same host comes on?  It's not>a hack,
>>>it's a problem with etc/hosts
>>
>>Doubtful.  Look at his last post...he knows it's a hack.  The only
>>one I can think of off the top of my head (that I didn't think of last
>>time) was  a server in *.tw I think it was.  And how long did that last?
>>patriot has been faking the hostname from day1.
>
>Oh lovely, just because a user happens to show up as user@patriot you 
>decide that it is hacked..  You don't even know the cause or reasons for
>this yet you are jumping to conclusions.  

People have explained possible reasons.  But seems to me that since it
HASN'T been fixed, then I consider it a hack...how long has patriot
been up?  I haven't kept track...but it's been a while.  He knows
the problem exists, so why has nothing been done to fix it?

>I suspect this server is running under SunOS.  jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca 
>had a similar problem for a few days (week maybe?) and it had nothing

Oh, a few days, a week...Well atleast you're expedient in fixing it.
From mystroms post, he did not see it a a problem, nor did he show
any indication of wanting to fix it.

>to do with hacking the source any shut shit.  It just appeared that way.
>IT HAS TO DO WITH THE etc/hosts not mapping properly.  The admin will
>probably have to define them by hand to fix it (if it hasn't been 
>done already). 

It hasn't.

-Alex

--
From: gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: "snowbot"
Date: 12 Dec 1992 01:47:07 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu

In article <Dweiss-081292013818@chiba.hughes.american.edu> Dweiss@chiba.hughes.american.edu (Dan Weiss ) writes:

>Actually, the solution is to have nickserv /kill after 5 or so "that nick
>is registered" notices.

No. 

Gwydion


Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: removing non-local KILL
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 04:36:05 GMT

There's not much point in removing non-local KILL from the server. If
it didn't exist, then it would be easy to fake a nick collision to get
the same result, but without the existing publicity that we have for
kills. There is already an option that the server admin can turn on
which doesn't let any operators on that server issue kills, and I have
it enabled on all the servers I administer.

Kills are a social problem, and attempting to achieve a technical
solution for them isn't going to be trivial. Don't make the problem
worse before you make it better.

Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: dbarberi@rodan.acs.syr.edu (London W11)
Subject: Re: IRC Folk History
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 00:46:28 EST

In article <1992Dec9.124454.26425@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE> stumpf@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Markus Stumpf) writes:
>In article <1992Dec6.051436.19419@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, frechett@spot.Colorado.EDU (-=Runaway Daemon=-) writes:
>|> The channel at the time was called +report.  It was moderated by a bot
>
>For all that are interested ...
>There are logs available from
>	ftp.informatik.tu-muenchen.de:/local/irc/doc
>called
>gruner   irc        369711 Mar 26  1991 report-desert-storm.tar.Z
>gruner   irc         33853 Aug 26  1991 report-ussr-gorbatchev.Zi 

  In addition, these files, and many others relating to IRC, can be found
  on 
     sunsite.unc.edu:/pub/academic/computer_science/virtual_reality/irc/papers

Newsgroups: alt.irc,alt.religion.kibology
From: kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry)
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Organization: Two rooms filled with typography, in downtown Boston
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 07:34:21 GMT

In article <1gbjhdINNjs7@life.ai.mit.edu> gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.194808.26570@njitgw.njit.edu> lcm1501@hertz.njit.edu (Lawrence C. Mc Abee) writes:
>
>>	patriot.mit.edu is not a vanity server. If you look at how slow
>> irc.mit.edu is (as well as csd.bu.edu) you will understand why it is 
>> needed. 
>
>>	NOW, I do disagree with some ops on that server, but it does not make
>> it vanity....
>
>
>You're mistaken.  Any server that I have op on is a vanity server.
>Ask Wumpus; he's the one who invented the term to describe me.  Or, if
>he didn't invent it, he at least popularized it.

But what if I have op on it--what's the special term then?  Enquiring
minds want to know.
							-- K.
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Can someone help me with..
Summary: Maybe...
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:51:57 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.232234.22892@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>
>
>I am running a program that wants to know the following:
>
>Gateway IP address: (default: 0.0.0.0)
>Nameserver IP address: (default: 0.0.0.0)
>Your IP Address: (default 0.0.0.0)
>NetMask: (default 255.255.255.0) 

Dunno about the gateway address, but the nameserver and your address should
start with 130.86.something, since that's the address for the csus.edu
domain... 

--PLH, killing time on 128.42.5.4 :-)



-- 

Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: yaz@phoenix.oulu.fi (Tuomas K Kaikkonen)
Subject: Re: Protecting privacy of users against IRCops; making umode +i effective.
Organization: University of Oulu, Finland
	<1992Dec11.014030.9307@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
	<1992Dec11.014556.9402@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
	<1gd32bINNbdk@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:11:07 GMT

In article <1gd32bINNbdk@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> Nicolas.Pioch@grasp.insa-lyon.fr (Nicolas Pioch) writes:

>   Quoting gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl):
>    -> male operators who are harrassing female users generally know what
>    -> server the target uses.
>
>   Precisely. If someone wants to disappear from a lamer's eye, using
>   umode +i he just needs to /nick something else... but this doesn't work
>   for an IRCop who can still /trace the server and find out the new
>   nickname in use...

A normal user can see all users on all servers on the irc network,
if he wants, whether they are +i or -i. You can also do your own
simple telnet substitute, which you can use to send irc commands
to your favorite server, and save all the output of the command
to a file and do a grep user@host if you want.

I want to say, that you do not have to be an irc operator to gain
information... all you have to know: bugs.
Sorry guys, but your anti-op attitude just pisses me off sometimes.

>   -- 
>   *** Nicolas
>       E-Mail: Nicolas.Pioch@grasp.insa-lyon.fr      (pioch@poly.polytechnique.fr)
>       IRC:Nap   >>> HAPPY user of OS/2 version 2.01, switching to NT next march !

--
Tuomas K.Kaikkonen   yaz@phoenix.oulu.fi  Here ,._/\
Taidonkaari 1 E 36   Tel:+358-81-5546081   I __`.  |
SF-90570 OULU        (_/ _  __            Live  /FI|
FINLAND               I I-I /_                 |___/
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: cc4507@u.cc.utah.edu (Chucki Carpinello)
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Organization: Toreo!
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 02:47:46 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.070728.13523@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer) was telling me...
>>In article <1992Dec15.014934.16284@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>>
>>>It's fake to me.  host patriot doesn't give me anything a nic.ddn.mil whois
>>>of patriot doesn't help either  I don't care what kind of stupid justification
>You get a clue...sheesh...You know WHY it's doing it, you know your finger
>is no proof of it's correctness.  Gee, can anyone else who isn't
>at mit or have mit hostmasks do that?  No, Doubtful.
>And if there would happen to be a patriot.calpoly.edu I would get
>Login name: mnystrom                    In real life:???
>
Well, for christs sake, if a user wanted to know what patriot was
THAT BAD, he could just ask!

Lord!



-- 
Chucki Carpinello
__
\/	Chucki.Carpinello@M.CC.Utah.EDU
From: gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Date: 16 Dec 1992 02:19:58 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu

In article <1992Dec14.103032.563@rat.csc.calpoly.edu>, asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
> How about a server that fakes host names for people?  Do you know of
> many other servers that do that?  Gee mnystrom@patriot  what the hell
> kind of address is that?


This is hilarious.  Some people will go to any extent to
score a political point... Or, at least, try to score a
political point.

Gwydion.
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: mrgreen@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (matthew green)
Subject: Re: Bots, Newsgroups, Protocols, Whatever
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:41:40 GMT

andreww@win4.vut.EDU.AU (Andrew Watts) writes:

>macman@bernina.ethz.ch (Danny Schwendener) writes:
>
>>So let's put the following limitations on bots:
>
>Add this and i'll go along completely;
>
>1) [a]. Bots shalt not be allowed on IRC.
>
>There, easy.

Get off irc then &ie..   :)

..

ps, dinopuppy babysitters aren't really bots..   
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB
	<1992Dec15.015224.16530@rat.csc.calpoly.edu>
	<1992Dec15.083755.6691@cc.umontreal.ca>
	<1992Dec15.202923.9973@rat.csc.calpoly.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 14:02:01 GMT

On 15 Dec 92 20:29:23 GMT, asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) said:

 > People have explained possible reasons.  But seems to me that since it
 > HASN'T been fixed, then I consider it a hack...how long has patriot
 > been up?  I haven't kept track...but it's been a while.  He knows
 > the problem exists, so why has nothing been done to fix it?

	I'll tell you why: because if it doesn't break sendmail (i.e.,
the domain is stamped by the mailserver so that a recipient can directly
reply to a mailing from that machine) it just isn't a high priority to
fix.  The only reason I fixed it here is because my braindead mailserver
*doesn't* stamp domains properly on outgoing mail.

 > Oh, a few days, a week...Well atleast you're expedient in fixing it.
 > From mystroms post, he did not see it a a problem, nor did he show
 > any indication of wanting to fix it.

	Why screw with what ain't broken?  I've done enough of that to
know it usually breaks something else that's more critical.

-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
"Leave well enough alone."
From: kny@cs.hut.fi (Kim Nyberg)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: mode +a ? (was: Re: yes or no? (bot deopping))
Date: 13 Dec 1992 12:28:17 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Distribution: inet
	<85220@ut-emx.uucp> <1992Dec13.022557.11079@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cardhu.cs.hut.fi
In-reply-to: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU's message of Sun, 13 Dec 1992 02:25:57 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.022557.11079@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>always been a disaster, ever since they got too big. What do the
>inhabitants of #gblf and #42 think of modes? Do they work well for
>you?

Well, most of the time, sometimes though I think that there should
be a mode #channel +-a nick!user@host that would override +b, so
that we could have +b *!*@*, +a *!*@*.fi (+ a for the few people
outside Finland who speak finnish and frequent #42). That would
leave us with only one problem, netsplits, but Arska (the bot)
should be able to take care of that problem (even better than now).

Ok, some people might ask why we don't use +i ... well, it's
extra work for all finns who want to join #42, and newcomers
wouldn't know how to ask for an invite. The reason for our
*!*@*.edu etc. bans are lamoids who join and part the channel
randomly, sometimes causing floods.

>Has anyone measured what fraction of flooded messages are redundant
>mode commands? Should we also have the home server have separate rate
>limits for flood messages such as nick, topic & join? i.e. 1 per 10
>seconds? Does anyone think IRC would be less useful with a strict rate
>limit on nick, topic, and join?

No, it could be a blessing actually ... less topic-wars, less
channel-jumping with lame bots.

Kim
From: asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Date: 16 Dec 92 07:10:56 GMT
Organization: Nothing worth mentioning...

gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer) was telling me...
>In article <1992Dec14.103032.563@rat.csc.calpoly.edu>, asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>> How about a server that fakes host names for people?  Do you know of
>> many other servers that do that?  Gee mnystrom@patriot  what the hell
>> kind of address is that?
>
>
>This is hilarious.  Some people will go to any extent to
>score a political point... Or, at least, try to score a

Political point?  You're the only one making it so.  I try to stay as
far away from irc politics as possible.  The original poster
started the thread, since they were talking about patriot, I voiced
my concerns about it.  That doesn't make it political.  I don't think it's
right.  I don't particulary care who runs the server.  I pointed it
out the last times I had seen it. YOu make it polical
by even brining it up.  Maybe you're just too paranoid.

-Alex
>Gwydion.

--
From: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Waxing nostalgic without much of a point. Was: Re: Why people care so strongly about IRC (sorry, a bit long)
Date: 19 Dec 92 15:26:32 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:

>In article <9212100353.AA25829@hrt213.brooks.af.mil> tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) writes:

>>	The first bot was a simple /on join hello thingy.

>The first bot pre-dated IrcII.

Do you have any idea about how long the "#ifdef AUTOMATON" has been in the
standard irc client ?  It seems like it has been quite some time..(I didnt
add it and I dont think armin did..)

avalon
From: tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Whereis the MiniIRC client??
Date: 15 Dec 92 14:22:38 GMT
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB

On Sun, 13 Dec 1992 09:06:02 GMT, arumble@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Anthony Rumble) said:
 > I heard around the traps of a MiniIRC, TinyIRC client??

 > Is there such a beast? and if there is.. where can I get it?

	How small is small?  Rocker's elisp irc client is 104K
byte-compiled, and I've got a working (albeit *VERY PRIMITIVE*) working
elisp client core that's just over 2K.

-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
"It depends what you want it to do."
Newsgroups: alt.irc