HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: phone@coombs.anu.edu.au (matthew green)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert) kill too.?
Date: 20 Dec 92 05:30:47 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

cc4507@u.cc.utah.edu (Chucki Carpinello) writes:

> In a previous life I wrote:
>>
>>At least when you /server localhost, the whole domain comes up..
>>
>>311 p is mrgreen@localhost.ee.mu.OZ.AU (the lame one, also monica's)
>>312 on irc via server munagin.ee.mu.OZ.AU (University of Melbourne, Australian Hub)
>>317 p has been idle 0 seconds
>>
>Not always. . .
>*** Chucki is chucki@localhost (Chuck Carpinello)
>*** on IRC via server csulx.weber.edu (Weber State college, Odgen, Utah)
>*** Chucki is not idle

Do you have I: lines for localhost specifically?  I've seen some `neat'
tricks with this, like having a hostname @127.0.0.1, etc.  Perhaps the
example.conf should have an I: line for localhost in it..  to show the
lamers how to do it properly..  

>>Any one with any clues will know that you are on the machine the server
>>is running on.  As to just showing user@host but no domain, when there are
>>machines with the same first name around..  tsk tsk..  and there are two
>>American servers with that are called uxa.  Cool.
>>
>say YES to non-local oper kills with harsher punishments

such as?

phone..

say NO to non-local operator KILLS..
From: gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Date: 12 Dec 1992 02:44:16 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu

In article <1992Dec11.210726.9232@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:

>... in your opinion. you'll be happy to know that irc.mit.edu is
>being upgraded to a real machine soonish, so cpu will no longer be a
>problem for it (not that it's really CPU bound...)

It's been being upgraded soonish for the last three months.
Shall I hold my breath?

Gwydion.
From: titus@coombs.anu.edu.au (titus chiu)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: yes or no? (bot deopping)
Date: 15 Dec 1992 01:02:11 GMT
Organization: Coombs Computing Unit, Australian National University, Canberra.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user on Coombs at ANU. The
              opinions expressed are those of the user and not necessarily
              those of the Australian National University.

gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>I think that all your solution would do is result in an explosion of
>number of servers, server operators, and kills.

why dont we just get rid of modes altogether :*) ... and have negative
channels back :*) (without mode command to -s it i guess) .. as for
kicks .. that really isnt necessary with the advance ignore command of
the ircII clients nowadays.. is it?

>One way to reduce mode traffic is to not propagate redundant modes,
>i.e. once Wumpus is a channel operator, "mode +o Wumpus" will be
>rejected by the user's home server. This reduces the stupid multiple

that is a good idea.. indeed it has been around for a little while now
of course (the idea that is) .. 

>mode problem, but introduces new consistancy problems.  So, the home

well.. i dont think it helps even if redundant modes are propogated
will help if the servers are out of sync (in fact of course it doesnt
help and just generates more traffic in the way of hack msgs)

>seconds? Does anyone think IRC would be less useful with a strict rate
>limit on nick, topic, and join?

well... i doubt nick and topic msgs need to be issued in quick successions
in any normal use.. as for join.. well.. the only problem i c if join
command is subjected to flood control is for people who join a few channels
in their .ircrc and it will slow them down a little..

titus
(Say NO to unattended bots)

--
titus chiu                                   -- email: ---------------------
                                             ---- titus@coombs.anu.edu.au --
  dont drink and drive home                  ---- titus@turing.ORG ---------
  get stoned and fly home.                   -------------------------------
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Organization: Aston University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL241235]
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 08:09:16 GMT

Just some loser... (asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu) wrote:
: mnystrom@athena.mit.edu (Mika Nystroem) was telling me...
: >In article <1992Dec15.203157.10128@rat.csc.calpoly.edu>, asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
: >|> tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) was telling me...
: >|> 
: >|> -- 
: >*** dog5 is mnystrom@patriot (Mika Nystrom)
: >*** on irc via server Patriot.mit.edu (Fastest draw in the East)
: >*** dog5 has been idle 6 seconds
: >It *does* say patriot.mit.edu; that's why I never considered it a major problem.
: 
: For the server, yay.  Not for you.
: 
: >I haven't fixed it because I don't have root access and the people who do aren't
: >going to. I did the following instead:

At a guess this is the result of gethostbyaddr() in libc returning a host
name which is not a FQDN if it is local.
(I didn't think the code used this interface, maybe it does if /etc/resolv.conf
is missing?)

I really don't see what the fuss is about.
(a few lines of extra code will fix this, if it is REALLY than much of a problem)

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 429 9199  (Home)                    |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |
From: gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Why people care so strongly about IRC (sorry, a bit long)
Date: 12 Dec 1992 02:16:43 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu

In article <1992Dec10.065657.16981@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> frechett@spot.Colorado.EDU (-=Runaway Daemon=-) writes:

>The problem you didn't address is that all these bot wars and mode wars, etc
>may _already_ have an adverse effect on the performance of IRC overall.  But 
>then those who participate in this type of behavior wouldn't give a shit any
>way.  After all IRC is just a toy and should be treated as such.  Obviously
>nothing productive can ever be accomplished on irc so why bother.  Anyone
>who 'cares' must be hopelessly out of touch with reality and they too should
>remember that IRC is only a toy.  It is every person's god-given right to
>have their own personal, opping/deopping/moding/flooding/banning bot cause
>after all, it's the other guys' responsibility.


Let me ask you a question, Daemon...

Have you ever talked to the bot owners about the
problems their bots cause?  I'm not being sarcastic;
but it is obvious you've already made up your mind
about them.  I'm just wondering why.

Gwydion.
From: asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Date: 16 Dec 92 19:42:06 GMT
Organization: Nothing worth mentioning...

tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) was telling me...
>On 16 Dec 92 07:10:56 GMT, asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) said:
>
> > 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.  
>
>	IRC politics involves not only *who* runs a server, but *where*
>they run it, *how* they run it, *what* they connect to, and indeed
>*whether* it should exist at all.
>
>	You concerns are, by definition, political.

Wrong...You left out one BIG point.  I agree poltiices involves those things
But you must also say the motivation for that must be personal angst against
the other party.  My comment is spurred by no such thing.  It wouldn't matter
WHO was running a server that did this, I still wouldn't like it.  You
and gwyd are trying to make it sound political when it really isn't in order
to 'lessen' the importance of the issue.  Since so  many people seem to 
overlook poltical squabbles.  Once again, i say this has nothing to do
with politics.  I didn't start this thread.  And I don't particularly
care that it is patriot that I am talking about.  If it was any other
server, I would have said the same.

-Alex

-- 
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: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 03:53:42 GMT

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

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

>>Get off irc then &ie..   :)

>I am not a bot m@ie !#@ Never have been, and never will be! 

Yes you are.  You told me just now.

>>ps, dinopuppy babysitters aren't really bots..   

>Lemme just point this out ONE more time. I am _NOT_ going to
>be babysitting ANY offspring of yours!

>hrmp!

Sorry, but you are sadly mistaken,

..

say NO to non-local operator KILLS..
From: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: yes or no? (bot deopping)
Date: 13 Dec 92 12:26:07 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

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

>Personally, I think it's time for the *** Hack: message to go the way of the
>numbered channels ...

I'd rather have them available than not available at all.

>   3) Do away with mode changes.  Personally, I think this is the best
>      solution, but it's really up to the people who do the coding ...
>      A slightly less drastic solution would be to do away with the 'o' and the
>      'b' modes (and 'm' would have to go too ...)  Then anybody on the channel
>      would be considered 'opped'.
>      Kick would seem to be a good thing to get rid of too.  But it serves it's
>      purpose too.

>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.

So what is to stop people doing this with their bots:
/on mode "* * -s" /mode $1 +s

>   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' ...

What then stops people doing continuous mode changes ?
If a local server converts kick->ignore, how do the rest of the
servers become aware of this ?  They tally it up ?  At least with
hack notices and current model you have an idea of how 'in sync' the
net is.  If it takes 'more kicks' to get someone off, people will create
more bots to give htem "more of a say".

[...]      
>   purpose is way out of date, because, as a group, IRCops aren't generally
>   much more help than the other lusers.

Depends on who you include in your group.  On a whole, there are quite a
lot of clueless operators out there...which is quite frightening.

[...]

>   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.

That isnt the purpose of K-lines and nor is it the purpose of KILL.
What would happen ?  Someone would write an IrcII script which let them
kill and then when they signed off, would sign on to a different server.
And people would do this for when they were killed too...

>   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 ?

avalon
From: mattm@digex.com (Matt Mosley)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: A new (very simple) bot solution
Date: 17 Dec 1992 20:20:19 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mirror.digex.com

>under such a system, if you have a mode "+b *!*@*" it would be the
>*only* ban there, since it would replace any other bans on the channel,
>so of course it would be the *only* one you want removed...

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.

-- 
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: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: Waxing nostalgic without much of a point. Was: Re: Why people care so strongly about IRC (sorry, a bit long)
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 16:58:57 GMT

In article <avalon.724778792@coombs> avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed) writes:

>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..)

I added it, somewhere around May 1989 -- that was the interface that
my Wumpus gamemaster automaton used.
From: lcm1501@hertz.njit.edu (Lawrence C. Mc Abee)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:48:08 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Dec11.155558.2035@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.144428.13598@news.ysu.edu> doug@cc.ysu.edu (Doug Sewell) writes:
>>It appears that a new vanity server, patriot.mit.edu, has just popped up.
>>
>>The server-op (as listed by /admin) was sending annoying msgs to an 
>>acquaintance of mine, and when he objected, he was /kill'd.
>>
>>Who the hell gives these guys C/N lines ?
>
>Greg McMullan, among others. Aren't vanity servers fun? Especially the
>ones brought to us by Gwydion and Belladona.


	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....

-- 
         "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, 
         however improbable, must be the TRUTH !" Sherlock Holmes.
	 (The opinions expressed herein are mine, and not NJITs)	
    E-mail: lcm1501@hertz.njit.edu  PGP public key available.
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: Sten M. Drescher <smd@hrt216.brooks.af.mil>
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB
	<1992Dec15.015224.16530@rat.csc.calpoly.edu>
	<9212151418.AA02294@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
	<1992Dec15.203358.10285@rat.csc.calpoly.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 20:54:19 GMT

On 15 Dec 92 20:33:58 GMT, asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) said:

 Just> tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) was telling me...
>On 15 Dec 92 01:52:24 GMT, asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) said:
>
> > 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.
>
>	Does anyone else besides me remember vogon.bu.edu?  At least
>patriot.mit.edu is in the dns.
>
>	And I can make sendmail drop my domain name easily.  Does that
>make it a hack?

 Just> Sure it does.  Or atleast it doens't work as it should.  WHenever
 Just> someone tries to forge a usenet posting, that's considered a
 Just> hack.  I see irc as following the same rules.  When this was a
 Just> hot topic a year or so ago about forged usernames, someone cited
 Just> some net policy about misrepresenting yourself or something.  If
 Just> such a policy exists, I would think it would apply here too.

	OK, MilNet 'policy' is to refuse to allow reverse resolving.
Therefore, whenever I go onto IRC, I show up as smd@140.140.4.216,
arather than smd@animal.brooks.af.mil or smd@hrt216.brooks.af.mil.  I
can't fix this, neither Cerebus nor I have enough pull to get it fixed
(and A1C and a Sgt vs. MilNet admin - yeah, right!).  How long's it
gonna be before I'm accused of forging my location?  Don't worry, I
already have been, and Cerebus only introduced me to IRC a month ago.

	Sten Drescher, a.k.a. the Orangeman
From: cc4507@u.cc.utah.edu (Chucki Carpinello)
Subject: Re: patriot.mit.edu (vanity server alert)
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center Student Mail Machine
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 00:04:34 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.103032.563@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>
>Ever noticed how many people USE csd?  Gee george, how many other servers
>do you know of that have crashed because they went over the max user
>limit of ircd?
  I belive netserv2.its.rpi.edu did once
>>	NOW, I do disagree with some ops on that server, but it does not make
>> it vanity....
>>
>
>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?
>
  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

>Faking a hostname is frowned highly upon.
>
>-Alex
>
>-- 


-- 
Chucki Carpinello
__
\/	Chucki.Carpinello@M.CC.Utah.EDU
From: gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Avalog arrested....
Date: 12 Dec 1992 02:11:00 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu

Avalon>No, you sue those responsible if there are sufficient grounds.

Gwydion>I must confess to a curiousity as to how many invasion of privacy
Gwydion>lawsuits can be justifiably brought against you.  Several hundred
Gwydion>have been suggested; I wouldn't go much farther than a few dozen,
Gwydion>myself.

Troy>Actually there appear to be several laws that a case could be made
Troy>under. Several of them would be test cases though. All it's waiting
Troy>for is somebody with the funds and motivation to initiate a suit.

Hmm..  How much funds are we talking about here?

Gwydion.
Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 12:28:04 -0500 
From: "Alex R.N. Wetmore" <aw2t+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: yes or no? (bot deopping)

Excerpts from netnews.alt.irc: 14-Dec-92 Re: yes or no? (bot deopping)
by Just some loser...@polys 
> >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.
>  
> Yeah, one channel op is nifty, but who 'inherits' the op if channel op
> /quits?

How about having the first person op themselves getting op.  The main
problem with this would be the server load as everyone tries to grab op.

My biggest problem with the one op/channel idea is that it allows one
person to become op and then background irc and not pay attention to it
anymore.  Then when the channel does need an op (someone is dumping
articles to the channel or whatever), the op won't be around to do a
/kick.  I'm still not positive that there is a need for channel ops at
all (the mode wars and kick wars might actaully drop as people don't
need channel op to take part in them).

alex (htoaster)
From: mark@coombs.anu.edu.au (Mark)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Disgusting behaviour by ops
Date: 20 Dec 92 00:50:30 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2
Organisation: Wassat?!

a_murphy@Turing.ORG (Andrew A. Murphy) writes:

>ljz57640@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (l.j.z. ) writes:
>>You forgot one:
>>10) refuse to have net sex with an ircop 
>>Happened to me once, and I was not amused.  

>>--Juni
>>  one of the few remaining net sex virgins  :)

>i'm sorry but you can't put 10 up that's abuse totally
>and a horrible reason to kill...

Hmmm, I should read the articles with weenie subject lines I guess if
stuff like that is in it. IRC must be getting pretty f*cking pathetic if
people are being *killed* for not participating in others shortcomings.

I happen to know and like Juni from a while back and it's quite disturbing
to hear this sh*t is going on. Geez you think the person in question would
at least find out if that sort of behaviour was welcome.

Clean up your acts, those that need to. Take your emotional starvation
somewhere else and dont use IRC to impose your problems on others.
Man that sucks.

Mark
annoyed.
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.current-events.somalia
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Somalia an Arab country??? no! [was: It's Blood for Oill, again.]
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:16:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.205804.17365@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> bobh@troy.cc.bellcore.com (hettmansperger,robert) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.010009.4765@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>>	
>>	If the Somalis are part of the Arab League, why the hell aren't
>>	*they* feedin' em?  Christ, why should we pay to feed a bunch
>                            ^^^^^^
>>	of people who haven't figured out that ol' equation:
>> 
>>	Don't have more kids than you can feed. 
>>
>>	Survival of the fittest, I say.  Good riddance.
>>
>
>Hmm.  Interesting use of "Christ" as an explitive given the message you are
>trying to convey.
>
>-Bob

	Are you covertly accusing me of being a christian?
 
	Hahahahaha.
 
	Nope, afraid not.  Christ just happens to be easy to
	say--I could have said, "Dammit" or "Look," or whatever.
 
	Finger my .plan and see for yourself (looong).

-- 
	"If you can't eat sand, why the hell are you living in a desert?"

	     Rule 1:  "Don't have more children than you can feed."
	  	  Nuclear redevelopment for a better world!
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.current-events.somalia
From: awells@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Andrew V. Wells)
Subject: Re: Spaying and neutering alles!!!
Followup-To: alt.current-events.somalia
Organization: Northeastern University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:36:23 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.153604.13857@usceast.cs.scarolina.edu>, ausdal@ece.scarolina.edu (Thi Van Ausdal) writes:
> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
> 
> 	I say we spay and neuter them.  50% of males, 50% of females.
> Even numbered children. Something.  Hell, it works for our dog and 
> cat population here in America.  While there are those who will gawk 
> like birds and cry "but they're not dogs and cats" (which is true, 
> I've seen cocker spaniels who outweigh most of Somalia) but think about
> the one of the reasons for the population there.  Somalis, like most of 
> the third world, is but the second generation or so since the arrival 
> of white man's medicine, nutrition, etc.  

                   [more racist shit deleted]

Here is a text-book case of nazism. 





Newsgroups: alt.activism,bit.listserv.catholic