From: herm@merlin.etsu.edu (Herman H. Fredriksson)
Subject: Re: Supidity of the Lambs !
Keywords: bots, are, lame.
Organization: East Texas State University, Commerce, Texas
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:47:04 GMT

gardabr@unix1 (Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen) writes:
>Ove Ruben R Olsen (buboo@alf.uib.no) wrote:
>: Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen writes:
 
>: > [..dudes message me asking me how to make a vanitybot..]
>: [..ruben says.. this is called USERSUPPORT..]

>See my other article about sharing programming techiques

>: If you go to IRC to communicate, why do you have a bot then ? I can't
>: really se the logic here.

>The logic is, for instance, that only certain people are supposed to have
>op on that channel, some people might ruin it and make a hell of a noise
>this has happend once, and I do not wish a repitition of that. 

Why? Your bot already has the capability to create a helluvalot
of noise! See the previous article.

[..some crap removed..]

>: How much have YOU been on IRC vs your BOT been on IRC to keep YOUR channel ?
>: This is a essential question every channel keeping bot writer should 
>: considder. Said in another word: DO you NEED it ?

>Yes, I know Glurg is on 24 hours a day. This is because some of the people I
>know do not have email capabilities, and Glurg works as a communication channel
>between me and them, as we usually are not there at the same time. Yes, I need
>it.

You mentioned something earlier about agreeing on certain
bots having certain functions. NOTESERV has had this function
for a very long time. Perhaps its your ego which NEEDS this bot.

>Also, due to Glurg's sometimes nice comments, he gives some atmosphere to
>my channel. The people using the channel likes him, and so, people not using
>the channel really shouldn't care.

Once again, see the previous posting regarding the cutesy comments. If
your bot adds atmosphere to your channel by mumbling impersonal repeated
and sometimes very much out of context crap onto the channel. Then I
pity that channel.
 
>: Afraid that someone may "steal" you precious channel ? get real :-)
>See above.

>: Neither channels nor nicknames are owned. This is IRC, not your home :-)
>Ehum.... IRC is my home... 8)=
 
>: [..stuff about the growing number of vanitybots..]

>Well... the /on join <nick> op bots could all be put in one megabot. But to
>do this, bot programmers would need to cooperate - which they would do with
>alt.irc.bots. Also, as mentioned above, if the users of a channel don't mind
>the bot, why should the non-users of the channel bother? Everybody on #hotsex
>agree that the bots there are very annoying, and so, THOSE bots should be
>dealt with. 

State information about channels are sent to all servers. If a bot sends
repeated mode commands, or kick, or topic, or other flood commands
(ones which are probagated to all servers), it affects everyone.
 
>: \Ruben.
>: (Say NO to unatended bots)
>But my dear Ruben! The whole point is that the bot is supposed to make it on
>their own. Otherwise, there would be no point in having them. Say NO to
>attended bots!

but the point is, that lots of bots can't make it on their own. Yours 
is a classic example (see previous post). 

herm
(say NO to unattended bots)
-- 
-- Herman Fredriksson -------- <herm@merlin.etsu.edu> ------ _ ---------
-- IRC Politician ----------- <herm@coombs.anu.edu.au> --- _| ~-, ------
-- East Texas State University --------------------------- \   _) ------
-- Commerce, Texas, USA -- "Everthing's Bigger'n'Better" --  \(  ------- 
Newsgroups: alt.irc