[IRCServices] NICKSERV suggestion.

[Bergee]

	Our network runs with LIST and LISTEMAIL restricted to admins only...
so personally I like LISTLINKS the way that it is.  I think you're right
that someone might not want the fact that they go by several nicknames
intentionally exposed.
	Although what might be useful is a command to confirm if two nicknames
are linked.  If you have a channel registered, you can already do this
in a rather roundabout fashion.  Let's say that a user has NicknameA,
NicknameB and NicknameC linked, with the main nickname being NicknameA.
 I (as another regular user) want to know if NicknameB and NicknameC are
linked.  I can just add NicknameB to my channel's access list at some
level, and then list the access list.  ChanServ will then tell me the
access level of NicknameA, so I can see that NicknameA and NicknameB are
linked.  And then of course, I can tell ChanServ to remove NicknameC
from the access list (which will of course work, and NicknameA will no
longer appear.)  So then I know that those three nicknames are linked
together... if that explanation made any sense at all. :)
	I guess after writing that, I feel like maybe it isn't worth trying to
hide nickname links, since there are ways a determined user can find out
anyway...

Bergee

Andrew Church wrote:
>>The main thing that makes me wonder is that LIST and LISTEMAIL aren't
>>restricted to staff, so:
> 
>      But nicks (nickgroups, technically) also have a PRIVATE option,
> allowing them to select whether their nicks are shown in the list or not.
> Linked nicks all share the same flags, so you can't decide whether to allow
> certain links to be shown or not.
> 
>      Though now that you bring it up, I could see an argument for allowing
> LISTLINKS on a user without PRIVATE set.  Comments from the audience?
> 
>   --Andrew Church
>     achurch at achurch.org
>     http://achurch.org/