[IRCServices Coding] Services 5.0pre9 released

[Craig McLure]

i agree with Finny.. secureops was often too restrictive, especially if i 
wanted only 1 person to not have ops.. i would set him -1.. and then if a 
some1 tried to op him/her, chanserv would de-op them, and i dont have to 
fight with chanserv if i wanna  temporarily op some1. and for (almost) the 
same reason, i think nojoin is better than restricted.

The users of my network feel the same way :)



>From: Finny Merrill <griever at t2n.org>
>Reply-To: ircservices-coding at ircservices.za.net
>To: ircservices-coding at ircservices.za.net
>Subject: Re: [IRCServices Coding] Services 5.0pre9 released
>Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 05:57:55 -0600 (CST)
>
>On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Andrew Church wrote:
>
> > ...the AUTODEOP
> > and NOJOIN levels have been bothering me for quite a while, since 
>they're
> > also affected by the SECUREOPS and RESTRICTED channel options.  This 
>made
> > the logic complicated and the explanations confusing, so I removed the
> > AUTODEOP and NOJOIN levels entirely--they're now fixed at -1 and -100
> > respectively (the SECUREOPS and RESTRICTED options still function the 
>same
> > way).  I hope this doesn't bother too many people, but please feel free 
>to
> > comment (and let me know if I broke anything).
> >
>
>imho I think SECUREOPS and RESTRICTED should be removed, not AUTODEOP and
>NOJOIN. This removes a lot of useful functionality that I've used before.
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe or change your subscription options, visit:
>http://www.ircservices.za.net/mailman/listinfo/ircservices-coding




--
Craig McLure
Craig at chatspike.net
Network Administrator of the ChatSpike IRC Network.
ChatSpike, the users network! www.chatspike.net


_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com