Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:52:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:40, Cord Beermann wrote:
> > >Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is these
> > > days than IRC.
> >
> > Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients.
>
> So write one or grab one of the existing ones and make it not suck.
As it is, IRC *does* have non-sucking non-graphic clients. If you think
people should switch to Jabber, I think you ought to write such a
client, not someone who's not interested in using Jabber in the first
place.
> > for the usual one to one communication it might be ok, but for
> > groupchat (and thats what most people do on IRC it simply sucks.
>
> By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like spamming
> the channel to announce they're going away,
That's not really the design of IRC; rather, it's the design of some
clients.
> or indicating their status with nicknames (which also spams the
> channel). You also get spammed on IRC whenever someone joins or
> leaves a channel.
Most IRC clients allow those to be switched off. Personally, I happen to
like them.
> Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system.
IRC has a real presence system, too.
> Jabber provides all the same "modes" IRC does in group chat, except
> bans actually work because they're not stupidly tied to some arbitrary
> netmask.
Well, there's one "advantage".
> Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't spammed to the channel
> unless your client adds them in for you (but changes are still
> reflected in the listing of who is in the chat).
Joins and parts you already mentioned. Nickname changes? I wouldn't know
why the fsck you *wouldn't* want to be informed of those.
> Jabber networks don't go on begging sprees for funding.
Hell yes they do. My Jabber server administrator has sent me some
"please support my bandwidth" request in the past.
> OFTC will invariably spam you like every other IRC network since the
> dawn of time the first moment they get more than a few users.
As it is, that hasn't happened yet. Can we talk about things that are
actually happening, rather than things that *might* happen at some point
in the undefined future, please?
> IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still
> plagued by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of
> improvement over time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world
> moved on already?
Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to
everyone I've ever chatted with?
Thanks, but no thanks. Jabber has its place as an IM protocol, but not
as a group chat thing; IRC is way better there.
--
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4
Reply to: