On Tuesday 02 May 2006 16:19, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > 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. All the concole Jabber clients I've come across suit me fine. I can't program for a variable that I can't perceive. > > > 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. It's a misfeature in clients caused by the bad design of IRC: It lacks presence information, which people do find important. Just not channelworthy. > > 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. s/most/none/. I just tried irssi, ircii, kopete, and ejabberd's IRC clients. None have this. > > Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system. > > IRC has a real presence system, too. An /away command nobody uses doesn't a presence system make. > > 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. Because nobody changes their nicknames on IRC anymore, it's always from something like "retard" to "retard-doingMyWife" or something similarly presence-related. > > 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. Switch servers. You can still get to the same group chats from any Jabber server. So far, that one Jabber admin that doesn't quite get it out of dozens. > > 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? So OFTC is the one IRC network that does get it so far. Good for them. Don't expect it to last. > > 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? Jabber doesn't do that, nor am I sure I understand where you get that impression. You have to explicitly authorize people to subscribe to your presence information, it's not something that gets broadcast to other users without your approval. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): baloo@ursine.ca Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber
Attachment:
pgp6B4n1j7Q3M.pgp
Description: PGP signature