On Wednesday 03 May 2006 01:19, 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.
can you give a good enough definition of 'non-sucking' to allow that?
> Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to
> everyone I've ever chatted with?
it doesn't:
- your presence only gets broadcasts to people you've explicitly authorized
to subscribe to your presence (and you can de-authorize people at any
time)
- furthermore you can actually selectively send your presence to people,
allowing you to present different presences-modes to different people at
the same time.
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB)
2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double
format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam)
Attachment:
pgp992wDOiX1E.pgp
Description: PGP signature