|
|
| Should SearchIRC remove indexing of network with less than 100 users? |
| Yes! |
|
15% |
[ 4 ] |
| No! |
|
84% |
[ 22 ] |
| Indifferent |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 26 |
|
| Author |
Message |
PingBad
Post Whore
Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 3001
Location: New Zealand
|
 Posted: Oct 21, 2009 3:41am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Trixar_za wrote: | | PingBad wrote: | | Lyhne1 wrote: | | I can see where it get tiresome deal with networks that come and go so quickly. Make it a rule that you can only add new network, after your network been up and running for like 90days or something. Sure there a way to get time stamp when they went online with there network. |
I assume you refer to /stats u here?
Not every network would have such a /stats; and of those that do, not every network would allow non-opers access (to name an example, IrCQ stops non-opers from getting any /stats output at all, so if you as a normal user can't get the information, scrawl can't either) |
An alternative could be to grab the 001-005 raw numerical data, extract the date the IRCd was started from there and then compare it with today's date.
However this will create a problem when the network recently added and compiled new servers...
It's a good idea though, just might not be possible to implement. |
- Download IRCd of choice
- Set system clock back, say, 8 or so years
- Configure and compile IRCd makefile
- Do the .conf thing
- Fix the clock
- Run IRCd
- Submit to SIRC
Time needed to accomplish: less than 10 minutes; accuracy: zilch.
Okay, that sounds negative, but if I could think of that from a quick scan of your message, trix, those wanting to be on SIRC's index rather quick are going to think of it sooner. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Trixar_za
Eleet
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 613
Location: South Africa
|
| Posted: Oct 21, 2009 9:00am Post subject: |
|
|
| PingBad wrote: | - Download IRCd of choice
- Set system clock back, say, 8 or so years
- Configure and compile IRCd makefile
- Do the .conf thing
- Fix the clock
- Run IRCd
- Submit to SIRC
Time needed to accomplish: less than 10 minutes; accuracy: zilch.
Okay, that sounds negative, but if I could think of that from a quick scan of your message, trix, those wanting to be on SIRC's index rather quick are going to think of it sooner. |
Well, this WOULD require the person to have some root access on a typical shell account or run it on a private line 
Going on my common knowledge of human nature however tells me this is HIGHLY likely. Any system that can be abused, WILL be abused by someone somewhere in the world. There will also be more people abusing it to be considered comfortable... That is human nature in a nutshell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Telume
none
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Oct 21, 2009 11:17am Post subject: |
|
|
| You don't even NEED to set the clock back 8 years lol, just set it back like 2 and you're good for submission depending on the day if this were implemented lol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PingBad
Post Whore
Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 3001
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Oct 21, 2009 1:38pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Telume wrote: | | You don't even NEED to set the clock back 8 years lol, just set it back like 2 and you're good for submission depending on the day if this were implemented lol. |
I was using eight years as an example (probably because I'd just finished an 8 hour shift at work, and was soon to start a few more hours here) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nixtrix
Lurker
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 106
Location: Around...
|
| Posted: Oct 23, 2009 12:20am Post subject: |
|
|
I have voted "No" for several reasons;
Not just because my network doesnt have the 100 users that several people would feel sufficent in order to be indexed by searchirc, I feel the fact people who do care about their network and spend alot of time ensuring configs are up to date and spending hours configuring stuff for their users would miss out on this like i would. OK i dont have 100 users but no one can say i dont spend alot of time working on my network and spending alot of ££ it.
This is a hobby to all of us... SIRC helps this hobby by indexing the IRC population. How is it going to do this would incorporating about 50% of IRC? Dont forget IRC is very split now a days new networks opening up all the time. Why should they not get a chance to use this service as more userbase networks can? What alot of people forget its not about how big the userbase is on a network. Its about the quality that network is run.. Id never say i was the best net admin.. but i can i say i try damn hard for the users i do have. And why shouldnt I be indexed for other people to come and check out my network? Just because u have a bigger userbase? I dont agree.
- Nixtrix |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElLupo
none
Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: Oct 23, 2009 7:29am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't agree either. For the same reasons already mentioned like this site being a representative reference to what the IRC community is about, offer a wide range of choice and versatility, a lot of users being on the smaller networks, giving the small networks the chance to display their added value when compared to the bigger ones, etc...
Besides all that, why should the many small networks suffer for a problem of resources? 50.000 channels take much longer to index than 50 channels. Why allow the big networks (who don't need it) free advertizing space if the small ones (who need it) can't? If a substantially big part of the pie is gobbled up by just a few players, let them pay for your problem.
It would seem to me that a 90 day rule of new networks is more fair and would separate the 2 week stint networks from the dedicated people. Positive discrimination of a bigger entity just reeks to elitism to me. Alternatively, you could also try to find donations for your resource problem.
my $0.02 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Register
Log in
