Re: Informative Reflector Sites

Brian Godette (
Thu, 19 Mar 1998 20:00:55 -0700

At 07:43 PM 3/19/98 BST, you wrote:
>** Reply to note from Thu, 19 Mar 1998 02:47:18 EST
>[Replying to Ken via Streak's post because I deleted the wrong thing, ho hum]
>> On Wed, 11 Mar 1998, Ken Colburn wrote:
>> > My problem with the reflectors I have visited goes beyond the issue of
>> > child-safe. The conversations are usually inane, disjointed and
>> > otherwise uninformative.
>But the chicks don't dig all that tech talk.
>> > I learn far more from this ListServ than from
>> > the reflectors, themselves.
>It has to be said, most refs are, to coin a phrase, 'meeting places', if
you like compare a
>ref to a pub or bar, 90% of the conversations in either place are inane
ramblings (or
>attempting to attract the ladies :). Brian and I managed to pretty much
clear a ref by
>talking about pretty arcane technical matters once, you would have been
welcome to join in :)

I don't know anyone who likes to stick around a conversation they don't
understand :). Suppose it's finally time for me to get off my duff and
release 1.07b9 (yeah I'm skipping 1.07b8). The latest "woopie" things over
the last version I sent you is it tacks on <privately> to all
client-to-client chat that doesn't have it where the destination client
doesn't support Priv (as per the OC packet). This fixes the oversight in WP
3.* (and probably Cornell 0.92b2, didn't get a chance to test it before
writing this) private chat when sending to clients that don't have Priv in
their OC. Might have it do the reverse as well... strip off <privately>
from public chat, but I find that to be worth a few chuckles. And of course
by popular demand, conf-no-geek CID# and conf-no-audio CID#. This is on top
of the B&W EOF fix, improved trash packet filtering,
anti-nick-spoofing and other numerous fixes/features I've since forgoten :)
Also at some point the DENY-OS2 code is going to be redone as DENY-REGEX
and CONF-DENY-REGEX that'll have some interesting uses :)