STRONGLY AGREE!!!

would be nice if Cservice suspends the username of the person whom suspend. ... would be nice.. then take overs and massbans drop by 80%. im sure

well I don't think so that will cause a lots of complaints perhaps if you're not choosing operators/members in the channel then that's why takeovers happens mostly in not well established channels.

Anyone thought of adding a certain access level to the /msg x ban #channel *!*@* duration level reason command ? I mean, this might stop some massbans if only the manager of the channel would be allowed to use it. So i propose that there should be needed 500 access to use the massban command. Waiting for oppinions...

I think this topic should be locked. It is over discussed and more than that.
And *takeover in registered channel* is funny.

/me waves to the moderators

Mit

I think i may have some suggestions on the reg. channel takeover problem.
The first one is adding a new channel flag called STRICTACC that would allow only the manager to add/remove/modify accesses. This could be useful if the manager suspects he may have some corrupt operators that try to cause problems. The second one is an X implementation of "protected hostmasks" This would be mainly for protecting several trusted persons to be banned from the channel but should also fix some takeover problems. For example.. we have the following protected hostmask:

*!*@stick.users.undernet.org

now.. if someone would like to use the command /msg x ban #chan *!*@*, then x will reply with:

-X- Unable to comply. Specified ban matches protected hostmask.

same goes with *!*@*.* or *!*@*users* and so on... or if the person would like to ban without using X it would go like this

* Troublemaker sets mode +b *!*@*
* X sets mode +b *!*@trouble.users.undernet.org
* Troublemaker was kicked by X (you are not allowed to place bans on that hostmask (protected))
* X sets mode -b *!*@*

of course the guy could try banning *!*@2* for example but that would throw only a few ppl out and so its kinda useless. Anyways i think it would stop a lot of takeovers since most guys use the ban * command.
Adding/removing hostmask to protected list should only be granted to channel managers and lower rank operators will only have the command /X PROTECTLIST or something like that to list the protected masks.
Also i think there should be added a MASSKICKPRO too because some takers are using only masskick to do problems and not massdeop also.

Disableng the command would be faster, cleaner and less stressfull....shessh..protective hostmasks?......new flags....jesus....

Wanna know a solution to prevent takeovers in registered channels ?
(Having a registered channel getting taken over is stupid on itself though)

- STOP GIVING OUT LEVEL 499 ACCESSES LIKE CANDY
- START THINKING ABOUT WHO YOU EVEN GIVE ACCESS
- STOP OPPING EVERYONE FOR FUN.
- AND STOP SHARING YOUR PASSWORDS

90% of the takeovers on this network are because the existing ops are unexperienced (for those people who think unexperienced is a difficult word, lemme translate if for you: dumb as a distilled drop of water) and simply don't think of what they do, they just do it.
And when thinks go wrong they start whining and cry for help.

yeah, well i guess thats true. most of the serious operators dont have problems with takeovers but there are still cases of abusing done by older operators. in such cases, protective flags could prove useful.

Yeah, the best protective flag would be: DO NOT GIVE ACCESS.