Registrer nick on Undernet?

Isomer · **Joined:** Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:00 am **Posts:** 15

Assuming for a moment that we implement nick registration (we're NOT going to), consider for 5 minutes what adding nick registration to a network with over that sees over 200,000 people use it each week would do.

You'll have kiddies registering a few thousand nick names that they think are cool, because they can. Suddenly everyone discovers the nicks they want are gone. etc.

In short it would be a mess. There are lots of reasons undernet doesn't, and won't, have a nickserv. Just because people from DALnet want it doesn't mean we should implement it. We have user registration complete with your own "hostname". You don't loose your identity when you /nick and noone else can steal it ever. IMHO this a far nicer solution :)

Nu-Hir · Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2002 12:20 am

I agree wholeheartedly with you. I've never liked the idea of Nick Registering. If you want a nick registered, come up with a nick No one else will take. It seems most people who are for nick registering are the ones with common nicks. Nicks that have the possibilty to be stolen by someone using IRC for the first time. Others, are just people who think that since all the other networks do it, Undernet should do it.

If Dalnet decided to shut down all of their servers today and keep them off permanently, should the Undernet follow suit?

Oh yea, it's good to know that there's an actual ircu coder reading the forum and looking at the suggestings. You guys made a pretty awesome ircd. Keep up the good work!

AmunRa · Posted: Wed Dec 25, 2002 10:51 pm

Tomekeeper wrote:

The lack of nick services is an inferiority of Undernet. It has been washed over in the past seemingly out of an arbitrary "We want to be different" mentality. I'm not impressed. It is an excellent idea and is not difficult to implement but it is being ignored. True, Undernet is not Dalnet, but it is also true that if the DoS attack on Dalnet would lay off it would once again be the most populated IRC network. Perhaps learning by example is better than stone-age adherance to "We will not put nickserv here because... yeah". I realise this is abrasive, but apparently this has been a long-standing problem that nobody has addressed. One system is clearly superior to the other in fair playing conditions -- learn from it and assimilate!

As I've said before ... it isn't rocket science. I've seen it before and it is not a catastrophically difficult undertaking to put in a nickserv

I had to Quote that because it's the best reply I've ever seend regarding to "No Nick Registration". I strongly agree with Tomekeeper. And come up with an idea (don't know if it's already been said):

1. Only registered users should be able to have 1 (ONE) registered nick.
2. The registered nick should be the same as the username.

I don't see how that would affect the network or the users ... of course there will be a higher load on the servers but it would be worth it. Think about it.
And furthermore, the identity is not given by the username (there are lots of users that don't know what an username is! They never heard of Cservice), the nickname is the first thing seen, that my friend gives you the IDENTITY . Even I don't check the usernames for every person I speak to. I just know the by the nick.

This is my opinion :satisfied:

Nu-Hir · Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 2:54 pm

But if Nick Registration where added to the Undernet Now, that would put a lot of strain onto the servers, with a sudden influx of people rushing to register nicks. Can you imagine how fast X would split if this happened?

AmunRa · Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:11 pm

Quote:

1. Only registered users should be able to have 1 (ONE) registered nick.

a. Registered users would have automatically a registered nick (same as the username).
b. New users will get a nick automatically when they register ... (same as the username)

I don't see the strain put onto the servers ... :roll:

To every challenge there is a solution. If you realy want to do it, well it could be done. So you see ... the problem is NOT a technical one.

What if the moon would fall off the sky? What if tomorrow never comes?
This is not the way to deal with problems ...

My opinion :satisfied:

moldi · **Joined:** Mon Jan 13, 2003 12:59 am **Posts:** 1

I use my nick for 6 years allready and a few months ago someone started to use it! It's quite UGLY! But....i'll be creative

I'll give up my nick! Best thing to do right?

Dx8eng · **Joined:** Thu Mar 06, 2003 9:10 pm **Posts:** 1

Y want to know how can Y log on to cservice.

Isomer · **Joined:** Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:00 am **Posts:** 15

Not all nicks are valid usernames, not all usernames are valid nicks.

Combining nicks and usernames would be horrible leading to all sorts of issues. Undernet isn't going to have nick registration, its part of who Undernet is.

JeepC77 · Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2003 3:26 pm

Seeing that this 'We want nick registrationin Undernet'-manifest has growing up lately, I felt it would be userfull to point you guys that this topic was also discussed in other parts of Undernet's forum. Maybe we will all arive to the conclusion that the nick registration is really NOT NEEDED. Take a look at those posts too:
1- How can we improve Undernet -> Nick Owners
2- How can we improve Undernet -> Nick registration
3- Undernet coder committee -> protect nickname !

Registrer nick on Undernet?

Who is online