= Netmeeting Channel News =
 

17-12-2003
Concerning Spambots
Author:  Mega_Byte
Real Name:  Mathew
Addressed to - Everyone

It has been brought to my attention that the users in this channel have a problem with the spambots in there.

Here is how it is.
Undernet fucked us over by placing a 300 ban limit in x so we can only ban 300 users. There are 4000000000000 spambots. So unless we want to go to +r so that everyone that doesn’t have an x username cant join which we thought about doing but couldn’t because only about 10 people out of all of you could even be bothered to take the time to get an x username in 7 days. We have tried all kind of things and right now the only way we can keep banning is to recycle the bans after 9 hours which is when our banlist gets full. Next time you get a message from a spambot, remember this: We were going to go +r but all of you cant be bothered to get an x username so we deal with the bots - end of story.

We have sent e-mails to undernet with the 4000 bans we did have in place and we have given them plans on how to very easily with no work on their part g-line (ban them on a global server level so they cant even connect to the undernet) all those ips.

We haven’t even gotten a response back from undernet. So my reply to all your questions is come up with something better and we will implement it or if you have friends that are admins on undernet, get them to use the e-mail we sent them - End of story. Main thing is right now if we get rid of the spambots the only way we can, you’re gone too cause you don’t want to get an x username - it must be too much trouble or something. Have an awesome day.

06-12-2003
Update on Spambots, Bans, Procedures, Tests, etc.
Author:  coolc00l
Real Name:  Patrick
930 am usa central time

I'll try to keep this short and to the point:
We tried banning all spambots, worked fine for 8 weeks.
Undernet lowered the max ban in x to 300, so we tested something else.
AT moment we timed out how long the x ban list would be full, with baldar auto banning spambots and thor auto banning perv in bad chans.
Results: seems about 9 hours x ban for baldar and 12 hours for thor, seem to be the best "mix" to keep the ban list in x between 240-270, We may have to shorten baldars to about 6-7 hours if we need moe breathing space.
The idea here is not to eliminate spambots, but try to reduced the TIMES and NUMBER of times we see them kick banned.
If we can lower that from once cycling every 6 minutes, to once MAX every 9 hours, it reduces the total number of spambot kick bans from 150 - 300 per hour, to 15-25 per hour, 15-25 per hour we can live with, 15 20 kick per minute we CANT!

"how does this affect me as an op?" you ask?
1. please make your manual spambots bans in x only.. for a duration of 9 hours .. say level 99.
2. we have 30 40 "ban slots" open for idiots/morons/bad pervs for ops bans they choose.
3. at the moment we cant ban chan bans in baldar, because then a user banned in baldar joins, baldar kicks , but cant ban (ban list in chan is over 50) so it creates a kick flood , baldar kicking same users 50 60 70 times. <<<< bad
NOTE: we are working on a way.. POSSIBLY to have baldar or another bot have a "longer perm" ban list for idiots pervs morons, that will allow the bot to ban them thru x when they join for shorter times. (they still cant get in!) -- this may or may not happen depending on whether I can get the bot script to function in this manner.
4. please don't use up the x ban list slots for nick only blowme*!*@* type bans unless they are for VERY short periods... 1 hour max to remove someone.
5. please dont make 6-14 day bans for anything unless absolutely necessary!

once the bans in x hit 300 the whole system stops working!! no more bot bans! no more ops bans! no more x bans! no more notta!  I suppose ops will need new popups, but also we need to learn to ban manually in x, its good experience

-X- /msg X ban <#channel> <nick|*!*user@*.host> [duration] [level] [reason]
-X- Adds a specific *!*user@*.host to the X banlist of your channel.
-X- You may place a ban on a nick if the person is online or ban their *!*user@*.host if the person is not online.
-X- Bans that cover a broader range than previously set bans will replace previous bans.
-X- Any user in the channel that matches the added ban will be kicked out if the ban level is 75+.
-X- The duration is in hours, with a maximum of 336 hours (2 weeks).

example /msg x ban #netmeeting nickname 9 99 spambot

this would set a 9 hours level 99 ban on THAT nickname.
unfortunately default x bans to nickname are type 3 *!*name@*.host.com
more effective is a type to ban *!*@--->>>> everything to the right of the @
example: Mega_Byte is maturner@h24-85-252-20.vc.shawcable.net
a ban of *!*@h24-85-252-20.vc.shawcable.net << is alot more effective for spambots than a ban of...
*!*maturner@*.shawcable.net << because the bot can change usernames and get right back in.

To manually ban a MASK (user@host) in x its like this.

/msg x ban #netmeeting *!*@h24-85-252-20.vc.shawcable.net 9 99 <reason here>

If ban masks are confusing , don't worry about it for now.
we will try to make some popups that READ the proper mask for spambot before you ban.
Balder gets MOST them anyways.
a note: try not to be paranoid about removing EVERY spambot.
it is looking like they are something we have to learn to live with to an extent, to even HAVE an irc chan.  more later.
 

15-11-2003
X User List Modified
Author:  Manda2k
Real Name:  Amanda
Addressed to - All #Netmeeting Ops

As of lately, Mega_Byte has edited the X-List and removed those ops who have been inactive and/or not joining the channel on a regular to semi-regular basis.

If you were an Op and had your access removed and would like to have it reinstated, contact Mega-Byte for further details on IRC or via E-mail.
 

07-11-2003

Op Notice
Author:  Mega_Byte
Real Name:  Mathew
Addressed to - All #Netmeeting Ops

It has come to my attention that there is some controversy over my laxing the language and general talk rules in the channel.

Apparently it seems I have not been clear enough as to what I meant by laxing them. This memo is to clarify it all.

When I said the channel was to become a pg-13 channel I did not say we were allowing sex in chan, I merely stated that we were going to leave "the type pf language and type of talk in chan at that particular moment" more in the active ops hands at the time it is happening. I thought this would allow you all to have a bit more freedom in your in channel chat as everyone seems to engage sometimes in chat that I would have before not found appropriate under the current rules at the time. My objective here is to allow you all to think more for yourselves so the channel becomes more "your channel" less rules more choices as to what you allow in "your" channel. If you don't want nickless on the channel asking for sex or talking the way he is ban him. If someone says fuck in a not so bad context and you want to let it slide, let it. Again this is up to each individual op, or the group at the time. Also that being said, all the ops must respect other ops opinions, so if 1 op kicks or bans someone for what they have said all other ops must go with and support that op. So to sum up, you have more choice over what happens in your channel.

 

20-05-2002 at 01:30 (Dutch Time)
This site was officially opened to everyone and changed in all the welcome and web sites...