Inconsistent interpretation of IRC channel rules

[Ketsuron]

Since the !booru bot is active in the IRC channel, people get kicked/banned.
The issue is that dealing with the bot-user interaction is inconsistent.


*) people who do not like the results just should not click the explicit tag links
*) it's not like one posts [img]url[/img] on the forum.
*) either such bot and usage is allowed or not - and if allowed, a user who uses the facility should not held responsible for its results.

[sothis]

one could argue that by allowing a full bio textarea on the site with no content filtering, that they should be allowed to post links to explicit content, or else i should remove the bio textarea altogether for the site.

i think that's a similar analogy to this.

[Ketsuron]

You miss the point, it is a bot, not the user who posts links which happen to be explicit now and then.

[Drahken]

Originally Posted by Ketsuron

...
*) it's not like one posts [img]url[/img] on the forum.
...

That's not entirely true. Go use the web chat client & you'll see. In the webchat client, image URLs actually show up as if you put img tags around them in a forum. If the complaints are coming from someone using the web client, then their complaints are perfectly valid.

[Ketsuron]

Originally Posted by Drahken

That's not entirely true. Go use the web chat client & you'll see. In the webchat client, image URLs actually show up as if you put img tags around them in a forum. If the complaints are coming from someone using the web client, then their complaints are perfectly valid.

You mean the preview in Mibbit? The preview is way too small to actually recognize anything.


<img style="width: 32px; height: 32px; " src="http://go.mibbit.com/thumb.php?x=32&amp;y=32&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fdanbo oru.donmai.us%2Fdata%2F73300df66e892d23b3f3b77da0d c0e74.png">

That are 32×32 px.

However the images we are talking here about are of the form: [Explicit] http://origs.in/#
which are not previewed.

And while at it, it is not the first time that a ban was said to be for example one hour and not removed after the set timespan.

[Ketsuron]

Turns out the 60 minute ban lasted 2d 22h 31m 30s. My thoughts about this are still valid.

[vermi]

As it happens, the temporary ban did last quite a bit longer than it was meant to. Apparently the bot that handles those bans lost its connection and never recovered. So, apologies for that.

Additionally, to stop this asinine argument over that stupid booru search script, I have disabled the bot, which didn't really do much besides that booru thing anyway.

[Frostbite]

Well, I definitely think the rules page needs to be updated, and perhaps those rules placed on the webchat page as well, so that mibs can't have an excuse for "not seeing them", I personally am not opposed to a bot, but due to my internets being wonderfully horrible, I can't host one for the channel myself. I'll be looking into solving issues like that regardless though.