Latest News

port80.se delink

port80.se.quakenet.org delinking. It is with great sadness that we must farewell port80.se from QuakeNet after nearly 20 years of service. Unfortunately the hardware problems they were experiencing could not be resolved, and so the decision to delink the server was ...

Read the rest 6 comments

Merry Xmas!

QuakeNet staff wishes everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Thanks for your continuing support!

Read the rest 3 comments

New server link

New Server stockholm.se.quakenet.org As of this week we are welcoming a new server to the game, its stockholm.se.quakenet.org kindly hosted by Sunet. While we are getting a new server, we are losing an old one. Since last week portlane.se.quakenet.org has ...

Read the rest 3 comments

New requirements for Q

Posted by Quas on Friday 24 May 2002

Due to the introduction of the new channel service known as L, we are now changing the requirements for requesting Q. This is to lighten the load on Q which is already under heavy pressure. In order to request Q now, you need to have 25 users in your channel as well as the previous requirements.

Please log in to post comments.

People will hate me now, but I think this change is a very good one. Keep Q working! :)

JaSt said on Friday 24 May 2002

PFFFFFFF Jezus... 25 users... that\'s very much for a starting channel (Most of the time you want Q because you just made a new clan or something...) But ok, you\'re the boss and we can\'t help :(

[WfH]XeNTiX said on Friday 24 May 2002

L is for new channels

specceh said on Friday 24 May 2002

Sorry but i think this idea sucks .. 25 Users ?!? This to many ! how do you should to do this because its a new channel / unknown channel ?!? (sry 4 my bad english , i hope u understand me ;D )

sf^daddy said on Friday 24 May 2002

The Q queue takes a huge amount of operator time and often needs 2 or 3 opers working together just to make an impact on the number of requests, and as soon as the work stops the queue fills up again. I personally have looked at over three thousand Q requ

specceh said on Friday 24 May 2002

Again! L is for *new* channels. Q is for *big* channels.

lion said on Friday 24 May 2002

...requests and easily 70% of these failed to meet our requirements. L and Q are equal in the protection they provide. You can easily use an eggdrop for additional features you need.

specceh said on Friday 24 May 2002

Yes, i think so too. But little Chans who wants to be bigger have not a chance to become a Q-Bot ! I think 10 Users is a realistic Chance to get Q , but 25 Users is to much :/

sf^daddy said on Friday 24 May 2002

pfff... be realistic guys, the queue is full about 16-18 hours a day and good request time is in (early) morning (06:00-10:00) and you must have 4 opped members which is quite big requirement in early morning... So what do you think when a channel request

Sauron said on Friday 24 May 2002

Thats right because if you need bot for example clan channel I think L is what you need... Q is only for \"bigger\" channels and a new clan channel is not a \"big\" channel....and you can allways later request Q if you think you can\'t manage with L... (s

Cedy^ said on Friday 24 May 2002

As a matter of fact, L is able to control channels with up to 30 people in them. I don\'t think it\'s impossible to run a channel with less that 30 people without Q. ;)

JaSt said on Friday 24 May 2002

want\'s to request Q in it at 07:00 in the morning with 4 opped members and 25 other users ??

Sauron said on Friday 24 May 2002

well do u need 25 users when u request... or all time... and i think it should be like 15... b/C 25 is a lot of people

knight^goq said on Friday 24 May 2002

Not only will this degrease the amount of \"bad requests\", but it will hopefully create more space in the queue, wich is good and the people that REALLY NEED Q, will be able to request any time of day.. What bad does people see in L btw? I think it\'s

[Darko] said on Friday 24 May 2002

.. I think it\'s a pretty nice service. Easy to get and not all that advanced. You don\'t need a high IQ to control it, etc etc.

[Darko] said on Friday 24 May 2002

I understand the changes, but because you guys changed the rules, then please add something much cooler to L, or make a new bot, like W bot or something i don\'t know, but you guys should do something back, that would be better and fare.

XelaryiuX said on Saturday 25 May 2002

What I mean with A new bot is: Like an average bot better than L but not better than Q, so A median bot, don\'t look at the W bot :P, I just typed something... It should be much better for us too..

XelaryiuX said on Saturday 25 May 2002

... if you guys should do that, you guys could relax more, because Q won\'t be requested so much, L won\'t and (the new bot) wouldn\'t too, so everything would be even.

XelaryiuX said on Saturday 25 May 2002

At first glance, this change sucks. but thinking about it then it\'s a fair and wise change. L is nice to qnet resouces, and offers the needed protection for the less than 25 user channels. Everyone should be able to live with these changes :) Darkstar

Darkstar^ said on Saturday 25 May 2002

25users?? Are you INSANE?? Ok, i really understand the reasons! I have 2xL in 2 Channels I´m owner of! One of the L has an Eggdrop to complete his functions!! It really WORKS!! but.... 25 user @channel?? a lot! When the Channel becomes bigger than 30 Use

|mYstiQue| said on Saturday 25 May 2002

0...! We now have 21Users! And it´s increasing FASTLY!! Is there no Chance to Change L to Q when its needed??

|mYstiQue| said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Comment has been removed by QuakeNet staff

Nico said on Saturday 25 May 2002

You can still remove L by yourself (read the L FAQ) and then go and request Q if you have the required userbase...

Nico said on Saturday 25 May 2002

That\'s a good idea to clear the queue ( ). But I don\'t understand everthing. Must we have 25 ( @ and + ) or 25 @ ? If it\'s 25 @, that not a good idea !!! If it\'s 25 with @ and +, it\'s a litle too much. Me ( Sorry for thi english I\'m french :p )

Night-Maverick said on Saturday 25 May 2002

No, please re-read the Q FAQ, it\'s written... 25 users, and at least 4 ops (like before) among these 25 users.

Nico said on Saturday 25 May 2002

this is a good idea. L will work fine until you consistently have 25 users. Then you can still request Q. And besides, for Q, it just means you need to have 25 users on the channel, the Q doesn\'t need to have 25 known users.

ajpiano said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Hmm. well, I personally think it\'s a bit too much..15 users would be enough IMO..but you guys are the bosses :)

IpDope[TT] said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I think this is very good thing. I think that the Q queue has now room 24h in day, becase there are no that much channels with 25 users to request Q. I think that now you can request Q when you want, so it\'ll be easier to make request when your pals are

Pain^ said on Saturday 25 May 2002

The queue has been \"empty\" for several hours now.. It\'s nice =)

[Darko] said on Saturday 25 May 2002

This action may make Quakenet DIE? Due to beginning clans who can not get themselves a bot because of this stupid limit of 25 idlers. Clans will go to a different server such as Gamesnet and Quakenet will die... is that what you want? I seriously think th

Fluee said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Fluee, but new chans, like clanchans could get L instead.

[DEI]Quid said on Saturday 25 May 2002

omg it is quite simple: quakenet wil not die bcoz new clans can get L did u not read ne of the above ffs ur just repeating the same old thing here it is simply..AGAIN L: for new chans started by new clans< easy to get Q: older and bigger chans < harder

]CaRN[ said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I think that was a good choice, cause all times the queue was full, when i want to request Q, now it is empty. ;) great, so i can request Q if i need, or i take L. So, good choice.

Revolutio said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Great i think.... L is GREAT!! If there is no more than 50 on the chanel you L is just as good as Q!! And when L is more esay for QuakeNet i think it\'s great. As long as L is idle on the chanel and then keep the topic i happy...!!

[CVB-DK]QIk-WiN said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I think its good, although you guys might wanna change something else. And thats that L sticks with Q. So when the Q arrives in the channel, L goes away. Else you have a channel opped with 25 ppl and no L bot in it (waiting for a Q) and you only need 1 mo

Nr|Five said on Saturday 25 May 2002

oops my bad :) forget my last comment :P (like Nico said. 25 users ins\'t hard to get)

Nr|Five said on Saturday 25 May 2002

This system is better than old... Thought 25 is pretty too much but where does i. e. 10 people need Q, isn\'t L enough?

ChiQu said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Well, i think it\'s good, cuz you can get L for smaller chans...Q is only needed for *BIG* chans :P

ZhadoW^ said on Saturday 25 May 2002

well well well.... i think it´s quite good that you made this change... if you are a new clan, you can use L, then you can request Q later on.. but i think that you admin\'s should add the \"ban\" function on L.... it´s quite ennoying that you have to ba

UB|Devastator said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I also feel that you should be able to request Q when L is still in the channel as having to wait for Q in an unprotected channel is dangerous, especially now with 25 users!

Preston said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Preston - cound´t have said it better myself

UB|Devastator said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Hmm.. Couldnt you mke it, so you dont have to remove L, to get Q, so that Q overides L? It\'s kinda lame to delete alle users and get rid of L, just to see that the request i full again \"#%!&\"

an7rax|116th said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Indeed, this is something that should appear quite soon, just give some more time to our devoted dev-com team, thank you :)

Nico said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I think this is good so the queue for Q isn\'t full all day long. It also gives our nice staff at QuakeNet some less stress :) If you have a new clan channel, request L. When/If your channel grows, then request Q. The only diffrence I need is the banning.

AgonY|Tynja said on Saturday 25 May 2002

The only diffrence I need is the banning. Otherwise I would be fine with L.

AgonY|Tynja said on Saturday 25 May 2002

humm.. something i miss on L is are the ban features of q... i know that it isn\'t possible to change that for some reasons.. i\'m just coplaining cos it sucks ;( but nevertheless L is a great service, and all those kiddies who think they\'d need a Q for

nightliner said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I think this is a very good idea. Maybe the queue will be open for those who really need Q now...GJ

chef^ said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I think too that this change is a good change. Always when I wanted to request Q for my channel, the Queue was full, because every \"newbie\"-channel gets a Q. Now only a smaller group of channels can request Q. Nice feature...

Fish|GIW said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I think that System is better for all the IRC OPs but it will I know that the MrNuriko Team will now create Bots to make a Request easier...That was my Tipp...cYa

CoolioCool said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Well.... I agree this is a very good thing. It isn\'t that hard to get 25 users. And this might take some of the lag off Q :) Keep Up The Good Work Qnet:) I love u Qnet but i know you hate me :p

Tha_BuTcHa said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Ive been on qnet for quite a while - I agree with the opers intergration of L and upping Q requirements - Bout time too :)

Psychotic said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Finally! A long time ago in a channel called #feds: 13:40 < tQH|Vengeance> I wonder why you have to request it that way, isn\'t it a lot of trouble always checking webpage, 5 ops blahblahbla? - Why not just use the chanserv model? (like dalnet/efnet ..)

tQH|Vengeance said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Well, now it is very difficult to get Q! So my opinion is that you have to add some features to L like a \"L Ban\", because in smaller channels you need also to ban sombody. So please think about this.

[KSF|Darkness|] said on Saturday 25 May 2002

if we now need 25 users for Q so plz add the feature +b on the L-Bot!

kaZe` said on Saturday 25 May 2002

hmm i think its both harsh and fair.... But i reckon the L bot should be able to set a welcome message etc.... just to make it a bit more respectable like a Q. And im sure there are thousands of IDLE Q\'s in quakenet that could be removed. That would def

|TaN| said on Saturday 25 May 2002

if the +b feature would be added , then what would make L different from Q...

ndmz[cl] said on Saturday 25 May 2002

Simply QUakenet does not use Chanserv or the likes as it is too slow.... Chanserv is laughably slow on Dalnet, and Quakenet has over twice the amount of channels, Q alone is on more channels than Dalnet has in total (On average). Go figure :D

kryten said on Saturday 25 May 2002

I don\'t see why there should be differences in speed from Q/L and other IRC Services like Epona.

tQH|Vengeance said on Sunday 26 May 2002

I think the requirements for the website are to high :) ... many users have not enaugh known to make a better homepage

Ic3w0lf said on Sunday 26 May 2002

Ehhhm a bit too much

spanne said on Sunday 26 May 2002

pure evil... however most people already have q\'s in rooms with 2-10 people max....

spirit_ds said on Sunday 26 May 2002

A good idea, good work QNet Staff!

tomster-S said on Sunday 26 May 2002

Sers togehther ... Hmmm can someone help me.. ? I have L and have to remove it from my channel to bacomme Q and know i forgot at last my flags +ag in #hasenfarm plz help me it

suche5on5 said on Sunday 26 May 2002

Sers togehther ... Hmmm can someone help me.. ? I have L and have to remove it from my channel to bacomme Q and know i forgot at last my flags +ag in #hasenfarm plz help me at #hasenfarm noone is owner just i have flags +av help help help

suche5on5 said on Sunday 26 May 2002

damn 25 ppl thats a lot :-(

Crizzo said on Sunday 26 May 2002

25 is just fine.. And if you got L, why do you need Q? :)

refic said on Sunday 26 May 2002

well, L cant set a welcomes message... :/ Q can

Bl1x said on Sunday 26 May 2002

if you really need those welcome messages, then add an eggdrop or something. Peronally I don\'t like onjoin messages unless there is some useful information there (which happens in 1 of 10 cases).

chef^ said on Sunday 26 May 2002

Good change imo. Keep up the nice work, dev team ;)

Moriarty said on Sunday 26 May 2002

this thing is ok, but can u plz change the feature, that u only can delete a user from the L userlist, if he is in the channel and authed? that sucks a lot, i can\'t delete users, who never again come to my channel....

]RUG[Homer said on Sunday 26 May 2002

#70: Read the L faq ... You can delete users, just use their Q auth name instead of nickname (/msg l chanlev #chan #QAuthName -flags)

Darkstar^ said on Sunday 26 May 2002

L has a welcome message. It was added about a week or so after the service became available

specceh said on Sunday 26 May 2002

hmm \"a good idea\" : not sure, that will just lead to \"EVERYONE AT #mychan : WE NEED TO HAVE A Q PLZ\"

fed-ad said on Sunday 26 May 2002

Why o why does noone like L? No probs to manage users... I was very happy then the L-service was released, hopeless to get a place in request Q-ue. Now it was done in a split second... And you can always \"upgrade\" to Q later on. If you only have 20

Rentz said on Monday 27 May 2002

I must say... Your commenting service, it would be nice if you could develop our opinion a litte without beeing cutoff...

Rentz said on Monday 27 May 2002

Say what you say but L RULES FOREVER! :)

Cedy^ said on Monday 27 May 2002

I\'m pissed of only one thing in those new requirements...why the requirements is same if you are moving Q channel to another channel...Why isin\'t that so you can move Q without any requirements???

Cedy^ said on Monday 27 May 2002

without requirements, you can get Q for a clanchannel and then move into a internchannel of your other clan. I find the new requirements are very good.

S4b3rR1d3r said on Monday 27 May 2002

SUCKS that. This is NOT a good IDEA. Cut it! Regards, An UNHAPPY QuakeNet Chatter

anzuhan said on Monday 27 May 2002

I think it is a great idea, if you don\'t have the possibilities to get an eggdrop, L is an easy way of securing your channel. Well, it doesn\'t have the ban features of Q, but I don\'t think you\'ll really need them in small channels. good job @quaken

Bomerlunder said on Monday 27 May 2002

...@quakenet :) you should do something against that strange limit of letters in the comments ;)

Bomerlunder said on Monday 27 May 2002

Well, i think it will be no problem to get Q afterwards, the requirements for L are very low and if the Channel gets bigger you can request Q...where\'s the Problem ? :)

]CME[Gemini said on Monday 27 May 2002

Glad to see Q is gonna finally be put to good use and its ability to be abused by 4 person CS clans curtailed. Nice one.

MYstIC_G said on Monday 27 May 2002

I think it\'s a pretty good idea. I can remember the days i tried to request Q nearly 10 times a day because of the full queue and btw. L is a cool service. PS: Q becomes 1337 now :)

BCSK|SatchmO said on Monday 27 May 2002

This sucks ass i just had a good site and wanted to request Q and now 25 users!!! FFS man

occ said on Monday 27 May 2002

#85: that is very bad luck my m8...

Sauron said on Monday 27 May 2002

\"You can easily use an eggdrop for additional features you need.\" Natasha works much better with L than eggdrop does. The best thing is to get a Natasha from bothouses like BotService or in near future Nordicbots

|vk|sorcer said on Monday 27 May 2002

#85 I\'m sure you\'ll get over it. enjoy L :p

specceh said on Monday 27 May 2002

Comment length increased to 500 instead of 250 chars. Sorry for the problem the short commentlength may have caused. And for those of you that doenst count every char by hand I\'ve added a nice little counter for you. Take care.

softis said on Monday 27 May 2002

Softis, you\'re tooooo kind :o)

Nico said on Monday 27 May 2002

What about putting a stop for more than 500 characthers as well? *nag & whine*:p

chef^ said on Monday 27 May 2002

i think it\'s a good change.

Dibbe said on Monday 27 May 2002

Hey fine Idea, I´ve seen very much channels that wasn´t a clan only a fake to get Q. This is fair for the \"real\" clans who need Q. Its better too, because Q is often lag. SO PPL USE L :D

nine`9 said on Tuesday 28 May 2002

shurely then you must remove the channels who have only a Q bot and no ppl in them at all. there are many channels like this with no intrest in them. that would free up a lot of resources for Q ;)

HH^onix said on Tuesday 28 May 2002

The least used Q channels are removed on a regular basis (once a month I think it is). Q rules/requirements are not retrospective, it wouldnt really be reasonable to allow a Q channel and then force a change of requirements on them later - its the reason a number of openly private Q channels still exist.

specceh said on Tuesday 28 May 2002

hey guys! quakenet rulz the new irc generation with all it\'s features! the bots give security one misses on other nets. 25 is a good limit. lern to use and adore L first before you reach out to the stars.

a2d|y0gi said on Tuesday 28 May 2002

considering the strain Q is under, and the fact that L pretty much does everything a clan needs from a chanserv type thing, then what are people moaning about... ontop of the fact that L is far easier to get than Q... ah well :)

MatriX said on Tuesday 28 May 2002

Hey it\'s my birthday , can I get Q without 25 users on the channel :DD

ul-deny said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

hm past doch :)

[kill]armin3000 said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

New requirements for Q rocks (:

SETAC|gecko said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

25 users for Q, that is 25 members of the clan. I dont know any clans with 25 members :p

FooL said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

Sorry, didnt read good :\\

FooL said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

hm, ok ok .I think 25 is really to much. Hmm...10 or 15 are good. SORRY 4 BAD ENGLISH ;P

Getzy[away] said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

#101 - I don\'t think NiP have 700+ members, but thats how many are in their channel right now. This allows us to limit the additional functionality in Q to the channels that will actually get most use from it, rather than those that don\'t :}

velvet said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

i like this new thing with L, and of course i understand these new requirements for Q, they´re needed! keep it up mates, Q-net better than ever!

Munin[N] said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

Damn then hire some new Admins to make the Q`s....

Sp|r|tus said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

I think it\'s ok, if it can help getting Qnet running mor stable, then fine and L i fine enough for small channels...great work.

Sp|r|tus said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

Uh...Q is for clans,I throught?Many clans don\'t have 25 people on their channel...:D

Losah said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

Losah: The new requirements came for different reasons, and L is one of them. Do you have a small clan request L. Believe me, you don\'t need Q in a small channel...

chef^ said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

Comment has been removed by QuakeNet staff

mranders0n said on Wednesday 29 May 2002

tbh, L owns. apart from not being able to ban ppl, but you can\'t have everything....

Gav said on Thursday 30 May 2002

it is not nessesary to order Q for a clan at the beginning! So it is exeptable

Morpheus_SJ said on Thursday 30 May 2002

Quakenet is becoming too much of a democracy

WdW said on Friday 31 May 2002

I think this is bat becouse some of the started clans want a join text like Q says but in the L bot this command dosent exist. Why cant Quaknet have one light bot and 2 bots like Q ? then Q wouldent be under heavy load ! thats yous what i think plz answer my question !!

GonAce said on Friday 31 May 2002

Qnet roxx.. Who the hell needs Q ? You just need about 50 eggys :P

[TASF]H07SH07 said on Friday 31 May 2002

GonAce >> L can do a welcome msg too :)

pantoufle said on Saturday 01 June 2002

what about a Q for non gaming-related channels :) ok quakenet is for gamers but if you want to be best network of the world... :)

blun4 said on Saturday 01 June 2002

nice! i love u.. qnet 4 ever..

r0bbyr0b said on Saturday 01 June 2002

It has both its good and bad sides... Now even more people will spam: \"Join #Channel - We need idlers to get a Q bot\" But my pov the new requirements are okey dokey :D

i|avatar said on Sunday 02 June 2002

It seems that people are confused about the 25 known users on L. 25 known users != 25 people on a channel.

Quadslut said on Sunday 02 June 2002

#117 Don\'t expect Q to *ever* be available for non-gaming channels

specceh said on Sunday 02 June 2002

i think L is cool..he is Q´s little brother...and he does his job for smaller chans, so where´s the problem?!?! AND L is available for non-gaming related chans..but if u want to be really consequent, then u got to remove Q grom all the non-clan chans which have Q yet..this is kinda unfair to me..btw, i REALLY miss the ban function @ L :/

d33pTh0ugHT said on Sunday 02 June 2002

Nice... it\'s a great idea. It\'s easy to bring L into a Channel, so 25 User as limit for Q is ok....

VP^Angel said on Tuesday 04 June 2002

Well I think you all have done a great job .. just one comment .. I\'d like to see Q removed from those channels whom r just not used often enough (for example my old clan #-shit- didn\'t have a web page anymore .. there where about 2 or 3 users using the chan ect ..) Can\'t quakenet recheck the requirements more often. PS I think 25 users is even not enough .. more like 50 would be better :-)

mr_ozzy said on Tuesday 04 June 2002

lol i cant believe how some people dont read...

exnor said on Tuesday 04 June 2002

well i dunno the problem, but why that bot register stuff? Other huge networks, i.e. DALnet use the fine and nicely Chanserv. but i guess thats a structure thing. Personly i would like to copy L to /devnull. Every emech is better, but that are the rules, so i guess i gonna have to life with the lil L (jamiroquai rulez:P)

[RoZ]Helmi said on Wednesday 05 June 2002

s4uroon said on Wednesday 05 June 2002

i didnt mean q for non-gaming-related chans but a new bot, for more than 20 userlevels :( maybe minimum of users in the channel 30 ... would be no problem :)

blun4 said on Wednesday 05 June 2002

#121 - Why is Q in loads of non-gaming related channels then? e.g. #worldcup ??

blu3 said on Wednesday 05 June 2002

The first time i requested L... ihad problems getting three persons on the channel... 25!?!?!?!? to much, to much....

Adam^nae said on Wednesday 05 June 2002

10 have bin okey but 25 thats 2 High!

R-Easy-Data said on Wednesday 05 June 2002

#103 ..... Why do you want a q if you cant even get 3 people? if your cant get 3 people to a channel WTF is the use in a bot? TBH L is a great new addition and will take the load of Q, and for those who go \"25 FOR Q!! OMFG OMFG\" - whats the problem? any channel under 25 users can use L which is much easier to get and offers the same Op protection. If your worried about not being able to get 25 people for a Q, does your channel deserve a Q? NO! :D (ps join my channel #bygames for 25 users j/k :

^pod^ said on Thursday 06 June 2002

thats lies.... i did 500/500 ... and it cut it off at 490 or there abouts... :/

^pod^ said on Thursday 06 June 2002

Well... I think users that talks about this as a bad thing would rather reconsider their thoughts... 25 people ain\'t that much, and as long as your channel ain\'t big enough, you should use L, which almost works the same way. If there is a problem with the +b function that doesn\'t exist on L, you should go visit #help.script and they\'ll tell you how to write it, but please try to figure it out by yourself first by typing /help on ban and /help remote... that way you won\'t abuse the helpers t

aff-dite said on Thursday 06 June 2002

that much :)

aff-dite said on Thursday 06 June 2002

#133 Special characters takes two (2) chars. If you for example press return then 2 chars will be taken. \'\\n\'.

softis said on Thursday 06 June 2002

Very good idea. It looks a lot at first, 25 people in a chan to get Q, but together with an eggdrop or something L is perfectly suitable, and that way there still is a ban system. For people who can\'t run an eggdrop, I\'d suggest the QuakeNet staff to indeed put a ban system in L. Then the most important things of Q are implemented in L.

Thevma said on Thursday 06 June 2002

i think thats stupid, if i really want Q, i could go to big chans like #mTw or #dkh and say: \"comon ppl i need a few guys of you in #xyz for Q\" and i have in this chan about 50-60 users. and that is what everybody does atm

tti|fakerkillah said on Thursday 06 June 2002

#138, yeah, that sucks. First of all it should be much more to get a Q. You can easily get 25 idlers to your channel and i have that amount in almost all channel i\'m as an operator. If i can do it, it\'s way too easy :D Q should have something like that it only counts the people that have been there for.. lets say, a couple of hours, that\'s how you wouldn\'t get those idlers from big channels to help you with getting a Q.

Istaria said on Thursday 06 June 2002

#129 Q is seen in non-gaming channels for 2 reasons. Either it was requested before the rules came into force OR it was manually placed by an oper for the good of the network. #worldcup will have got a temporary Q from an oper for a few weeks to protect the large temporary community that has gathered there. S is in there too I believe. Remember services are also tools for the use of opers to protect the network as well as the more mundane tasks they do day in day out.

specceh said on Thursday 06 June 2002

Shit change ... that is real shit how could i have over 25 People in my channel?! if i say i need 25 People, all want to be OP and then they do perhaps a takeover or something else that is very shity... i think 15 users or 10 is okay, but 25 ... :(

uG-Master- said on Friday 07 June 2002

I think L is cool.

[AF]Storm said on Friday 07 June 2002

Wow, 25 User to get a Q-Bot! I think, that would be really harder to get Q for a channel, cause I thing 25 users is not realistic in the beginning of a channel.

GangsterClan said on Saturday 08 June 2002

I don\'t blame em, Would you rather have a Laggy Q or a fast Q? :P

ded said on Wednesday 12 June 2002

#141: BTW, where the hell it reads that ALL 25 user MUST have ops? In the Q guide there stands: \"You NEED 25 users in your channel. For a clan channel, four (4) of these users MUST be opped CLAN MEMBERS.\" I say it might be good to you to read the Q-request rules AGAIN and properly! (no offence) :o)

Sauron said on Sunday 16 June 2002

Well. I think 25 is too much. But there are so many death channels with Q. Why dont you remove Q from that channels?

[DF]Storm said on Monday 17 June 2002

Most of you are just whining. I think this is a good change, however the limit is a bit high (perhaps 15 or 20 user would be better). The L-bot is just fine for most of the users in conjunction of other bots (eggdrop, oer, etc) and there are quite many bot-service channels where you can request these bots if you can\'t make one of your own. Besides, I don\'t think Quakenet \"has to\" have these kind of services at all, these guys are doing their \"work\" voluntarely and for the sake of us, the u

Renzo said on Monday 17 June 2002

... and for the sake of us, the \"users\".

Renzo said on Monday 17 June 2002

i have L,S and Oer bot in 200 users channel, no problem, Oer does all the opping and protecion stuff, if Oer drops, L gives op to admins, and system works well.

Fosqate said on Tuesday 18 June 2002

Ok...so basically everyone here is complaining about L just because you think that Q is bigger and better, and YOU deserve the biggest and the best. Really, I couldnt care less if I have Q or L, as long as I have a bot thats always online and that can help me keep some order in the channel

kzasch said on Tuesday 25 June 2002

i just can\'t seem to understand why everyone is pissed just because the requirements for q have been raised... L works well and if you just set up a new clan channel you are most likely not going to have 25+ users in it... and L can handle this quite good, so stop complaining and enjoy L.

realmhunter said on Tuesday 16 July 2002

I really like the new requerements. #qrequest is very empty now, and it isnt so hard to get 25 users in the channel, we are a pretty new clan (4 months) and we have about 45 users in the channel, and i like it that you must have a good average, instead of just spam in every channel join this join that, that wont work anymore.

DarK-A said on Wednesday 02 October 2002

How can i get Q, we have L very long, but Q isn here on the homepage, what can i do ?

Th3R4PT0R said on Sunday 27 April 2003

dont let the q bot away q bot was a great bot pls let him

]rE[Lord_Orion said on Saturday 27 September 2003

I want to request Q for my chan Where is the message for Q at request ? thx :)

bastardo123 said on Thursday 11 March 2004

Hello, i see this started in 2002 and it is now 2004 and i have been using this since like 1997/8/9 and just wanted to say \"This is a GREAT IDEA\" \"if you cant get Q STICK WITH L FFS\"!....great idea. ./me humps QuakeNet :pp ..Peace out.

d35troyer said on Thursday 04 November 2004

from globalteam.esports, channel: #globalteam We are trying since alot of weeks to have the Q, We have between 60...80 peoples every days , but always the same : [16:57] -R- Checking your L access. This may take a while, please be patient... - [16:57] -R- Error: You do not meet the requirements for Q. Please continue to use L. a little bit strange or maybe a wrong synthax?

Globaldom said on Sunday 26 February 2006