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

L expiry rules changed

Posted by Specceh on Sunday 03 November 2002

We've recently added to the channel expiry feature on the L service to remove the bot from little-used channels. L will now part from a channel if its user count is consistently below four users for a while, as well as the existing expiry check, where no one with a chanlev on a channel enters for 20 days. The four user limit includes both authed and non-authed users.

If your L is deleted for this reason, you will need to rerequest it, and make sure that the channel is sufficiently well used to keep L in future.

Please log in to post comments.

This was the worst news ever. We realy loved our L bot in our small priv channel. *thumbs down for the Q net crew*

DaMightyBob said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Silly rule, grr my own chan were only 3 of us were has no opping bot in now. I see your logic but just grr would be better if just less than 3 users with chanlev didnt log in or something not 4 :(

FtK^Blanch said on Sunday 03 November 2002

bad news :/ we were only online weekend so no more bot :/

fox|BMS said on Sunday 03 November 2002

http://irc.netsplit.de/networks/top.var and scroll down to the channels graph.

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

I think there are too many rules, thats ok for Q but for L I think thats was abusive... y\'en a marre!!!

[TKD]Ifrit|ZzZz said on Sunday 03 November 2002

All I can say is that really sucks... From reading about the L bot I got the strong impression it was ideal for small clans that didn\'t have the numbers to get Q, and its just unreasonable to expect a clan with a low number of members to be logged in under these new \"rules\"...

[MrT] said on Sunday 03 November 2002

wtf is this...? You gotta be kidding... This really sucks! Change the expiry rules again, please.

snar`phibbe said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Maybe a better way would be to act upon \"L\" bots being wasted rather then removing the ones due to time limits ?. That way if you wnat a channel which isnt being used you complain, and then its removed. I know it takes time to do these things but is there no automated way of removing a bot once a complaint has been raised ?. Just a thought you guys have to do what you feel is best overall. Just seems a sweeping statment which affects a lot of small clans.

Mauserwhore said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Oh man, this really sucks ... Please change the rules again, this is so bad for small clans.

Brainy|Away said on Sunday 03 November 2002

very bad news for aur friends ahven\'t installed irc till now and so we ahd been to little users and so plkease change this rule again

zeroAZ said on Sunday 03 November 2002

First of all, we\'re sorry if this new rule is causing you problems. We decided to introduce this because we found out that a lot of channels (about 30%) registered on L wasnt really being used for anything more than occuping the channel to make sure no one else could register/use it, causing us and you a bit of grief with empty channels no one could use. Anyway, I\'m gonna go back and bug the rest for a few changes to make it easier on all the small clans we have here too...

Faile said on Sunday 03 November 2002

this cannot be true! wtf.... how can i now save my channel? without L?? man u suck!

deinemama said on Sunday 03 November 2002

remember, eggdrop services are still there to take care of the channel that dont meet the requirements for L or Q, so there shouldnt really be a problem

scrOOge said on Sunday 03 November 2002

no, no, this is not wise for q-net... wouldn\'t it be better if it\'ll be limited to 2 users, not 4 ? i agree that many empty channels, but many active channels have just 2 users. i think you are going to have a lot of people complaining about this, so could you even change four users to two?

CaZ_ said on Sunday 03 November 2002

FUck.... this was a bad thing really! =(((((

Mab1 said on Sunday 03 November 2002

ok maybe i\'m missing the point but WHY on earth do you care about a channel that only ever has two users in it? Surely you can use a query if you want to talk to one other person? I think you are overreacting somewhat. You only need 4 people to appear in the channel occasionally and everything will be fine, it does not say you permanently need 4 people in there so I cant see why this even effects small clans.

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Sorry quakenet but i think this is one of the worse rules you have ever introduced! I have a chanel that has 3 people in it most of the time, sometimes 4 and now because of this stupid rule we\'ve lost the bot. :\\

brownie said on Sunday 03 November 2002

in re to scr.... \"remember, eggdrop services are still there to take care of the channel that dont meet the requirements for L or Q, so there shouldnt really be a problem\" Not all of us are able to run eggdrops from our PC\'s all the time or have shell accounts to run an eggdrop :\\

brownie said on Sunday 03 November 2002

1st of all i think this is good for the network becoause it frees up some more of L for me :D j/k its good because L can only go on a maz channels so it frees em up for other ppl

TT7-SAS said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Good job. I also had too much un-used L\'s. My chanlev went from 20 (full) to 3 ;)

[WfH]XeNTiX said on Sunday 03 November 2002

#18 You dont need to. There are a massive number of bot services on QNet just dying to give you a free eggdrop.

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Specceh: Chatting in a channel is so much more relaxed than a query. Query is much more like chatting over ICQ. The whole benefit of IRC chat is lost imo. I can see the point in removing it for empty channels. Can\'t You instead monitor the amount of chat or something? After all, chatting is the important thing on IRC :)

Xxon said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Specceh, would you be able to give me the names of them please? Ive tried Wireplay bots but they arent accepting new registrations :\\

brownie said on Sunday 03 November 2002

#help.bots #botshop #nordicbots amongst others. you could try a /list *bot* but that will probably be a LONG wait

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

#22 Well how did you manage it before L? It hasn\'t always been available so people coped before. However the fact is that there are a lot of unnecessary L channels out there which are not doing anything. Its a culture thing which we have no problem with (no other top 5 irc network has a ratio of 1:1 users:channels), however we will put on some limits to what can be done to use our resources effeciently.

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

it\'s not funny. i was away and during this time q-net removed my L-Bot and now is my channel overtaked, what shall i do, i have all log i think. plz help me and answer my questions please this channel is a symbol for me.

Sl4uGht3rM4N said on Sunday 03 November 2002

#26 basically, choose another channel. If just your absense was sufficient for the channel to be underused then it was an unnecessary use of L. You can use another channel for whatever *low* activity purpose you had it for.

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

If you look at netsplit.de you see that there were 120000 channels on Quakenet before this change took effect. This means that nearly every user have had an own channel. Do all of you really need an own channel? And still it isn\'t impossible to get 4 users occasionally in your channel. I think this rule is great to unblock the huge amount of channels which were solely blocked by people that don\'t want certain channels to be registered...

Tankred said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Total bollocks is what it is ! :\\ there r 2 of us in our channel, sometimes 3, but we probably talk a lot more than other channels with more people in. u really need to change it from 4 to 2. ÐAMN U !

FenFen said on Sunday 03 November 2002

This is really bad :((( my clan chan now hasnt got a L anymore . I\'ll leave the qNet I think...

]sh[marinejoe said on Sunday 03 November 2002

#29 indeedy, it should work on how much people chat as opposed to how many users there are. Then we\'d see all the lame multi-thousand idler channels lose their bots muhaha.

renetiq said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Want my little nice sweet L back, pleassssssssssse :-(

Ximish said on Sunday 03 November 2002

That is NOT funny, the L of ur private channel of ur Clan was deleted... that was really the badest the ircops never done...

[F-L]Spike said on Sunday 03 November 2002

God,I really don\'t like this new rule.. You coulde at least send out a warning (I maybe missed it..?) And one more thing for almost every bot you need 4OPs or something like that. And than you can take L anyway. I dont think any botchannel would give a channel with 2-3 users in a bot.

[OpTi]Ingerfara said on Sunday 03 November 2002

this really sucks i hope its get back as before

|3ende|2 said on Sunday 03 November 2002

What does this mean? *Q message, L is not in chan so everyone is banned*

Fooze said on Sunday 03 November 2002

this new rule sucks big time. I\'ve just been on holiday for the past 2 weeks, and my friends went on a 2 weeks trip to ethiopia (they get back this evening) and i got back this morning and i have to say we went with the knowledge that our channel would be safe while we were gone - NOT the case. now its been taken over and we have been screwed. Our webpage now has no ties at all to our IRC clan channel. Crap rule guys!!

alec| said on Sunday 03 November 2002

b0000000000. Kinda take the whole idea away of what L was introduced for. L was introduced so basically everyone could have a bot in there channel. Stop Q being requested so much etc. All this is going to do is bring in loads of spam with lamers trying to get ppl to join there channel so L doesnt go. Bad move Qnet.

James[UH] said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Well that sucks. I had a channel for a Deus Ex Dune mod (no ads allowed, so anyone want details e-mail me dxd@bpsite.co.uk). However there were only a couple of people to use IRC on the mod team, so we would sit idle and wait for people to come and ask questions. The chances of getting four people were slim, but that didn\'t mean the channel was useless. Now it is useless, because it will appear to be a dead channel. Heh. I think I might just say f*ck IRC and promote the forum more.

SpectralShadows said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Yeah that will calm down the people that wanna have an unused channel and complain all the time :-)

Jack-The-Ripper said on Sunday 03 November 2002

yea i like that new rule @_@ thanks for giving us botchans a new chance

lub said on Sunday 03 November 2002

:x I used to have a small channel where me and my friends met (there\'s four of us but it hardly happened that we were online all at the same time) and now you\'re nicking our bot??? I thought L was already lightweighted... L now became a Mediumweight bot? gfg Quakenet :x I\'m disappointed in you

Eleven said on Sunday 03 November 2002

heh lub, where can i get your bots :P I\'ll need one now :x

Eleven said on Sunday 03 November 2002

by the way... Quakenet... my channel in fact was used by 4 users? #eleven #[Yorin] #CE_REAL and #blinx are the usernames - check logs if u dont believe me... (chan is #DeHollies btw) :x the rule had affected me while it shouldnt have :o

Eleven said on Sunday 03 November 2002

well i don\'t like too much this rule but I think that the qnet guys have thought a lot about it before the rules has gone active. Probably it\'s the better for the network. Anyway, think that in #nordicbots you can get your bot, you don\'t need to run your own eggdrop. These days they aren\'t accepting request. it\'s a pity =/ does anyone know where to get bots? :D anyway don\'t you think that having so many channels with the bot is abusive? channels should be more concentrated i think :X

ZombiekE said on Sunday 03 November 2002

bye quakenet.... my channel will move to an other network this rule is stupid...

EsS-Dotcom said on Sunday 03 November 2002

And I was wondering where my L has gone to ... thats the most stupid rule I have ever read ! Change it or I will begin to SING ! HA ! DIE !!!

ex|f4k3m3[m]b3r said on Sunday 03 November 2002

stupid rule

bera said on Sunday 03 November 2002

nice rule :) good work

The_Menace said on Sunday 03 November 2002

hm, that sucks. really, your new \"rules\" are totally for tha ass. super lewserness. man, i thought the qnet would be better, but it doesn\'t. qnet is goin to be extreme lame.

Mazzy said on Sunday 03 November 2002

For christ sake kids : grow up : Stupid rule? no, pay attention : if it wasn\'t for this rule, and the growth of quakenet, you would not be able to have an L. So stop your bloody whinging, if you don\'t know about something don\'t knock it. It\'s not stupid, I\'m afraid to say its the other way round. Please grow up before you decide what is shit and what is not. Feel free to use another network, another less reliable network using shittey slow *serv. Good luck kids, you\'ll need it.

Kryten said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Comment has been removed by QuakeNet staff

James[UH] said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Comment has been removed by QuakeNet staff

lub said on Sunday 03 November 2002

PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, I\'ve been waiting years for a bot in my chan #-bored-, I finally get it about a week or 2 ago and BAM, this! ... But what do they consider as CONSISTENLY below 4 users? The majority of the time?

[TamaMan] said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Why not have a bot similar to L but who only does the small privaye channels .. like a P or somefin. would help me :) Dont like the rule as i have lost two channels which i will have a hard time to get back as it took long enough to get.

Winters said on Sunday 03 November 2002

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee~~~~ last one ;)

Nevermore said on Sunday 03 November 2002

The point of L is byebye now?

[ThA]WhAtZ|SoVe said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Hardly. The point of L was to provide an easy way for CLANS to protect their channels. 2 or 3 people is very unlikely to be a clan. If you have mistakenly perceived L as a free-for-all channel camping service then I\'m afraid you are wrong.

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

hehe hmm well i understand why as they dont have unlimited resources so live with it any way dont apply to me as my channel has on average 16 users in it, so i aint worryed. also as for the whinners like a few people have said dont like it move to a different network. btw Quakenet dose not suck best network i have seen so all the whinners and kidys please stfu :) cheers Acidburn^

Acidburn^ said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Personally I believe that most of the quakenet stuff that you do is right but i dislike this rule :( but heh that aint nout going to be done about it..too late my chans already been taken over, ta. me and my friend always chatted in there for ages and ages :(

FtK^Blanch said on Sunday 03 November 2002

ur such a fuck! no woner they ban u lol!

|Insane| said on Sunday 03 November 2002

i think we have some people suffering from the sps...? honestly, do you think anyone will read your point just because you write it in caps and repeat it a couple of times? get a life, repeating doesn\'t add anything to what you say, it just triggers ignore filters.

JaSt said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Specceh -> hm. dont see why you added the \"invite-only\" function then? ... L, nice for private channels.. nothing else.

[ThA]WhAtZ|SoVe said on Sunday 03 November 2002

The shit is i have a Radio channel with 120User and 28Ops and we dont bekomm a Q The is the biggest Shit on the Quakenet. The rule musst be Changed P.S: Sorry for my Bad English :>

]STH[MCJesus said on Sunday 03 November 2002

lol MCJesus it is because your radio doesnt have a nice page. and Qserve is at its limit i think and your \"bekomm\" = get btw: gj Qnet =)

shaolan said on Sunday 03 November 2002

Radio channels are not entitled to Q anymore - this has been the case for some time now (those that have it received it a long time ago, or in one case, because of serious abuse issues that we decided to resolve with Q). QNet is fundamentally focused towards gaming and access to Q will not be opened up to other channel types. Use L with a clever eggdrop and you will have no problems with your channel. Do not op users yourself but only let L do it and you will be even more secure.

Specceh said on Sunday 03 November 2002

I can understand doing this, it would have been nice to have L or Q warn about it first tho? To just have it disappear like that was quite disconcerning (from a channel that has 3 people in 99% of the time, and 4-10 at \"key\" moments) oh well, live and learn Malc PS if you did do broadcasts via L or Q I am sorry, I must have missed them :/

SDM said on Sunday 03 November 2002

It´s pretty obvious that they have to get rid of alot of unnecessary L-bots. Shouldn´t we users try to help instead of whining about it?

Eyght said on Sunday 03 November 2002

What the hell....thats bad...our little clan...we were just 3 men and lucky to have the L ...but now.....its sade......

sushi666 said on Monday 04 November 2002

:\'(

BavarianExtulas said on Monday 04 November 2002

How often do you have to have 4 users in your channel? We usually have 5-6 come in for a clan match every other day and stay for about an hour. Are we likely to have our bot removed?

CheesyPeteza said on Monday 04 November 2002

Honestly i understand the frustration among the most of you who suffer because of this new rule. But again there are no possible ways to make everyone happy about everything, and some decissions need to be taken, despite the critics we will recieve by enforcing them. Looking at the netsplit statistics i see that a 1:1 channel/users ratio kind of speaks for itself.

Necromancer said on Monday 04 November 2002

Comment has been removed by QuakeNet staff

Butt^cs said on Monday 04 November 2002

This prevents lamers from putting L in lots of empty channels, but I think all channels ending with -priv shouldn\'t be bothered by this rule. Since L will become lighter, more commands should be added, like some milk, a topiclock, or chanlev +b.

GlowMouse said on Monday 04 November 2002

yeah ... it´s okay ^^

michak said on Monday 04 November 2002

Not to be a pain in the arse or something, but i think its a quiet good rule, after this happened, i lost 4 +n flags (should have been cleaned up anyway) there wasn\'t anyone in those channels, but i agree, add for example a ban command (not neccesary for a topic lock (make it by yourself kids :p)) on *:topic:#chan:{ if ($nick != $me) { topic $chan %topic. [ $+ [ $chan ] ] } elseif ($nick == $me) { set %topic. [ $+ [ $chan ] ] $1- } } how hard? anyway, good rule Quakenet, keep up the good work!

Dj_RapRap said on Monday 04 November 2002

Christ, wtf is your problem? In a clan with only 3 members, can\'t you communicate in any other way, like e-mail, ICQ, MSN or whatever you\'d like. It\'s not impossible to manage to keep 3 people in touch without using that bloody topic. Topics ain\'t very efficient for communicating anyways. And, I have to agree that it\'s utterly annoying to be in need of a chan that\'s taken by some twat (sorry for swearing) who ain\'t using the chan anyhow. Nice rule Qnet. Keep up the good work, guys :)

R|Defekt said on Monday 04 November 2002

yeah

R|Defekt said on Monday 04 November 2002

#18, there are many channels on quakenet that provede eggdrops for free. #help.bots for example.

scrOOge said on Monday 04 November 2002

Lame rule... what about intern clan chans?

|licht|MiP said on Monday 04 November 2002

quote news: \"if its user count is consistently below four users for a while\" What do you mean for a while? Is it like 5mn or 5 days or 5 weeks?

Ant0n said on Monday 04 November 2002

i don\'t like this rule but I see the sens of it and for all who had a small channel we all have to work together when you have a small channel then search some one who ahs one to and go in his channel and he in yours to come over 4 people. That won\'t be a problem to perform the other channel only to get an L.

zeroAZ said on Monday 04 November 2002

finally...quakenet got lame...

TheDeath2k said on Monday 04 November 2002

#71 The expiry rule should not effect you

Specceh said on Monday 04 November 2002

Please, reply to #81, what do you mean when you say for a while? :)

ZombiekE said on Monday 04 November 2002

Specceh to your comment in #4 (yes that far up) QuakeNet has allways had roughy the same number of Channels, to users... http://irc.netsplit.de/cgi-bin/ncompare.cgi?n1=QuakeNet&n2;=GamesNET GamesNet being the only other IRC network to follow the same patten (not sure where i read that)

TheDevil said on Monday 04 November 2002

http://irc.netsplit.de/cgi-bin/ncompare.cgi?n1=QuakeNet&n2;=GamesNET - proper link, dont know where the space came from :|

TheDevil said on Monday 04 November 2002

#86 yep i know. doesnt mean we have to encourage it though :)

Specceh said on Monday 04 November 2002

Theses are all the bot channels I know of : #DFbtos #Easy-bots #animebots #nordicbots #help.bots #bots I do know of more but can\'t think atm , hope these will help you :)

AOD|Cynda|Data said on Monday 04 November 2002

Ok I\'m a bit of a ninny, and made A typo on the first bot channel above ( which happens to be my own lol >.< ) its ment to be #DFBots NOT #DFbtos

AOD|Cynda|Data said on Monday 04 November 2002

really sux!

Lexto said on Monday 04 November 2002

Yeah, you are thinking of the short ahead, but since this is really a free service provided, it\'s totaly their desicion, and it\'s more about quality, not quantity, wise move QNet :)

]MeRc[-R|sc- said on Monday 04 November 2002

#92 Do you use L? in private channels? if so, you would know that L is/was a helpful \"bot\" for smaller clans, and channels.

TheDevil said on Monday 04 November 2002

I can\'t say I don\'t use L, because I do, and it is helpfull, but some sacrifices have to made, to keep what QNet is, and stable.

]MeRc[-R|sc- said on Monday 04 November 2002

its already been asked a number of times, but once again: what does \"if its user count is consistently below four users for a while\" mean exactly? That is so vague as to be almost entirely useless, can we have some specifics please???

[MrT] said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

Without taking sides, a suggestion for the peeps who might want a bot - try a \"windrop\" (windows version of eggdrop), especially if each op on your channel has 1. Then each person sets their bot to recognise their friends. A partial solution i am sure, but better than nothing and perhaps a fun experience too. Ok, chances are that your channel might not get 24/7 coverage (does it now?) but @ least it\'s an idea and perhaps worth a try. You got brains in your heads, the effort might be worth it

Mr_ReeZ said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

the effort might be worth the try gl! that\'s what should have been the last sentence in my post above, but it got truncated. Right, as a pointer - hardest thing about egg + windrops is setting up the initial config, but it isn\'t an impossible job and tho i\'d like to advertise a website as a pointer - i can\'t so will just recommend that you folks use a decent search engine and look for \"windrop\" and \"eggdrop\". Oh yes, btw, if u try it - remember the 15 chars in a nick rule that Qnet ha

Mr_ReeZ said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

that Qnet has (means a special compile of eggdrop and windrop)

Mr_ReeZ said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

By the way... My bot in #DeHollies in fact WAS for a clan, a CS/TFC/Ragnarök 2on2 clan and 4 people came there frequently, though never at the same time. I lost my bot for no reason then perhaps? :x See Quakenet, I kinda see your problem, having thousands of L\'s requested to channels just to prevent others from taking it. You\'re right to take them away, but please don\'t take the bots away from channels who in fact ARE being used by 3 or more people!

Eleven said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

this is the first news which got 100 comments, and i just had to add the #100 :)

creature said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

#99 This process is automated, or do you really think somebody is controllng this and remove L by hand? For such little channels you may try to get an eggdrop to secure your channel. Try the numerous botservices on Quakenet. #help will surely tell you which services are good.

Tankred said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

#95 & others - we intentionally haven\'t detailed the expiry criteria to avoid people using this knowledge to cheat the removal. I would simply suggest ensuring that your channel is used by the 4 people that got the L in the first place, or as suggested get an eggdrop that will not only increase your user count by 1 but protect your channel should you all go on long holidays.

velvet said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

how about setting the limit down to 3 ?

ryver said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

4 should be low enough. Isn\'t to hard to get 4 people in your channel at regular times....

Tankred said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

This rule sucks :( I prefer to have the limit to 3 users and there to many rules L for private chan owns but this rule delete private chans!

{}Invader said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

I think it should to lowered to 3 users, cos then 2v2 Clans can get an eggdrop to raise the user count to 3 :)

AOD|Cynda|Data said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

oh no... :o/ don\'t

sGs|-DeathAngel said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

I believe this is a good rule. For smaller(very small) channels, get eggdrops. 30% of the channels is very much, and 30% is a lot of the resources. Unless you want a lagging L, this is a good rule for us all(at least most of us).

Cide said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

You can get some wonderfull eggdrop bots for free in #nordicbots - they work nice and you can even chose from a variety of botnames (how useful) but hey, it\'s great for those who lost their channel in this issue.

Eleven said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

I really like this finally i can get my channel back, from some peps that took over.

EndofEvangelion said on Tuesday 05 November 2002

#105, I have a clan, we\'re six active members, and we have no problem at all keeping our private channel with over +5 persons all the time. Shouldn\'t be a problem for any of you if it isn\'t for me. Get an eggdrop if you\'re channel does have -3 persons.

Cide said on Wednesday 06 November 2002

I have a small clan of 4 members and we are online everyday but not constantly and not all at the same time. This sux

kea_op said on Wednesday 06 November 2002

cooomoonn whats this?? ..... this rule suck! :((

WomaK said on Wednesday 06 November 2002

Great job! Maybe the chance of joining an *almost* empty channel when typing /join # will be reduced. :)

Bao_ said on Wednesday 06 November 2002

Great!!

NcG_Atomic said on Wednesday 06 November 2002

Whats wrong with u all whiners. Nothing wrong with this rule, i understand why they have it. And what kind of clan is a clan with under 4members....uhmm. And i hate those channels with an L in and no one else, no more that. Good Luck Staff

PlasteX^n0name said on Wednesday 06 November 2002

I also think this rule is really ok. Nobody needs a bot if there are oly 3 or less people in the chan... and anlways think of that you do not pay anythink for Qnet so be happy with what you get or leave. THX to the ops for their work :> keep on rocking

Shell^^ha said on Wednesday 06 November 2002

\"user count is consistently below four users for a while\" i read the whole thread and i still dont know what \'consistently\' and \'a while\' means in this case. i\'m making a q3-mod with some other guys and i\'m worried bout our chan now. it\'s in an early state - therefore we dont have a bunch of idlers. i dont have a flat and i cant be online all day long (that would be bout ~350€ per month). it would just be too bad if loosin l/our chan would prevent us from doing some stuff for t

ki|oNyx said on Thursday 07 November 2002

€ = euro (this way i got over 500 words)... the complete sentence was \"it would just be too bad if loosin l/our chan would prevent us from doing some stuff for the community\" :]

ki|oNyx said on Thursday 07 November 2002

The requirements for L is 4 users. So, if you fit these requirements, you are allowed to have L. If you don\'t, L will leave(the requirements does not just apply when requesting) because you do NOT fit the requirements. If you do not fit the requirements, why should you then have L? I suggest that if your channel is too small, so the L requirements do NOT fit, you should get L. However, this is only my opinion, you are of course allowed to have your own.

Cide said on Thursday 07 November 2002

GREAT... this is actually the best news ever. now all those whining counter-strike clan-channels who are empty 100% of the time will be gone. and proper channels can be established for the cause of actually communicating on irc...

Ivr|mongoloid said on Thursday 07 November 2002

This is really silly! For what do we have L? Q is the bot for the big chans, and L should be a bot for little private chans or something. I\'m really annoyed :(((

curi said on Thursday 07 November 2002

Why is having an L in a private channel a problem, if you have more than 4 clanmembers, which im sure you do then get them to add their priv channel to perform, they dont have to be always talking in it. I think this is a great rule as it will clear up some of the channels that people have camped out with just an L.

EC_UncleSam said on Thursday 07 November 2002

I think that that this was really needed for Quakenet and therefore I fully agree with everyone giving these new rules support. Channels are not supposed to be held up by a L bot. The graphs shows what happened when it got \"too easy\" to get L.

Steinland said on Thursday 07 November 2002

I just want to say thanks a lot for the positive comments about NordicBots. We will do whatever we can to live up to your requirements and needs. We will also soon get our homepaged updated, so our guides can be found there (No need to hurry really - dunno how many weeks before the is anything near done :D)

i|Avatar said on Thursday 07 November 2002

I like this rule, eggdrops and other bots are more valuable now! Way to go Qnet!

BouBBIN^Work said on Thursday 07 November 2002

Can\'t understand you all. As far as I have noticed clones are allowed (So did I requested L - Yeah you\'re right just me and four clones). So why not do it with 3 of your mates to keep L? At the Q Team: Let us keep the benefit of L this way, pleez.

[gB]BakerMaN said on Friday 08 November 2002

First of all, I wont say that I am much better myself, but I am mostly in about 20 channels - maybe 10 of them I share with the same people. The channels got different names but it is more or less the same people in them - That is waste and there\'s really not the need...

i|Avatar said on Friday 08 November 2002

I really think this was a good move by Qnet staff! Not only do you get rid of those unwanted channels, but you also get a more stable and functional L bot for those that really need it! And for those small channels of consistently below 4 users, they can have a free eggdrop from one of those channels mentioned! Keep up the good work, staff!

Ensten said on Friday 08 November 2002

i normally wouldnt start to flame here, buuut.. FU quakenet that was the lamest action you could ever take the channels i had got deleted without the slightest warning now they are possessed by people who simply have enough ressources to put 4 bots in them is that your way to save ressources? i\'d rather say its your way to piss people off a big THX from me

cr|stony said on Friday 08 November 2002

\"I like this rule, eggdrops and other bots are more valuable now! Way to go Qnet!\" haha indeed so stupid :/

cr|stony said on Friday 08 November 2002

Stony : grow the fuck up for christ sake, its like childrens hour : if you dont know about what you\'re flaming, don\'t flame it, you\'re just showing yourself up to be a twat having a flame. There\'s other networks : go use them, close the door behind you.

Kryten said on Friday 08 November 2002

There\'s no reason to whine: IRC is an privilegue, not a right. So please, enjoy the privilegue and be happy about some additional services, like Q and L. And if you REALLY need a bot for a three-dudes\'-channel: Get some l33t Eggdrop, there\'s plenty to rent - for free, even! If someone\'s not happy with QNet, she or he is allowed to move on to another IRC Network. Like I did years ago - from IRCNet to QNet. Dear QNet, thanks for providing such a great service for free! :-)

cricetus said on Saturday 09 November 2002

I think It\'s a bad news for those who want to have a private chan!!

Polak_McFLY said on Saturday 09 November 2002

This isn\'t the best change you\'ve done. To be honest, I really dislike it. We have a Q for our main channel, and a L for our private channel. Now it\'s the question, can we keep our priv channel... bad it has to be this way :(

QM said on Saturday 09 November 2002

HuBriS, how many people do you have in your clan, as I have a chan with average 10 people in. I get along nicely with L and an eggdrop and I have no problems. If anybody has any problems with this rule its those whining kids that like channel camping for the sole purpose of denying those channels from being used properly, grow up and appreciate quakenet for what it is, a group of volunteers maintaining the network and anything they do with Q/L you always whining, nice rule and great work qnet!

RiderPatrol said on Saturday 09 November 2002

mohahah i have \"stolen\" about 5-6 channels now ... oh how poor L parted their channels :P

fade` said on Saturday 09 November 2002

j/k

fade` said on Saturday 09 November 2002

i hope u\'ll change these rules back.

brain^on said on Sunday 10 November 2002

Personally I agree with the rule. It allows the LBot to leave channels with only a few or no people in, therefore saving resources for other, larger channels. As they have said before, you can get Eggdrop Bots free from loads of different channels, so why winge? I have the LBot, 2 Eggdrop Bots, and easily get 10+ members in my chan, excluding the 2 Eggdrops. QuakeNET is providing the IRC Network AND the QBot and LBot free of charge, they could just say sod it all and pull the plug.

ssmmdd said on Sunday 10 November 2002

I think Qnet has just gotten one step worse (again). The requirements for Q are now even more absurd than before, L was the only decent solution to that, and now that option\'s shot to hell as well. I was just thinking about how nice it would be if you\'d lower the L requirements since Q is SO out of reach for most folks... L is definetely not powerful enough. Finding another IRC server is also NOT an option since EVERYONE seems to be here :/

[cCc]Toxik said on Sunday 10 November 2002

\\o/ yey \\o/

meeps said on Monday 11 November 2002

djeez... the rules from Q are ok. but plz, dont make rules like that for L.

{ReD}ViPeR said on Tuesday 12 November 2002

as long as you don\'t do the same with Q ...

BH|logiC` said on Tuesday 12 November 2002

The bots on Quakenet are a service, not a right you can claim. It\'s logical there are rules for these services. Please be a bit more reasonable and grateful people :(

D-lirium said on Tuesday 12 November 2002

Quote: 2 or 3 people is very unlikely to be a clan. :end quote: There are a major of clans/mates playing 2v2 matches in UT Instagib and want a private quiet channel for their clan to organise matches with the opponent. A query with 4 peeps is kinda annoying imo. Also my clan has 3 members, never had more, and i\'m sure we aren\'t an exception... Just so you know.

SNAIL said on Tuesday 12 November 2002

Oh, and before i forget: telling peeps to stop whining is imaginable... but telling peeps to grow up or calling them twat doesn\'t sound very adult-like either... :x

SNAIL said on Tuesday 12 November 2002

Do you whiners realize that QuakeNet doesn\'t have to provide any kind of service at all for us normal users? You should be grateful for being able to get Q or L at all. It\'s good that channels very little use or no use at all (just L staying on channel) can\'t get/keep a service. I believe most of the whiners are teenagers and younger people who has no idea of resource management or other similar things. Stop thinking about yourself and try to see things from others perspective.

Renzo said on Wednesday 13 November 2002

Quakenet is more and more bad !! thats shame ! ( Go gamesnet )

DZ_RmFreeJ said on Wednesday 13 November 2002

Great news. This is something I\'ve been waiting for, hate those \"L only\" channels with +b *!*@*

Unfamed said on Wednesday 13 November 2002

come 2 #amityville for a good bot

MaXiMq|||TIE said on Wednesday 13 November 2002

btw: 3 people is a clan. heard something of 3vs3?(or even 2 on 2 ) especially liked in CS. and what do you do when you\'re that kind of clan? you juste invite somebody or what, while talking about your tactics. kind of clever ;) I don\'t say anything against, you have your reasons, but would I rethink this, if you couldn\'t put down the number of ppl needed to 3, or do something else to give these kinds of clan\'s a chance. yes, and I against unused chan\'s. I just got upset about one myself.

Broetchen said on Thursday 14 November 2002

what must i do when i want a L for my channel??? Score too low. ????????????????(im german)

GCH|dRcRazY said on Thursday 14 November 2002

you have to be opped in a cahn (Without L), have to have 4 other poeple in there. then you have to wait 2 hours and you get L btw: what about the faq? ------------------------------------------------ du musst op im chan haben. brauchst noch 4 andere idler (müssen kein op haben), dann musst du 2 std. warten und die kannst L bestellen ps: wie wärs mit dem faq?

Broetchen said on Thursday 14 November 2002

Hmm these new rules don\'t work too good actually...I\'m the owner of channel #hardware, an pretty popular help and discussion channel for hardware, free to use. We normally have more then 50 users on the channel but at night mostly it drops to around 20..but not 4. An hour ago I saw L was removed from the channel, how can this be? Seems there is a bug in the L service. A solution would be to get a Q, but I tried that some time ago, but I didn\'t get any response, although hardware powers gaming

DJD20 said on Thursday 14 November 2002

First of all I\'d like to say that I\'ve been on Quakenet for about a year now and my thoughts about it and the services it\'s providing are very positive. The whole L bot concept was a great idea when the Q queues were getting long and slow. Raising Q\'s requirements after L\'s introduction was imho the right thing to do. And the new L requirements are very understandable in the light of limited resources and the fact that Qnet is growing so rapidly and has the highest channels per user ratio.

Mictian said on Friday 15 November 2002

Big shame to see L go from my channel as I regulary only have 3-4 users max 20 users but if quakenet need the resources i understand. sad though it is.

McCloed said on Friday 15 November 2002

Go QuakeNet. I think this is a very good decission..Especially #51, Good spoken. Man, just think of it. If they would not have implented this new rule, soon all the L bots would be in use and then if you want one for your *real* channel you just can\'t get one anymore..Why d\'ya need L for in such a channel anyway? It used to protect your channel. But there,protect from what? The two people who comes there once in a while? Be happy with these clever operators. Boo.

IpDope[TT] said on Friday 15 November 2002

I have been on Irc since 1993 when things had to be done with HP-UX 8.0 and ircII or be left undone. I wrote my own \"bot\", an very early attempt, and got a angry call from the scary sysadmin. So I guess I am not totally out of the picture. But to my shame I didnßt know one can query more then one person in one call! Instead of saying \"sorry kidz\" or \"stop whining\" you just might have given some clues to avoid channels at all and start using queries. But from my first test ircII doesn

Spektakel said on Saturday 16 November 2002

Hmm, I understand your reasons to remove L from chans with only 2 or 3 people most of time. But not all of this channels are so unused you think. I heard from a service named »chanfix«, that control the user-flags and chanstats on quakenet. Why don\'t use this service to control the use of L-chans? If chanfix detects a channel, that is \"unused\" (no more users than 4 for example 2 days), L part this channel. If this doesn\'t works, than think about changing your L-rules again. Userlimit of 4 i

Chiaki said on Saturday 16 November 2002

So now please tell me why is my L away from my channel i was away for 7 days and when i came back L was away =X i have thought ahh there is a new rule then i went here and see 20 days

xT|FoX said on Sunday 17 November 2002

fox|BMS said : bad news :/ we were only online weekend so no more bot :/ weekend = 7 days ...

xT|FoX said on Sunday 17 November 2002

Does this mean that we have to be in our IRC channel 24 hours in a day, so our L bot will stay??

biiiitti said on Tuesday 19 November 2002

I don\'t see why everyone is complaining. It really is annoying when you go into a channel you want and some loser has just stuck an L in there with no intention of using the channel. However, I do think it would be good to ALSO monitor chat in the channel to make sure that the people in the channel aren\'t just idle bots. If you have 3 people and you really can\'t afford to get a fourth, then just use some channel that is highly unlikely to be registered. With 3 people, protection isn\'t a prob

spazboy said on Wednesday 20 November 2002

#163, no, you just have to spend *SOME* time in your channel and have at least 4 people at some point. #161, try reading the rules and make sure you didn\'t break some rule, when one of my channels was abandoned, I couldn\'t remove the users for awhile, and the channel lived on without anyone for several months until I was finally able to remove everyone. I can\'t imagine them removing a channel after 1 weekend of inactivity, however, wasn\'t anyone else using the channel while you were gone?

spazboy said on Wednesday 20 November 2002

whats the point lame rule

Think_Games said on Friday 22 November 2002

Hello irc ops or helpers pls answer

xT|FoX said on Saturday 23 November 2002

FOR FUCK SAKE O GOD DAMN MOANING BABYS, AS THEY SAID IF U HAVE A CHAN WITH 2 PPL IN IT GET A GOD DAMN EGGDROP. Kryten i totaly agree with u. I find it extremely funny that u want L in a room with 2 ppl, Get an Eggdrop ffs! they are probably better for that kind of room neway!

[CeX]Death_Ray said on Sunday 24 November 2002

if u have a chan that is a clan priv room or sommin with 2 ppl in it, y would u want an L??, protection, on a room with an opped eggdrop and a key, who the hell would bother 2 try and join?! there are ENDLESS eggdrop services out there that are free and reliable, #worldbots #nordicbots #mase.bots #easy-bots #dfbots these are only a few, stop crying and get a eggdrop!

[CeX]Death_Ray said on Sunday 24 November 2002

Does anyone know another net where I can get channel?

kea_op said on Tuesday 26 November 2002

THE WORST move made by qnet ever ! I have tryed to get eggdrop bot from 3 days with no result :( ! Pls change this crazy rule ! :) or give some \"normal\" ways to get a eggdrop bot ! My proposal is a \"new\" S bot for small channels with 1 rule: Someone have to auth. min one time per 14 days ! It is my opinion ! Regards & GL

Alpha_^D^ said on Friday 29 November 2002

Comment has been removed by QuakeNet staff

Specceh said on Saturday 30 November 2002

FUCK OFF AND LET L BE LIKE IT WAS BEFORE. IF YOU\'RE NOT DOIN IT, JUST GO FUCK YOURSELVES OR SOMETHING. DAMN FUCKING WANKERS. GO HOME TO YOU FUCKIN MOTHERS AND TAKE THEM IN THEIR ASS! MOTHERFUCKERS!

YtsE said on Monday 02 December 2002

I dont like this rule but i see why you add it but i dont see why you all are whining so much, its just a bot!

aimno said on Monday 02 December 2002

It seems all very stupid that everyone is getting \"Het up\" about all this. Considering that the main game people creat clans around is cs. Nearly all games req. \"5\" users to play :P

Hess- said on Thursday 05 December 2002

At the first place this felt sooo stupid, but now it feels fair. And because no more useless L\'s the NW is faster and more stable. And no more deadly quiet chans.. I hope the eggdrop makers will notice this too, and sometimes remove their bots when channels are totally empty for several days. I have mine private channel too and it runs well even without L, no welcome message but so what, if it\'s a true private channel, no one else can know about it.

sk0gemo said on Thursday 05 December 2002

What can I say?? Gun_Man slaps Quakenet team with Windows 3.1 Change the dumb rule ffs!

Gun_Man said on Friday 06 December 2002

Why are there so many people moaning ? This is a service provided to us for free, lets thank the people at mIRC for providing us with this free service instead of moaning as if we have some kind of birthright to getting L. Our clan has only recently started but i\'m gratefull that this service is provided, so come on people, stop looking a gifthorse in the mouth.

_BigBird_ said on Sunday 08 December 2002

Boah... that\'s bad. In my channel are only 4 Users, and if somebody\'s not there, you\'ll remove L from our channel, or what?

Alven said on Friday 20 December 2002

now my little nice work and testchannel had been stolen by an lame guy with a bnc *argh*

OpTimiZeR said on Sunday 22 December 2002

Would have been nice to make the change a bit more diplomatically tho, give some warning that the L service was gonna be reduced.

RippehMONG said on Monday 23 December 2002

What a worst. The rules seemed to be too high sometimes. It\'s hard for people who start at the moment with clans. But i see your problem. ok. So do well in future. Rock on !

[LaWa]GRizZly said on Tuesday 24 December 2002

wtg qnet :)

Janus` said on Sunday 29 December 2002

This sucks man, to many rules...!

eXcaliber|Engus said on Tuesday 14 January 2003

Sometimes we have only 3 people in channel sometimes only one , waiting till the others join, because of this rule i need to stay always in this channel, if i want to talk in privat with some friends together, because of L it was easy , and why , my friends know that channel name, now it is possible if i don\'t stay in it, it can be taking over. too bad , hope u will changes the rules again.

D4rkM4n said on Saturday 01 February 2003

well this rule is great if you ask me, people are complaning but this is a free service so stfu tbh, there are 2 many unused channels with L in them and there are even some channels with unused Q\'s but it isnt hard to get 4 people in your channel if you find it hard you need help.

[UCA]DaRkv00d00 said on Wednesday 09 April 2003

wait my clan has to sleep and we normally turn off our computers for the night when we get back will our L be gone foreva?

Deathguise said on Wednesday 09 July 2003