Clients should support FIBS

[don]

Paddy,

do you mean to disagree with my statement?

or are you simply stating that clients are not absolutely obliged to use the CLIP protocol that was designed and implemented specifically for the purpose ?

Yes I disagree with your statement.  The protocol does not require the client to do any client-side filtering to implement the gag.  To elaborate, all a client has to do is issue a gag command, and this command can easily be sent to FIBS every time the offensive user logs in.  If the client does the filtering then it should be responsible for FIBS-like behavior and responses.

I can't quite figure out what you are saying in your OR clause so I don't know if I agree or disagree.  You have it phrased somewhat like a "have you stopped beating women?" question, and I don't want to touch it.

So that's a clear answer to a clear question and a dodge of a vague question.  IMO, a programmer should be able to phrase a question clearly, if he's interested in a discussion.  Have you stopped beating women, Paddy?  See?  There's no yes or no answer.

--
don

PS -- I'm ignoring diane's post because I can't see any relevance to this topic in it, except as she provides examples of the behavior I'm talking about.  I am not objecting in this discussion to users like diane, zyxtcba, donzaemon and others who hide and snipe behind gag.  That's not a client issue of great concern here.  It only becomes a serious client issue when I'm forced to interact with them in situations like tournaments and I don't get the well-designed feedback specified by FIBS.

[burper]

The protocol does not require the client to do any client-side filtering to implement the gag. 

Don,

do you mean to disagree with my statement?

or are you simply stating that clients are not absolutely obliged to use the CLIP protocol that was designed and implemented specifically for the purpose ?

Regards,
Paddy

I think what don means, is that your client could use the fibs 'gag' command instead of any client-side filtering.

This means monitoring when users log in and re-issueing the gag, and probably the blind, either manually or programmatically.

Someone could still issue invites. If the client-side filtering implementation included invites, but was still name-based, one could create new nicks to do the inviting with, such as INoUHearMeAHole. One could write a script to automate this to get multiple "messages" through. don, write this script.

So I read and understand the whole thread in detail and stand by everything I posted previously, and meant it all seriously. So don, any reply other than sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "LA LA LA LA LA I'm not listening" loudly?

[burper]

The topic is:  Should FIBS clients conform to the FIBS protocol?

Absolutely not.

Can you name any client that conforms 100% to the protocol for which it is being used?
First question when you find one: which version or the protocol?

[burper]

Another example relavent to this discussion: those mobile phone fibs clients.
They typically do not implement shouts, in order to conserve both bandwidth and screen space.
In what way is this different from using client-side filtering (with no automated reply) in place of gag?

[burper]

or are you simply stating that clients are not absolutely obliged to use the CLIP protocol that was designed and implemented specifically for the purpose ?

I can't quite figure out what you are saying in your OR clause so I don't know if I agree or disagree.  You have it phrased somewhat like a "have you stopped beating women?" question, and I don't want to touch it.

I don't think this is a "beating your wife" question at all. I think you answered it by saying you thought it was
I would agree with that statement. Clients are free to bypass the use of CLIP. Anyone who uses telnet or tinyfugue knows this. One *could* implement a gui approximately like javafibs using straight telnet. You might question that persons sanity, but that would be a different question.

[burper]

Another point here, since "we" are talking about conformance, I believe the only specification that could be considered official here, is the one written by marvin back in 1997.

If you wanted to "do the right thing" and be 100% conforment, you should ignore the greatly expanded later version, which is unauthorized. You should also ignore FCM, as that takes great liberties with the official spec, and apparently was implemented by "reverse-engineering" much of the protocol. You would end up with a grossly inferior client from a functional point of view, but it would be 100% conformant.

[padski]

Paddy, Yes I disagree with your statement.  The protocol does not require the client to do any client-side filtering to implement the gag.  To elaborate, all a client has to do is issue a gag command, and this command can easily be sent to FIBS every time the offensive user logs in.

When I login non-CLIP and gag a player I no longer see shouts from that player.

When I login CLIP and gag a player, I continue to see shouts from that player.

The single most common use-case for the gag must surely be to deal with the likes of bgfd the other day.

A CLIP client has to filter on the client-side, to implement the same gag that a 'telnet-client' gets.
Indeed to get what is in practice the most basic gag function.

At least, such are my recent observations, but I am very new to this.  I had thought that such an interesting wrinkle would be well known, and that my statement would not be controversial.  Hence my pains to ensure that this is indeed a point of disagreement and not merely a misunderstanding on my part ?

Is there something that I have overlooked ?

Although it may simply be a case of simplifying something that was previously overengineered, it would come as
no surprise to me to discover that this change is in fact intended to address a weakness in the original fibs gag.

but this is just one detail in fairly complex picture, which anyone could easily stumble over, and yet I fear it could take some considerable time to go through it all in this level of detail.

Don,  you've pointed out a real hole in the existing system. I think we are fortunate that it has come to everyone's attention before it could be exploited by mischief makers intent only on causing trouble.  I am sure the players and TDs will join me in applauding you for cutting straight to the heart of the matter in identifying a lack of decorum.

I have great sympathy for the general view that gui authors should be encourged not break to underlying text interfaces, but for the reasons I have outlined strongly disagree with your contention that this is what is happenning in this case.

I would encourage you to set aside your impractical insistence on the legacy fibs gag and focus instead on looking for real practical solutions to a problem which is essentially non-technical.  As I have pointed out the technical community may well be able to offer some asssistance.

The please kibitz proposal has the considerable benefit of addressing the immediate problem directly and specifically, whereas the impact of the fibs gag is much more pervasive, even if it is at first sight elegant, and has the considerable disadvantage of already having a history. Although I do not have any stories to hand, it would not surprise me discover that there are already known weaknesses in the fibs gag that make it unsuitable for the purpose you propose.

Sadly, neither of us has a role in this that adds to the credibility of our genuinely intended proposals, and so it will be a loss if we reach an impasse on some fine point of technical principle, without exploring the various practical possibilities.  I have gone to considerable lengths to explain the reasons why your proposal will not work, and I would be grateful if you take a little time to point out possible problems with please kibitz.

Regards,
Paddy

[don]

Hey Paddy.

Happily there is a simple solution to the major problem, that of participants in tourneys whose clients aren't exactly on spec:  Participants and TDs should be encouraged, if not required to temporarily disable those features of their GUIs that don't conform.  This would amount to disabling permagag, any auto-blind function, and setting toggle-allowpip to on.  If an offending user harasses during a tournament, then it is up to the tournament director to handle matters -- an improvement on the current situation where TDs can be hassled handling what should be routine communications between players.

--
don

[padski]

Don,

I hope you will come to see that badmouthing the authors of clients and their users and pressuring TDs to take sides does nothing to advance the cause of improving the atmosphere.

I know from personal experience playing you with a client that really did have a problem that you were entirely gracious about it, and that overall players on fibs are both extremely friendly and understanding.  It would be a shame if people were to get a wrong impression of fibs from the quarrels that sometimes spill out onto the web.

In the end, while I sincerely wish that we could all just get along amiably, I have to find the grace to accept that sometimes things are the way they are for a good reason.  I can only hope that you can too.

I do thank you for engaging in discussion on this matter, and I hope you will understand me taking my leave of it now, if you have nothing further to add.

Regards,
Paddy

[don]

Hey Paddy.

I hope you will come to see that badmouthing the authors of clients and their users and pressuring TDs to take sides does nothing to advance the cause of improving the atmosphere.

I agree that badmouthing the authors of clients and pressuring TDs to take sides does nothing to advance any cause.  I don't know why you point out something so obvious.  Has somebody been badmouthing authors and pressuring TDs?

I hope you will come to see that beating women is wrong, Paddy.

Cheers!

--
don

[adrian]

Ok, even if don will ever be, technically speaking, right again, just disregard my approval for him. Keep them coming:   postcards, brownies and homemade beer, along with smites. It is a great ARENA !  Free to play and free to observe.
( Why couldn't I just STFU  ?? )

and