[crossfire] IRC Bridges

[Poof]

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 11:24:22 +0000
Rick Tanner <leaf at real-time.com> wrote:

> On 3/4/19 7:39 AM, Poof wrote:
> > 
> > I could not find my mailing list subscription information and so
> > missed the earlier discussion about Discord. Had to set up a new
> > account. Regardless, as long as there is a bridge in the #crossfire
> > IRC channel, I'm out.  
> 
> This was posted to the IRC channel after you logged off.
> 
> Mar 03 20:40:16 <draugthewhopper>       unixman: I feel compelled to
> point out that the goal of bridging to discord is not to permit access
> via a phone, nor is it an effort to get people to switch from IRC to
> any other system. It is to lower the barrier to entry, and hopefully
> encourage new participants in the CF community. Additionally, if your
> feelings on the matter are that strong, then I wish you had
> contributed in the mailinglist discussion (unless of course
> 
> Mar 03 20:40:16 <draugthewhopper>       n email from you, in which
> case I apologize).

An argument that a bridge from a closed source, instant messaging platform to the Crossfire IRC channel will "... lower the barrier to entry, and hopefully encourage new participants in the CF community." is not an argument based in reality as far as I am concerned. Using IRC is not a barrier to entry for Crossfire. If anything, the quirky nature of the Crossfire game, meaning the graphics, playing style, et cetera, and its relative obscurity are the barriers to having more players. The idea that tacking on Discord will get more users is wishful thinking. You obviously disagree, which is fine. We will just agree to disagree. There are dozens of IRC solutions that will work just fine with any popular system in use today. See this site for examples:

http://www.irchelp.org/clients/

> > My arguments:
> > 
> >     Bridges totally screw up nick completion for trying to address
> > a specific person on the other side of a channel bridge.  
> 
> True.. tab completion is not available. But not a deal breaker, IMO.

No, but it *is* an irritant. I'm severely un-fond of irritants. ;)

> >     A bridge makes it less clear who is saying what since the
> > bridge nickname is what one sees by default as the "user" typing.  
> 
> I disagree. Here is a short snippet from earlier today. Looks okay in
> plain text. Looks even better in my IRC client of choice. And looks
> best via Discord.
> 
> Mar 04 15:12:34 <CFDiscord>     DraugTheWhopper> I did testing of the
> gate changes, updated NPC behavior, and dimdoor restrictions, but not
> a full playthrough.
> ...

The first thing I should see after the timestamp is the nickname of the person typing, period. As long as the Crossfire IRC channel is small, I'll admit this is not a big deal, just another irritant (and we all know how I feel about those, now, don't we? :D ). But if Crossfire gets the hoped for thousands of users that using Discord will bring, then it *will* become somewhat of an issue on the IRC side. As for how it looks in Discord ... I care not. I will never use Discord for two more reasons than those I mentioned off the top of my head originally. The reasons? I do not agree to the Discord Terms of Service nor to the Discord Privacy Policy.

https://discordapp.com/terms
https://discordapp.com/privacy

I am defacto agreeing to those policies by being in an IRC channel that includes a Discord bridge. So, I won't be in such a channel.

One other thing, Ruben is not wrong. But I won't say more than that.

As I have said before, I haven't contributed to the project in a while anyway. So, it's not like you guys are losing anything by me not being in the IRC channel. Should I get active again, (which I keep intending to do ... but "the road to heck is paved with good intentions" and all that. ;) ), I'll just stick to the mailing lists and the forum.

Gene Alexander
-- 
Mailing List Subscriptions - subscriptions at eracc.org