Battle.Net Channel Ideas

[Grok]

Nothing new here, just commenting.

* Battle.Net ops holder should be able to set a channel greeting.

* Battle.Net ops holder ops commands "ban", "kick", "designate", should be exempt from flood calculations.

* Battle.Net clan channel ops (by namesake, i.e. the '[vL]' user while in channel 'clan [vL]') should be able to assign one channel speaker.

* A clan channel designated speaker should be exempt from all TALK and WHISPER flood limitations, so long as he is whispering people in the same clan channel.

[Yoni]

I don't agree with exemptions from flood calculations. Too abusable.

* Server sided wildcard kicks/bans. If not, a way to kick/ban more than one person (i.e. /ban user1,user2,user3).
* Server sided safelist/autoban list. (I doubt this would ever be implemented.)

[Skywing]

I don't agree with exemptions from flood calculations. Too abusable.

* Server sided wildcard kicks/bans. If not, a way to kick/ban more than one person (i.e. /ban user1,user2,user3).
* Server sided safelist/autoban list. (I doubt this would ever be implemented.)

Abusable how if they only apply to the current channel?

[Yoni]

Some people already have abilities to log on many, many accounts at the same time. One could log on a lot of users on a single server, join "Clan <Myname>" on each one, become flood-proof, and spam (whisper self?) enough to drain the server's bandwidth.

I know, it's not practical, and the Battle.net servers have a lot of bandwidth. Still though, shouldn't make anyone totally flood-proof.

Maybe have looser flood rules for whoever is designated speaker. (But not loose enough to do something like what I mentioned above.)

[Skywing]

Some people already have abilities to log on many, many accounts at the same time. One could log on a lot of users on a single server, join "Clan <Myname>" on each one, become flood-proof, and spam (whisper self?) enough to drain the server's bandwidth.

I know, it's not practical, and the Battle.net servers have a lot of bandwidth. Still though, shouldn't make anyone totally flood-proof.

Maybe have looser flood rules for whoever is designated speaker. (But not loose enough to do something like what I mentioned above.)

Why bother doing that?  Malicious persons in question could just SYNflood the server or do any number of other things much easier and much more efficiently.