Forum:Ban Evilbot from the irc

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Ban Evilbot from the irc
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 4 February 2011 by Liquidhelium.

I've been watching Evil abusing my bot with his bot who shouldn't even be in the irc, My bot is 24/7 and even more advanced then his "downloaded" bot.
All it does is creating a lot of spam, and it's even more then just those 2 logs...
So I'm asking you guys, can't we ban evilbot from the irc?
We already have 3 bots; Craftbot (JSBawt),TLULBot and Sentrabot to cover the [[Thing]] part.


Support - I'm really tired of getting my bot abused by him. --Ikin 00:53, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - So the problem here is spam? Why not just make it clear to Evil that he needs to stop spamming the channel? One could argue that your bot creates spam too. --Aburnett(Talk) 00:56, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

I did, I said I'll test it elsewhere. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 00:58, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Does Evilbot respond to everything in the channel, or you you have to specifically address it (like using Bot: Hai2u)? -Aburnett(Talk) 00:59, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
You you have to specifically address it using `say. --Iiii I I I 01:03, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) The 'PIE!' was a test to see if it could say something every time someone said something without a ton of 'PIE!' at once. It can do the "Bot: Hai2u" but just says "Probably". I'm going to give the DIE command to all groups so they can kill it if it spams... as soon I figure out how... Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 01:05, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Until you have a much better handle on what the bot does, it needs to stay out of the channel. --Aburnett(Talk) 01:08, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - So what's the issue here? Evil's going to test it elsewhere, thus eliminating the problem of spam. Is there any need to carry on with this discussion? Andrew talk 01:05, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

I see no need to continue discussing this. As long as Evil knows he was in the wrong and wont do it again, this shouldn't be a problem. --Aburnett(Talk) 01:08, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
He's fucking spamming up everything but no he know that it's a problem so it's fine, so if I ddos him and know it's a problem it will all be fine? --Ikin 01:15, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Megan, I'd like to remind you that DDOSing another Wikian for something like this unacceptable and will likely result in adverse action taken against you. --LiquidTalk 01:19, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
search "spam" on this --Ikin 01:24, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - We have allowed other users to test their bots in the channel, such as you Megan :P Your bot also produces a lot of spam, and provides no use on the wiki anyway so benefit of the wiki-linker could be done by another bot that does less spam then yours. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 01:22, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Did my ever spam like his, did my do a loop of [[links]] --Ikin 01:24, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
It could be his way of testing the code to get a better understanding of the bot. Having it go "^", "nou" and various other things if a user says something is also spam in the channel since it's unneeded, or having it go "cake *cries*" after someone says "caek", and various other things are also spam as they are irrelevant to the discussion going on in the channel. :P svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 01:28, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
I repeat, I have never done anything in a loop like evil did 2+ times. --Ikin 01:42, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
And I never said you did, I just said your bot also produces spam. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 01:44, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
So you're trying to make my bot look like his bot with the ^ while he had 15 lines of PIE! out any one saying it? --Ikin 01:57, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
I clearly said that both of your bots produce spam. I never once said that the amount of spam is equal. However, spam is spam and should be dealt with accordingly. We do not let people off for adding a small amount of spam into an article if other people add a lot of spam to an article. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 02:01, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Yea we do. One or two spam words gets a warning, a lot gets a block. Where have you been?--Degenret01 02:15, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
They all get a warning at the beginning, if they continue they get the block. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 02:20, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
I have seen dozens and dozens if not hundreds of blocks for first time offenses if the spam is a lot.--Degenret01 02:23, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
I've seen tons of warnings after major spam as well. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 02:25, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

No - How can I take your statement seriously of how your bot is "even more advanced then his "downloaded" bot." We don't ban bots from the IRC because a user feel their bot is better. And let's not even begin to delve into the amount of sketchy stuff you and your bot have done. It appears that this shouldn't happen again and should have ended by just notifying the user. Farming cape (t).png Lil cloud 9 Talk 02:34, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

I don't want it banned because my bot is better, I want it banned because it uses my bot plus his bot to create a lot of spam --Ikin 02:49, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Banning the bot from the channel is overkill for something that can be done with words..... svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 02:53, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Request for closure - I'll have the bot test elsewhere and I set it so anyone can use the DIE command, `die, and it will close the program running it so if it spams again anyone can kill it. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 03:04, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - The issue has sorted itself out. Since no one approves of banning the bot from the IRC completely, there is no further need for discussion. Evil has stated that he will take the bot elsewhere, meaning that further discussion is unnecessary and perhaps counterproductive. --LiquidTalk 03:10, February 4, 2011 (UTC)