Re: *** VOTE *** Permlink of cookies

Heh. This was when talk was made on irctoo to merge with blitzed. Again
another out of context hit on me. I do not understand it honestly. Most
here will realize that Dave is admin of icezip.com, his email is
[email protected]

irctoo at this point had cable modem servers in the uk linked, and it was
in discussion as to whether all of our servers would be linked or not. Why
would I crack on a network I was proposing to merge our network with.
irctoo has been dieing since 2001, pretty much right after it was created.

***I ADMIT*** that I have said blitzed was 'a network of cable modems
slapped together' in the past. At the time it did have cable modems, and
it was by *no* means as established as it is today. This was said when I
was being approached to join blitzed in the very beginning. I have *never*
held a grudge against blitzed or anyone on it, regardless of what some may
think.

Anyway you really had me wondering what the heck that log was from, it
took me awhile to search through mine to find that date in my email. If
anyone wishes the context to my conversation with dave, email him and ask.


toodles
andy

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Andy Smith wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 05:34:27PM -0400, Andrew wrote:
> > Wow, right back to the beginning eh. I did make this comment, though it is
> > taken out of context. When asked to join blitzed after finally giving up
> > on xnet I did say I needed more of a network structure than a couple cable
> > modem servers slapped together (or something along those lines). This was
> > very near the birth of the network. I do not remember who I would have
> > been talking to, most likely it was in an open channel directed either at
> > epsilon or cryptr.
>
> Apr 19 03:59:23 <Dave> hey, are any of the servers here by chance cable modems?
> Apr 19 04:00:00 <grifferz> no. peanut is business dsl, which is the closest.
> Apr 19 04:00:00 --- [Dave] is away (out!@ [7.00p])
> Apr 19 04:00:02 <grifferz> why?
> Apr 19 04:00:32 <grifferz> in earlier days we had accepted cable modems.  but now we are big enough to not accept them.
> Apr 19 04:00:50 <Dave> just caught wind of some rumors, didnt think it was true
> Apr 19 04:00:58 <grifferz> oh?
> Apr 19 04:03:48 <Dave> also, if we apply, ther'll prolly be a guy applying that runs a newnet server applying shortly after
> Apr 19 04:03:55 <Dave> ther'll=they'll
> Apr 19 04:04:17 <grifferz> you haven't been talking to someone called "Fraggle" have you?
> Apr 19 04:36:37 <Dave> heh
> Apr 19 04:36:39 <Dave> yup
> Apr 19 04:36:50 <Dave> how'd you guess that?
> Apr 19 04:45:28 <grifferz> slander about cable modems is his style, every time I hear about newnet it reminds me of him, and he connected here earlier, said nothing and left.  a number of the staff here came from xnet where both I and Fraggler were admins and his dislike of me was made clear then, though never really sure why.
> Apr 19 05:03:20 <Dave> him and i dont really talk, but he likes me for whatever reason
> Apr 19 05:03:37 <Dave> i thim him and i have had like 5 lines of convo
> Apr 19 05:07:55 <grifferz> we have had cable modems as servers before.  when you are very small you take when you can get.  fraggle should appreciate that this network was built from nothing, and it is not easy to have high principles about cable modems when you have 10 users and some guy with a cable modem has another 10
> Apr 19 05:08:50 <grifferz> but I think all of the people in charge of deciding which servers are linked appreciate that cable modems are not suitable or reliable enough, and often they are run against the AUP of their ISP.
> Apr 19 05:09:03 <grifferz> we already have too many servers as it is
> Apr 19 05:10:39 <grifferz> anyway, I really must sleep for a few hours now, see you later
> Apr 19 05:16:44 <Dave> later
> Apr 20 00:09:55 *** Dave (~dave-9ft6pBsG/[email protected]) Quit (Quit: Leaving)
>
> April 2002.
>
> I don't think I have anything more to contribute in this thread.
>