an IRC channel

Pim van Riezen pi at
Fri Dec 1 16:51:34 UTC 2000

Jose Eugenio Marchesi <jemarch at> tapped some keys and

> On Fri, 1 Dec 2000, Alessandro Rubini wrote:
> > No, thanks. This requires people being online and leaves no written 
> > record.  IRC is not for serious discussion or serious people, in my
> > opinion.
> I think is the people that makes the communication system serious, not 
> the communication system the people.

Yes and no. Don't take it the wrong way, I operate both an efnet and an
undernet irc server from our network. IRC is a good medium for acquiring
"subliminal knowledge", the "sucking clue out of others" factor. And it's
nice for being playful and toying around. Obviously I like irc or I wouldn't
put energy in it.

IRC is also well-suited to handle synchronization of incidental work. It's a
really bad platform for guided discussion, though, even more so if it
involves more than three or four people with different schedules and
priorities. Even the undernet and efnet administrators don't discuss
policy/strategy issues online, it gets done in mail.


conf t
no ip-directed marketing drivel
wr mem

More information about the Discussion mailing list