Criticism to Efnet #mIRC

1/23/2009.

Equivalent to real life situation.

Suppose, jails and prisons were set up electronically. That is, when a police officer throws a fully-convicted person in the jail or prison cell, the officer locks the door, but uses a computer to control when to automatically unlock the door.

So he types into the computer, for example, 1 week. Then, 1 week later, the door automatically unlocks itself. Then, the prisoner, can open the door and walk out and out of jail. So then the person walks out.

Should the police officers be okay with it? Yes, absolutely, because the person did his jail time. Should the police officers instantly re-arrest him and throw him back in the cell? No, absolutely not, because the ban of the prisoner is expired.

But, suppose, to relate more to my particular case, that the police officer does not actually tell the prisoner how long he is locked up for. So let's say, the police officer typed in the computer for the door to be automatically unlocked after 3 weeks, but does not tell the prisoner this.

Then, the prisoner has no clue how long he is locked up for. So every morning, he will try to see if the door will open and find it fails, until, of course, 3 weeks later.

This is where it would be unethical for the security guards to decide to further lock him back in the cell is his ban has successfully been removed.

(We can have other arguments, such as, if a police officer A sets the lock for 3 weeks on the computer, and towards the end, a 2nd police officer B, decides to further lengthen the ban of the prisoner on the computer.)

Of course, in reality, prisoners know how long they will stay in jail or prison because the judge usually tells them, and then the police officers enforce that.

But in any event, since my problem is on IRC, or to simply put, the Internet, there is often no such fair system anywhere, except in my chatrooms of course. So the real relation here is that all the police officers here are in charge of how long each prisoner stays, and completely up to each officer's discretion on whether a ban shuld be removed (or when whether a prisoner should be set free).

My situation.

I was permanently banned from Efnet #mIRC. Why? Because I wrote an unban script. That is, whenever a person was unbanned from the chatroom, I will instantly and automatically notify them of that unban. If they left the network or turned off the computer, etc., then they won't know about it and my message to them wouldn't have relayed to them if they can't receive. But if they were still on (connected to) that network, then they can instantly rejoin that chatroom right after the operator unbans them (usually after an operator's script automaticaly unban them, after a specific select time).

Of course, the operator staff of the channel argued that by letting the unbanned users know they were unbanned, is a motive to invite the trouble-makers back in. Duhh.

So what is your opinion for both before and after hearing my specific situation? So by banning me from the chatroom, it is now impossible for me to notify anyone if they were unbanned from that chatroom if I myself were not in there.

My philosophy: always remember, the importance of a ban is as equally important as the importance of the unban.

This is the same when it comes to police officers and arrests.

Further notes.