Other IRC clients support the color codes too, and would look rather bullyish to implement a new code that would make other clients incompatible, especially those clients that are still popular but no longer being updated.

See, but there's an arguement for this. Pirch has used italics and script font (basically a symbol font that can be (de)activated via CTRL + S) but not reverse (IIRC) and has for YEARS now and mirc's not compatible with either of those two. When the script font is used mirc translates it into ASCII equivalents from your current font (at least it did). Italics (IIRC) showed a CTRL block (you know the [] looking square) instead of italicising them. Pirch ahs had these for eyars now (granted has not been unpdated in just as long).

According to your arguement (ok, your statement if you prefer that word smile that I quoted above), they never should have been implemented because of imcompatibility issues. They were added anyhow and I believe is aprt of the reason why italics are soo wanted..... because an outdated very old client has it and has for ages. We cant hold back an option JUST because it is NOT supported by other clients. Mirc should remain its own client and not be influenced by what another client may or may not support. After all, correct me if Im wrong, but Pirch also had a different fast send for the DCC than mirc did and using the same statement above, never should have done it because of incompatibility issues.

Before people start saying use Pirch, I have and like mirc better hence it being my client of choice BUT it does have things mirc doesnt and therefor the compatibility issue doesnt hold water (nearly as much)


Those who fail history are doomed to repeat it