(non insulting rant to follow)
yes but it gets back to compatibility tho. If mirc has something they're not compatible with, the conversation/arguments becomes circular in that it never ends. We give them a chance, they dont add said option, mirc is no longer "in par" with the rest of them and thus not compatible with them. The arguement of mirc should stay compatible locks mirc into getting only that which OTHER clients would get and thus playing second fiddle (on SOEME things) to other programs who ahve said options but possible developed differently. Personally I honestly think of it like this ............. saying mirc should 1) set the example 2) be as compatable as it can with others when they arent compatible with mirc is rediculous............. since we KNOW a joint venture will most likely NEVER happen (I illustrate the vast differences in IRCds and their functions and which modes should be added into the channel central) then mirc is stuck. It needs to be original not a copycat of all the others. Ive seen arguments for mirc to have one thing or another that said other program has and a lot of the arguements have been "no because others cant support it". So ok, a good feature doesnt get added because smoe other program out there doesnt support it. Isnt that kind of insane?? This type of argument/debate will continue tho until the IRC clients of the world at least talk to each other more than the IRCd coders of the world have and decide on some things. I know people dont agree with me and will point out why and that's fine, I just dont think mirc should worried about other client's when they're OBVIOUSLY not worried about mirc based off of features both external (meaning others see it) and internal
