I don't know what planet you all live on, but the issue of whether ban evasion is a right or not is largely irrelevant.
It's entirely relevant, though not the only issue raised. When IRC was first introduced there was no real means to ban someone from a room. Why is this so? Because IRC was largely an unknown protocol and used only by professional computer users who had better things to do with their time than annoy other users.
When IRC began to appeal more to the masses they used to ban people like texmex by putting the room on +i (a mode that did exist at the time) and then kick the user out and simply restrict all entry until the channel owners hoped and prayed that the fool had left the server and found something else to occupy their time.
Soon after, someone suggested a more powerful and configurable way of dealing with troublemakers and mode +b was conceived. +b meant that specific connection details and/or nicknames could be banned from rooms without affecting innocent people. The trouble we have today is that people like you and texmex are determined to make +b an outmoded way of dealing with trouble.
As for IRC EULAs, AUPs or whatever you choose to call them, connecting to an IRC server does not signify an acceptance of such an agreement. These agreements are quasi-law at best, and one is not under an obligation to abide by those.
This depends on the country the server is located in and largely comes under civil law, regardless of the country. When you log into IRC you are presented with the message of the day which more often than not contains the terms (or a link to a website containing an AUP, etc) governing your use of the server/service. By continuing to use that server/service you are entering into an implied agreement to follow those terms. Failure to honour an agreement is classed as a breach of contract which leaves the offender liable to legal action which more often than not results in formal complaints to ISPs and in some cases the Police if a criminal offence is being committed. How this can be regarded as quasi-law is beyond me. I've been a server admin for quite a while and have had to deal with people getting past bans and I have had to, in cases where a person simply cannot be brought to understand what "You are not welcome on this server" means, sent a formal complaint to their ISP. Out of my habit of statesmanship I always include a reason for banning someone and quite frankly I am heartily sick and tired of people using proxies to circumvent my attempt to bring some peace back to a situation. Even worse is people like you who think it is okay for someone to deny they are the troublemaker and provide them with a means to reconnect. My thanks to Karen for removing the link you posted.
As far as I can tell, the poster has been banned unfairly and wishes for help on using a proxy so that he can get around the ban. I can't see that this is against my moral standards or any Norwegian laws, so here goes:
What are the chances that the user is not wanting to connect to a Norwegian server? I'd suggest that the chance is better than average therefore Norwegian law does not apply. At any rate my only reference to law originally was texmex connecting to someone's proxy without their permission. I am sure that Norwegians who own servers would disapprove of their IP being used to evade a ban as they are then responsible for any undesirable activity that texmex, or any other ban evader causes.
Above is a very helpful URL that will tell you how to set your mIRC up to work through a proxy. Of course, you don't have to subscribe to the proxy advertised on that page, you can use any proxy you can find that conforms to the standard.
Showing someone how to get themselves into further trouble is NOT helpful. It's stupid and a very bad reflection on you. You are worse than him because you "showed him the ropes".
I would ask myself though, "is it worth it?" Remember that you're trying to join a channel that chose to blanket ban you and many others.
Remember also that he is likely to raise eyebrows on his return. He'll most likely use the same nickname and the hosts of the channel will remember that he was asking to be unbanned. At the end of the day, it's not really worth the bother.
