hi, why not to implement a service of webcam so that mIRC has the option like to send to private to a user?

Webcam implementation has been discussed extensively, you may wish to search the forums using the search feature, remembering to expand the date to 5 years, and read the myriad other threads on the issue.

If you search Google for 'ByteCam' there is a DLL out there I believe which does what you want.

Regards,

Because then mIRC would suck.

A reasoned and well-thought out response. Well done...

How about people only reply if they've got something useful to say?

Are people not allowed to offer their input/opinion regarding the request of a feature? We all use mIRC. We will all have to deal with the video requests when (IF) this or anything like this is implemented. Mentality already gave the necessary information. My reply is just an opinion so no further elaboration was necessary. How useful was your reply?

because this is mIRC not web chat

I'm terribly sorry, I didn't realise "it would suck" was a valid and worthwhile opinion in itself. I was under the impression that things like reasons were necessary in order for an opinion to be of any use in a discussion.

From your second post it implies your problem is that you would be barraged with video chats. Just like we're all flooded non-stop with DCC CHAT and FILE SEND requests, right? I know I can't go more than 7 seconds without somebody trying to DCC me in some form and it's really annoyi-- oh, no, wait, it's been about 10 years since I was sent a DCC request I hadn't explicitly invited.

You're entitled to your opinions of course, and you may think this would spell the end of IRC as we know it - misguided as I may think that is, but "mIRC would suck" is worthless flamebait unless you're willing to give a reason for why you think that. It isn't too much to ask is it?

How about calling someone an idiot? Couldn't that be a non-worthwhile post in itself?

That was General Discussion not Feature Suggestions, and the post as a whole was useful: I was trying to stop the thread being hijacked by yourself and another user and going completely off-topic. And here you go again...

If you've got a problem with me take up in private messages or report me to a moderator, don't try and bring your petty issues into another thread.

Heard of /ignore ?

Oh, I get it. You differentiate between making a useless point in a post where the rest of the post (majority) was useful.

Likewise, if you only said something useless, you would find the entire post useless. So you have to put the useless sentence in a post where the rest of it would make it 99% useful and such..

But my point was not the usefulness of the entire post.

My point was on the usefulness on the specific sentence in topic - calling someone an idiot.

I think it is childish and such, but - that's just my opinion. Not a fact.

I find it somewhat disturbing that name-calling will happen in all ages and all levels of intelligence, from children to teens to adults, and so and so forth.

-Neal.

And when you define that it isn't okay to make a post where the message was useless, you have to make an exception. You have to make an exception that it isn't okay to make a useless post, but it is okay to point out that a post was useless.

-total flame, another one of these and you're gone.-

Like I said: If you don't like me calling an idiot you have two means of recourse: Send me a private message on the boards or report me to a moderator. Neither of these means hijack somebody's thread to make it about you. Again.

Note to Mods: If anyone wants to delete my posts in this thread and the subsequent responses I'd appreciate it. Unfortunately I tried to appeal to people's sense of reason on the Internet - a rookie mistake.

Likewise, to Rock's defense, I think the real problem is when people don't like or value other people's certain opinions.

Even though we like to draw the line that smart/rational people have "better" opinions than dumber/irrational people (subjectively), I do agree we should have the equal-opportunity opinion. Which means everyone has the equal priviledge of expressing their opinion. Which means no one actually makes fun of people for their opinions - we only point out their flaws or errors or their mistakes only to better their views if we dislike their opinion (or take offense to it, in particular cases).

-Neal.

That's like saying it's okay for you to call someone an idiot in a public thread, but that person can only reply to you in p.m.. You basically limit their choices and such.

-Neal.

May I quote a forum guideline posted by d00dman, in a sticky thread which all 3 of you, LostShadow/Rock/Starbucks, know about:



This is the third thread I've locked in the past 48 hours, and it has not gone unnoticed that there's a couple of people (yes, you're one of them LostShadow) that seem to be the main antagonists of all three of them. If I have to do it again I will ban you indefinitely from the forums.

I can see virtually no reason for any of you to have posted beyond my reply, and all 3 of you know how to behave here and what is expected of you.

Now let's go back to the long period of relative harmony we had on these forums until recently, and less of the flame threads. Thank you.

Regards,