/play vs. internal flood protection - 23/06/09 03:32 AM
If the internal flood protection is turned on, /play sends all lines through this feature by default. Imho a good idea.
But in certain cases it would be quite helful to have a switch that allows to /play with the "true" delay/queue settings specified in the other switches/parameters, that is: A switch for /play to bypass mIRCs internal flood protection.
Background: Twiddling with a script that extensively uses /play, and as there's also no default identifier to return mIRCs flood protection status, I have to to get these settings with custom $readini($mircini())-identifiers, to hint the script's user to his/her conflicting flood protection settings via popup, so that he/she can adjust the flood settings or turn the protection off completely (I don't want to change it without their knowledge via /flood)
Would this switch open /play for abuse?
I think it won't. Whoever intends to flood another user or the sending client would deliberately turn the internal flood protection off or use a bunch of raw/msg instead of the versatile play command.
The internal flood protection is handy; I don't want it ignore regular /play-commands. I only want to be able to /play exactly like specified - if the right switches had been used, and without loosing the flood protection for pastes, regular messages etc.
Looking forward for your thoughts. Thanks!
But in certain cases it would be quite helful to have a switch that allows to /play with the "true" delay/queue settings specified in the other switches/parameters, that is: A switch for /play to bypass mIRCs internal flood protection.
Background: Twiddling with a script that extensively uses /play, and as there's also no default identifier to return mIRCs flood protection status, I have to to get these settings with custom $readini($mircini())-identifiers, to hint the script's user to his/her conflicting flood protection settings via popup, so that he/she can adjust the flood settings or turn the protection off completely (I don't want to change it without their knowledge via /flood)
Would this switch open /play for abuse?
I think it won't. Whoever intends to flood another user or the sending client would deliberately turn the internal flood protection off or use a bunch of raw/msg instead of the versatile play command.
The internal flood protection is handy; I don't want it ignore regular /play-commands. I only want to be able to /play exactly like specified - if the right switches had been used, and without loosing the flood protection for pastes, regular messages etc.
Looking forward for your thoughts. Thanks!