Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Keep It Simple, Stupid

Re: Chatty CB bot(s)

by Intrepid (Deacon)
on Aug 11, 2008 at 04:23 UTC ( #703539=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Chatty CB bot(s)

I am very strongly opposed to a bot that is allowed to speak publicly in the cb.

I propose that if a bot were created and blessed for cb operation at all, it would be ok for it to respond to public stimulus (like: "chatterbot, stats Barrd") with a private reply, and the sending of a brief and uninteresting action report to the cb, like: "[chatterbot] has replied to [<some-monk>]".

The use of the brief acknowledgement / status action message would prevent the confusion, silliness and disorderliness of seeing people appearing to be speaking to an entity that does not ever appear to answer.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Chatty CB bot(s) (priv req++)
by tye (Sage) on Aug 11, 2008 at 04:46 UTC

    Actually, I find private reply to public requests to be an even more unacceptable mode due to causing as great an increase in noise but with zero increase in information. It can even lead to copy-cat requests as those watching get curious what the previous requesters got shown privately. Afterall, the limitation on the CB is the number of lines (never more than 10 shown) so an action report still consumes 10% of the available real estate while providing almost nothing of value.

    To reduce noise in the CB, it would actually be better to have requests to a bot be made only via private message with the option of requesting either private or public reply. A public reply would mention who asked for it and so could provide all of the available information in a single line of chatter.

    - tye        

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://703539]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others imbibing at the Monastery: (9)
As of 2018-04-20 15:09 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?