• English
  • עברית עברית
  • Français Français
  • Nederlands Nederlands
  • Suomi Suomi
  • Deutsch Deutsch
  • Svenska Svenska

Latest News

port80.se delink

port80.se.quakenet.org delinking. It is with great sadness that we must farewell port80.se from QuakeNet after nearly 20 years of service. Unfortunately the hardware problems they were experiencing could not be resolved, and so the decision to delink the server was ...

Read the rest 3 comments

Merry Xmas!

QuakeNet staff wishes everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Thanks for your continuing support!

Read the rest 2 comments

New server link

New Server stockholm.se.quakenet.org As of this week we are welcoming a new server to the game, its stockholm.se.quakenet.org kindly hosted by Sunet. While we are getting a new server, we are losing an old one. Since last week portlane.se.quakenet.org has ...

Read the rest 3 comments

Trust Adding Suspended

Posted by cro on Saturday 11 January 2003

Repeat Post
In the last few months the number of requests for trusting hosts with more than 5 connections has increased significantly. This has been so dramatic that it is now the majority of support questions we get asked in both #feds and at info@quakenet.org.

We are preparing new systems to help us manage this, and discussing what reasons justify a trust from us. While we are working on this all long term trust adding is being suspended. Trusts for LAN parties and other short term events are still available and in exceptional cases, such as NAT gateways, we will consider adding a new trust. The best way to get your trust modified is to email your request to info@quakenet.org.

For people with existing trusts, you will still be able to get operator assistance for trust maintenance including time extensions, trust quantity and minor revisions to the hosts in your trustgroup.

This means that no new trusts will be granted except for LAN parties, with no exceptions.

Please log in to post comments.
Do you think that people who didn\'t read the post before (just because they don\'t look at this webby) will read it now? =)

XeNTiX said on Saturday 11 January 2003

Well, i do ;]

^WaCkY^ said on Saturday 11 January 2003

I cant speak english

eXeQdA said on Saturday 11 January 2003

seems, that maintenance means that you can write/ask for maintenance but noone will take care. i heard about ppl sending same email 4 times, and i tried myself twice.... now my question is: do you give assistence or not?

Nevermore said on Sunday 12 January 2003

Yes, we do provide support. But we do get an enormously large number of emails per day. We absolutely ignore any email about new trusts, and sometimes trust changes get missed. As a random statistic, i currently have a little under 19,000 emails in my QuakeNet inbox.

cro said on Monday 13 January 2003

Uhmm .... Uncool.. :( My .plan for today was to ask for some Trust for our Net. But im from Switzerland .. and we dont stress anybody .. so .. happy coding and thinking about a new System for adding Trusts. >>As a random statistic, i currently have a little under 19,000 emails in my QuakeNet inbox. Hehe, be happy ... other people wait each day for Mail and they get nothing ;-) ... I hope in that Box with 19tsd mails .. there are 9tsd loveletters from nice girls ;-)

Cyberchen said on Tuesday 14 January 2003

may is it possible to get a trust on a new ip i got an existing trustgroup with 170 trusts, but i have to make the new customers on the 2nd machine....?

[-SC-]Darkman said on Wednesday 15 January 2003

But when will the new system be ready? Our Clan bouncers are G lined everyday. So please only tell me, when it will be ready. In #feds they only tell me that, what I can read in the FAQ section and if I ask another question about it I get devoiced. Only One Answer when we can request new trusts. thanks

cHill3r said on Wednesday 15 January 2003

i think u should concentrate your work on creating a useful service to \"get-Q-if-i-have-L-yet-and-dont-wanna-remove-it-before\" coz it\'s horrible to remove all userflags, getting into the queue and waiting to get the case done by some qnet oper. really...i am annoyed by that. but except that, keep on yer good work qnet =)

d33pTh0ugHT said on Thursday 16 January 2003

Qnet.. We really need some kind of ETA here. This is having a negative impact on peoples businesses. We are desperate for even just ONE trust. We cannot accept anymore shell customers from Quakenet until we get some more trusts for our hosts. Please try and give a rough ETA on this!

RaNg3r said on Friday 17 January 2003

I can understund Quakenet, but i have a company and we will sell Bouncer this is not possible there Quakenet the system tinkers itself! Can Quakenet not Company\'s give trust? I hope your team can Help us!

TS|r3c0iL said on Sunday 19 January 2003

Can\'t we get an Servern listening on IPv6? I mean, i have enough IPv6 adresses, so thrusts for my bnc aren\'t needed anymore. This would be an nice solution.

oxygen[ghn] said on Monday 20 January 2003

lol guys. well i though Qnet done everything right, cause there are now to many bouncer-company well thats not the prob, but the prob is. That every 2. user or company let just the \"BNC\'s\" on an channel idling. Just to show how big his channel is (with clones). Well that suxx, and qnet cant g-line them everyday or everyweek. That\'s why i think that is the right way to control the Trust function. so hf on Qnet and cro says : Thanks for flying on Quakenet Dayta

pG-djx said on Tuesday 21 January 2003

pG-djx, if that is indeed Quakenets attitude, then its a narrow minded one. \"Oh a few shell companys are making clones in channels... lets just remove trust adding all together\"... I doubt that\'s what they\'ve done. They\'ve already said why they\'ve suspended trusts... Because so many people are asking for them, they need a better system to manage it. But this is starting to loose people money, and annoy customers that, up to now have been patient. We still have no ETA to give them either!

RaNg3r said on Tuesday 21 January 2003

Time to comment. First, Ranger: We do not get paid to run QuakeNet. We do not get paid to provide services. Yet you want us to devote our spare time and resources - and our own money - so that you can make more money from selling services on QuakeNet? That\'s extremely arrogant on your part, I must say.

cro said on Wednesday 22 January 2003

(part 2) I really don\'y care that shell & BNC companies are losing money because we suspended the trust system. I get paid a very large amount of money per hour for my time and effort, time and effort I donate freely to QuakeNet. ranger, I am afraid you have lost my respect entirely - all you appear to be interested in is making money from my effort, without bothering to recompense me or anyone else who puts time into QuakeNet.

cro said on Wednesday 22 January 2003

(part 3) for pG-djx: The new trust system will have much more defined rules, one of which will be related directly to idle BNCs, and will also include very strict guidelines for companies wanting to make money from QuakeNet. These guidelines will be enforced, because we do not care that you make money from using QuakeNet\'s freely provided service - we care about providing the best possible network for our users.

cro said on Wednesday 22 January 2003

(part 4) Ranger: you have pissed me off frankly. I may just deny you a trust at all, since we do not have to give *anyone* a trust, even if they ask. What\'s your trustid?

cro said on Wednesday 22 January 2003

If anyone wants to continue this discussion (and feel free), then create a forum post in the general-whatever forum.

Deckard said on Wednesday 22 January 2003

#cro i accept ur comment. I am anyway against bnc-company on Quakenet. so let them just die, thats not our prob :`) Dayta

pG-djx said on Thursday 23 January 2003


sLy` said on Sunday 26 January 2003

i think the bnc hosters (as mine) are good for the quakenet so they guaranty the q net more users. i have to say that the qnet has the best service in trusts. i has seen many ircs in 8 years this is my new home.. so stay and wait qnet will be it good (hope so ;) ) greez

[-SC-]Darkman said on Monday 27 January 2003

Hmm, i have a big problem with my oidentd :| It fails and i dont know why, if i start it: oidentd --reply ws Then the identd goes into \"ws\" becurse the fail, some body knowns this error ? plz help :| Server info: Debian: 2.2.20-idepci

WarChild said on Tuesday 28 January 2003

As Deckard said, I did try and continue this in the forum however it\'s been locked. cro, you say all I care about is making money from Quakenet. That\'s not true, but what I do care about is loosing money and getting glined. I know time is donated by opers, infact, I would be prepared to pay for our trusts being added if that was an option...!

RaNg3r said on Wednesday 29 January 2003

All I did was ask for an ETA! I also said that if pG-djx\'s comments were true, they would be norrow minded. I didn\'t insult anyone! I don’t see why you think it’s unreasonable to ask for a rough ETA (If we have to wait weeks, months or years). I like Quakenet, that’s why I’m here! I’m saddened by the response and abuse I\'ve just seen! I’ve been a long time user of Quakenet, and just shocked.

RaNg3r said on Wednesday 29 January 2003

I don’t see what I’ve said that could be so insulting. I’m sorry if I did offend you, cro, it was not my intension. [Apologies for multiple posts – forums are down]

RaNg3r said on Wednesday 29 January 2003

Good thing you\'re fixing a new system :) bad luck for me thou cuz me and my clan just ordered 10 bncs but we\'ll hopefully have different vhosts :) If I would be rich, or earn alot of money on qnet, I WOULD give QuakeNet some percent of it! Without Qnet I would be nothing. Good bye ;-)

Ricken said on Sunday 02 February 2003

Well, I\'m happy for Quakenet is making a service to handle all trust\'s, many shell/bnc companies have alot of idle user\'s online, just to get more \"idlers\". Well Quakenet is going crazy with idler\'s, \"idle in my chan, so I get more users\" - I dont see the point with that.. A channel is to chat in, not idle, right? Or have I misunderstood something?

AssA said on Wednesday 05 February 2003

My suggestion would be to be made the trusts liable to pay the costs, but not very expensively. That would be an acceptable loss for the BNC offerer and a considerable profit for the Qnet. Iam an BNC hoster too, and i think this is a fair deal

]ct[-Bleifish said on Thursday 06 March 2003

i think 1 € cent per trust is good, it sound not much , but so i have to pay ca. 100€ per month

]ct[-Bleifish said on Thursday 06 March 2003

ups, i mean 10 € cent

]ct[-Bleifish said on Thursday 06 March 2003

Not good, I run a BNC\\Shell service and my trust expired, Now I am out a buisness and now my customers have to goto someone else.I cant even get my trust renwed either, Well, Unfortunatly I am moveing to another network after Quakenet\'s total ignorance to people. Goodbye quakenet :\'(

BavarianExtulas said on Saturday 22 March 2003

When do you think your new trust system is running again. Its just because this news is a litle old, so i just wondered?

zatoR^ said on Sunday 25 May 2003

Yep, my BNC server got G-Lined aswel. Very annoying - why do quakenet do this? The server only has port 80 open out of the list of bad ports. And Apache is on port 80... I think quakenet should be more carefull about banning people.

r3nz0re said on Thursday 11 November 2004