Re^2: keep a user signed in

Had to downvote. You can't approve a SOPW and attack it the way you did. If you thought the OP was using it for that purpose, it should have been considered instead of approved.

You're pretty much saying it's okay but it's not.

Now I am indifferent about this but then again, I didn't approve and then attack.

To get back on topic and to answer the question. It is possible and really not that hard to do. You should first check the time out period and write your bot NICELY so it only goes active when it needs to and not any more.

Comment on Re^2: keep a user signed in

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: keep a user signed in by GrandFather (Saint) on Nov 13, 2005 at 20:24 UTC
I approved it because it was an Anonymous Monk post and the original poster (assuming that he is not a monk in hiding) would otherwise not see see the original post (or indeed see any replies that may be made) and may be tempted to post again. In general beating on a limited resource in this fashion is a Bad Thing^TM. Note that any bot in this case is bad because it is keeping a channel locked, but unused, and is therefore denying other users access so that OP can come along, without regard to anyone else, at his leisure and use the limited resource. The pathalogical case comes when all the "users" are bots and no-one actually uses the site. Do you want to encourage that? Perl is Huffman encoded by design.	[reply]
Re^3: keep a user signed in by polettix (Vicar) on Nov 13, 2005 at 22:18 UTC
I think that approving a post to PM and agree its contents are two quite different and somehow unrelated things. The OP was quite in-topic and not offensive. This is something that IMHO qualifies a node for approval in the PM sense - freedom to speak. OTOH, I could be strongly against what the OP contains, and I like to think that there's space to express one's thoughts. Again, freedom to speak. IMHO, that "competition" stuff was a bit exagerated independently on who approved the OP - but this is only my humble opionion. Flavio perl -ple'$_=reverse' <<<ti.xittelop@oivalf Don't fool yourself.	[reply]
Re^3: keep a user signed in by ysth (Canon) on Nov 14, 2005 at 02:40 UTC
Approving is about publicity, not agreement.	[reply]