New `draft/policy` cap

[ValwareIRC]

I think it'd be great for a server to properly display its terms and conditions to a client, whether that be pre-connect so that can review and possibly be forced to accept before connecting or registering an account, and so whether this should even be part of the Account Registration spec is something to consider, since you could require it for general connections depending on the server implementation, which would be nicer imo.

Edit: I've updated my proposed specification to allow multiple different kinds of policies which is designed to enhance user UX regarding policy transparency. This not only allows server admins to force a user to review their terms of service etc before being allowed to connect, it also gives the user a chance to decline and disconnect before even sending a NICK command if they don't like what they see.

[slingamn]

How would you confirm in-band that the terms were accepted?

[ValwareIRC]

Using /CONSENT - Here's a draft spec about it

[SadieCat]

This feels like the kind of thing that would either be something that would make IRC harder for people to use or just be entirely automated away by client developers which wouldn't be considered legally binding.

[ValwareIRC]

GDPR Privacy Policy isn't the only usecase, think of it in the same vein as when you join a subreddit, sometimes you have to click to agree to the rules before being allowed to join. It's the same in most things in the world, IRC seems to be the only place where you have to sneak the privacy policy into the motd which is not enough. This just asks your users to accept it. Whether a bot automates the process or not happens in other situations already and is a common thing to deal with.

All this is spec is designed to do is make the user click agree to your rules, t&c's, privacy policy, whatever you need them to agree to before joining your server.

[slingamn]

The proper analogue of the subreddit in an IRC context would seemingly be the channel, not the server.

[ValwareIRC]

I'm not against implementing something for channel policies, but it is also common for a server to set server-wide policies, and it's the server that implements the services/registration mechanism, so I think both could be nice idea.

[ValwareIRC]

I've updated my proposed specification to allow multiple different kinds of policies which is designed to enhance user UX regarding policy transparency.