[OTR-users] Opinions on proposed "unknown fingerprint" behaviour?

[Gregory Maxwell]

On 5/20/05, Ian Goldberg <ian at cypherpunks.ca> wrote:
> Certainly the "Private connection established" message can appear
> inline, but there still needs to be a way to bring up the fingerprint /
> session id.  [Since I believe in gaim, if there's no conversation window
> open for a given buddy, messages directed to that window are simply
> discarded.  That's OK for "Private connection established", but not for
> the session id, etc.]
> 
> I'm thinking that clicking "OTR: Private" while a private conversation
> is active will pop up a window with that info in it, and also a button
> to refresh the private conversation (the current behaviour of clicking
> "OTR: Private").  Clicking "OTR: Not private" when there's no private
> conversation will continue to initiate one.

That would be fine, but I'd think I'd like to be able to set per user
'no new fingerprints' ... If it's automagic I really don't trust
myself to notice a fingerprint change, and I have contacts whom I know
will not be changing finger prints. In the case of 'no new
fingerprints' the otr establishment should just be rejected until I go
toggle that option.

While we're doing that we can put a button inside that popup to
disable OTR. It would also be useful to have a /otr disable or
something that you can just type into the chat window. Ditto for
toggling 'no new fingerprints', I suppose.

The reason I request this is because I have some contacts who use OTR
most of the time.. but sometimes they login from some place without
OTR and my client still thinks they are running OTR.  I say something
to them, they get OTR goop, and they contiune screaming at me that
they have no OTR while I'm frantically navigating through preferences
trying to end the private session to keep them from being spammed with
OTR messages. :)