If they then try to talk in the channel they are in, the local server will allow them to do so, while other servers on the network will silently drop whatever they say (since the other servers believe they are still banned.)
I wonder... is it even really good for other servers to attempt to capture 'client banned' status and suppress messages? It seems like only the client's locally connected server should really be concerned about enforcing ban restrictions, like suppressing messages. The result of suppressing on a remote server is inconsistent operation if different servers have different opinions about a user's banned status; this is not very robust. Consider the case where baduser!*@* is banned. All the channels ops are on Server2. Most of the other channel members are on Server1, which is also the server baduser is on. Server1 and Server2 banlists are in sync, but cached member status is not -- Server1 believes baduser is not banned, Server2 believes baduser is banned. As a result, baduser can flood and send other nasty messages to his heart's content. None of the ops can see it, but all the members on Server1 have to endure it. What should happen is Server2 should either pass the messages or detect them as a sign of desync, and take some sort of remediary action.... But just silently discarding messages is pretty bad; I wouldn't count that as remediary action, it just serves to partially conceal (from some channel members) that something is going wrong... -- -J