|
Grex > Agora35 > #22: I remember when valerie busted me for using an idle zpper called "netwatch" :) | |
|
| Author |
Message |
jp2
|
|
I remember when valerie busted me for using an idle zpper called "netwatch" :)
| 
Sep 24 16:16 UTC 2000 |
This item has been erased.
|
| 57 responses total. |
jp2
|
|
response 1 of 57:
|
Sep 24 16:16 UTC 2000 |
This response has been erased.
|
jp2
|
|
response 2 of 57:
|
Sep 24 16:16 UTC 2000 |
This response has been erased.
|
willard
|
|
response 3 of 57:
|
Sep 24 16:19 UTC 2000 |
Hahahahaha. :-) Okay, all kidding aside, I think I'm gonna go
purchase a Grex membership now.
|
jp2
|
|
response 4 of 57:
|
Sep 24 16:27 UTC 2000 |
This response has been erased.
|
willard
|
|
response 5 of 57:
|
Sep 24 16:30 UTC 2000 |
Yeah, I know -- in actuality, he's a really swell guy.
|
scott
|
|
response 6 of 57:
|
Sep 24 16:55 UTC 2000 |
Golly, you missed the best one! It's the one where (with very bad grace) Mike
actually knuckles under and agrees to obey the rules:
Re: Idle Zapper
From: Mike Smallwood <willard@cyberspace.org>
To: Scott Helmke <scott@wwnet.net>
Cc: staff@grex.org
I won't run anti-idle stuff anymore, just stay the fuck out of my
directory.
-M
|
willard
|
|
response 7 of 57:
|
Sep 24 16:56 UTC 2000 |
There's a difference between saying I'll obey the rules and actually
obeying the rules.
|
md
|
|
response 8 of 57:
|
Sep 24 17:03 UTC 2000 |
UN-believable.
|
sno
|
|
response 9 of 57:
|
Sep 24 18:31 UTC 2000 |
It is a simple thing to run anti-idle stuff from offline. I do it all
the time to keep my ppp connection from dropping when I step away.
|
tod
|
|
response 10 of 57:
|
Sep 24 19:47 UTC 2000 |
Do you get it edited by Grex staff?
|
janc
|
|
response 11 of 57:
|
Sep 25 16:16 UTC 2000 |
Obviously anyone with half a brain can figure out that if you run the anti-
idle stuff on the client side instead of the server side then there is no way
in the world Grex staff can detect it or stop it. Doing this for reasons
like what sno describes isn't even a problem as far as Grex is concerned.
The reason one runs anti-idle stuff is so you won't get logged off of Grex
if you hold your telnet connection for a long time without using it. This
avoids having to wait in the telnet queue and type your login when you want
to get back on again. The only cost is that dozens of people you don't
even know have to wait longer in the telnet queue so that you can have
instant access to Grex.
If this sounds like a good idea to you, then you are an asshole. It's
against the rules however you do it, but you can certainly get away with
breaking this rule if you try.
|
tod
|
|
response 12 of 57:
|
Sep 25 17:10 UTC 2000 |
Jim Brady has half a brain. Can he figure out how to run it?
|
jazz
|
|
response 13 of 57:
|
Sep 25 17:36 UTC 2000 |
He can write legislature and advocate its' passing. I'd imagine so.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 14 of 57:
|
Sep 25 17:42 UTC 2000 |
re: 11 -- Before I ask this, I'd like you (and everyone else) to keep in mind
that I've never run an anti-idle script.
Could you please point me to the rules? When "bad" things happen on Grex,
staff says "it's against the rules", but I've not seen any "rules" posted.
In all honesty, how can you expect willard, or anyone else to comply with
rules that aren't clearly posted?
|
jazz
|
|
response 15 of 57:
|
Sep 25 17:50 UTC 2000 |
Some of that, Kevin, is common sense. It shouldn't need to be spelled
out that it's bad for someone to urinate on your porch, even if they're
standing sufficiently far away as to not be technically trespassing.
|
scott
|
|
response 16 of 57:
|
Sep 25 17:57 UTC 2000 |
How do you find out?
Assuming you're not doing something like running obvious hax0r things, in
which case you're already aware of your wrongdoing, then either you'll have
already seen messages about running not-allowed programs (such as seeing the
huge warnings in ftp about eggdrop), or staff will warn you.
Willard has ignored warnings, and by all rights could have had his account
locked days ago. We are being nice and letting him stay on, since he's
promised not to run such things again. As it now, he's running dumb things
that deliberately look like trouble, but aren't.
|
willard
|
|
response 17 of 57:
|
Sep 25 18:16 UTC 2000 |
What business do you have looking at the contents of my files to
discover that they aren't trouble? My idle timer is incrementing, so
it's quite obvious that I'm not doing what you think I am.
STAY THE FUCK OUT OF MY DIRECTORY, SCOTT. FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, those
files are not yours to look at, you fucking prick.
|
willard
|
|
response 18 of 57:
|
Sep 25 18:42 UTC 2000 |
(What makes me even more upset about this is that not only did scott
open my files again, but he revealed the contents to the group at
large in his response to this item.)
|
jazz
|
|
response 19 of 57:
|
Sep 25 19:00 UTC 2000 |
The goal of such behaviour is generally to harass staff members into
doing anything without the benefit of quite a bit of reflection, and then
demanding action when they do. It works considerably better on m-net, which
has a much more liberally selected staff and board, and has staff that follow
the same lines of thinking (as you can see).
It does pain me to see the depths to which a system that, a few years
ago, I worked very hard on, has fallen, and to see the behaviour of the script
kiddies that have inherited it. But that's life.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 20 of 57:
|
Sep 25 19:02 UTC 2000 |
Mike,
I avoided commenting on your public behavior all spring and summer. It was
pretty stupid stuff, and annoyed some people, but it didn't harm anyone.
I'm not technically sophisticated enough to tell when your private behavior
is harming Grex users. I count on staff to handle the problems so that allof
us have equal access to Grex resources when we are here.
Your attitude of assumed ignorance and a need to have a specific rule against
what you are doing pointed out to you indicates to me that you aren't simply
being annoying, but have actually moved to the point of attempting activities
that are specifically not allowed. Your "catch-me-if-you-can" attitude, and
your bizarre claim that we cannot use general statements as justification for
staff actions are not only provocative, they are wasting another Grex
resource: staff time.
I applaud the extra consideration staff has given to how to handle your
behavior. I cheer them on for taking action against it. And I want them to
continue to do so, using whatever technical expertise they have, so that I
and hundreds of other Grex users are not inconvenienced by YOUR technical
terrorist behavior.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 21 of 57:
|
Sep 25 19:02 UTC 2000 |
re: 15 -- Aaaah...but it is, in fact, illegal to urinate on my front porch.
There are laws against public urination. (I believe South Lyon has a city
ordinance that carries a fine along with the misdemeanor)
|
gull
|
|
response 22 of 57:
|
Sep 25 19:59 UTC 2000 |
If you put unencrypted files on a multiuser system that people other than
yourself have root access to, and then expect total privacy, you're either
naive or an idiot.
|
janc
|
|
response 23 of 57:
|
Sep 25 22:12 UTC 2000 |
> STAY THE FUCK OUT OF MY DIRECTORY, SCOTT. FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, those
> files are not yours to look at, you fucking prick.
The rules here aren't necessarily what you say they are. If you want to
rewrite the rules you need to convince either staff, board, or a majority
of the members that the policy you suggest is the one that should apply
here. (Staff can be overridden by the board, the board can be overridden
by the members.)
Meanwhile, we'll keep looking as long as you keep giving us reason to look.
> STAY THE FUCK OUT OF MY DIRECTORY, SCOTT. FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, those
> files are not yours to look at, you fucking prick.
The rules here aren't necessarily what you say they are. If you want to
rewrite the rules you need to convince either staff, board, or a majority
of the members that the policy you suggest is the one that should apply
here. (Staff can be overridden by the board, the board can be overridden
by the members.)
Meanwhile, we'll keep looking as long as you keep giving us reason to look.
|
jerryr
|
|
response 24 of 57:
|
Sep 25 23:15 UTC 2000 |
why is response #23 a "double response" what jan typed appears twice in the
response (at least to me)
|