|
|
| Author |
Message |
mary
|
|
Open Newuser
| 
Mar 27 12:44 UTC 2005 |
Is it time to close newuser to instant access? The internet is a
big pool and we're an easy target for, essentially, the troubled who
need to act out for attention. Is Grex going to survive if we do
nothing and put all our hopes into ignoring such behavior?
Is it time we look at making Grex read only until verified in some
manner? There are many ways to put up a gate, some friendlier than
others. I'm afraid I think it's time to try something new. Sad,
but true. But things change and the internet and time have changed
Grex's pool.
How do others feel?
|
| 299 responses total. |
twenex
|
|
response 1 of 299:
|
Mar 27 12:57 UTC 2005 |
I agree.
|
scott
|
|
response 2 of 299:
|
Mar 27 13:29 UTC 2005 |
Tough call. We do seem to have acquired a couple of genuinely sick kids, and
I don't see them giving up anytime soon unless we can put some limits on them.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 3 of 299:
|
Mar 27 14:11 UTC 2005 |
Why not try the usual tool of blocking their IP addresses before resorting
to more drastic measures?
|
other
|
|
response 4 of 299:
|
Mar 27 15:59 UTC 2005 |
While the concept is anathema to the principles upon which Grex was
founded, the alternative effectively reduces our security policy to a
petty power struggle between admins and a determined pest.
|
russ
|
|
response 5 of 299:
|
Mar 27 16:08 UTC 2005 |
I suggest that Grex do SOMETHING, pronto. Agora is a cesspool, and
filtration cannot replace the discussion that's being driven off.
By all means, let's start with IP blocks. We can talk about other
measures while we watch the results.
|
twenex
|
|
response 6 of 299:
|
Mar 27 16:09 UTC 2005 |
While the concept is anathema to the principles upon which Grex was
founded,
Not necessarily. 'Free speech and free access' does not preclude forbidding
access to those who would use Grex for nefarious purposes. That's why free
societies still have prisons, to draw an analogy.
|
twenex
|
|
response 7 of 299:
|
Mar 27 16:09 UTC 2005 |
Russ slipped.
|
naftee
|
|
response 8 of 299:
|
Mar 27 16:16 UTC 2005 |
Great. First, one of your staff members deletes part of a file belonging to
an item in coop, in order to prevent the item from being a "cesspool". Now,
you guys want to ban rootshell.
Fuckers.
|
keesan
|
|
response 9 of 299:
|
Mar 27 16:45 UTC 2005 |
How many new users do we get per day, on average?
|
slynne
|
|
response 10 of 299:
|
Mar 27 17:22 UTC 2005 |
I have mixed feelings about changing our new user policy. Obviously we
have a problem but it seems a shame to change something so fundamental
to what I see as Grex's philosophy. I am open to discussing it though.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 11 of 299:
|
Mar 27 17:23 UTC 2005 |
In the case of the "determined pest," IP blocks have been shown to be useless:
There are too many places on the Internet that do _not_ block outbound access
to unidentified users.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 12 of 299:
|
Mar 27 17:26 UTC 2005 |
The only option I see is to close newuser. However, I don't think it will
work: the limits have to be published, so it's just a matter of waiting for
the limit to expire, then it's back to business as usual.
|
remmers
|
|
response 13 of 299:
|
Mar 27 17:37 UTC 2005 |
Three years ago I wouldn't have said this, but I agree that something
needs to be done and favor trying the least intrusive means possible as
a first step. That might indeed by some proactive blocking of IP
addresses used by chronic abusers. We need to keep in mind, I think,
that the chronic abusers, althouh quite prolific, are *very few in
number*, so hopefully not much action would be necessary. I'd like to
keep newuser open if at all possible.
Re #11: In the email world, blocking of open SMTP relays is now
standard practice. Maybe we could borrow an idea from that. Would it
be feasible for us to identify and block sites that allow outbound
access to unidentified users? Does anyone maintain a list of these?
|
russ
|
|
response 14 of 299:
|
Mar 27 20:25 UTC 2005 |
laston effe mccoy promisc flocker baga
effe ttyp3 at Sun Mar 27 12:57:31 2005 from bsd.miki.eu.org
mccoy ttyp2 at Sun Mar 27 13:49:25 2005 from bsd.miki.eu.org
promisc ttyp1 at Sun Mar 27 13:38:37 2005 from bsd.miki.eu.org
flocker ttypd at Sun Mar 27 15:19:10 2005 from gnook.org (on line)
baga ttypb at Sun Mar 27 13:02:51 2005 from phenix.rootshell.be
Doesn't look too difficult to cut off their access.
|
keesan
|
|
response 15 of 299:
|
Mar 28 04:51 UTC 2005 |
Loky phenix.rootshell.be
Should there be some policy as to what is suitable cause for blocking?
Do we ask members to vote on each address?
|
mary
|
|
response 16 of 299:
|
Mar 28 11:52 UTC 2005 |
I'd suggest doing the following:
1. Close newuser immediately with the message we are having a system
problem and as soon as it can be resolved newuser will be reopened.
2. Current abuser accounts are suspended.
3. Staff gets together as soon as possible to come to an agreement
as to how best to block specific sites.
4. Newuser is reopened to test the fix and again closed it if
blocking doesn't work.
5. With our actions we make a strong statement the party is over.
Grex is, basically, unusable for a newuser who might decide check us out.
I certainly wouldn't recommend anyone give us a try. I wouldn't advertise
for new users. So close newuser until we can say otherwise.
Twit filters works, but in a limited way. Someone can run through newuser
in about 60 seconds. A twit filter would need to be updated on a daily
basis, at least. It's certainly not a practical solution for anyone new
to Grex. And without new people we are hosed.
It is time to get real agressive about the problem, in my opinion.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 17 of 299:
|
Mar 28 12:59 UTC 2005 |
I don't find the newusers any more annoying than some of the garbage klg, rane
and bap post. While the subject matter may vary, the insulting tone really
does not. The level of discourse on grex had gone downhill long before the
most recent juveniles showed up. Don't kid yourself into thinking otherwise.
The collective users of grex have managed to ignore the "canadian wave" in
the past, and after a few months, semi-substantive items were still posted.
There's no reason it can't happen again. Develop thicker skin, folks.
|
keesan
|
|
response 18 of 299:
|
Mar 28 14:13 UTC 2005 |
Rane and klg don't keep mutating, so if you want they are easy to filter, and
they are not intentionally posting things to annoy other people.
How does the board decide who is abusing grex?
|
cyklone
|
|
response 19 of 299:
|
Mar 28 14:20 UTC 2005 |
While I agree that rane, klg and bap don't use newuser to "mutate" I disagree
that they don't post intentionally post to annoy (although I suspect each
would instead prefer to be described as "provocative").
|
scholar
|
|
response 20 of 299:
|
Mar 28 16:00 UTC 2005 |
Notice the change in tone:
It's only now that users are being judged to be "abusers" based on the CONTENT
of their posts.
A new and backwards step in Grex's history.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 21 of 299:
|
Mar 28 17:09 UTC 2005 |
Much as I might disagree with much of what rcurl opines, I have never, ever
witnessed him creating a nuisance item, a vulgar item, and item created for
trolling purposes, even one particularly provocative. Even richard doesn't
really do that. Individual posts in existing items do not rise to that level,
IMO. The current batch of nincompoops are the system "vandals", those who
would spraypaint your garage or the city park.
That being said, if there are in fact any amount of legitimate, potentially
valuable, newusers beging created on a regular basis, closing down newuser
will almost certainly mean they would shrug their shoulders and never return.
If newuser, in its current totally open form, were temporarily turned off,
would some sort of e-mail request for a new account be any more reliable in
establishing somebody "serious" out there re: wanting a grex account for
actual positive contributions to "the community"?
|
krj
|
|
response 22 of 299:
|
Mar 28 17:56 UTC 2005 |
Mary may find the Agora conference unusable, but other parts of
Grex are getting along fine. From my personal perspective, party
is doing about as well as it ever has.
I agree with Kevin Albaugh above; closing "newuser" for any length
of time is a bad idea. It wasn't that long ago that twenex, just to
pick one example, was just another random newuser.
|
scholar
|
|
response 23 of 299:
|
Mar 28 17:58 UTC 2005 |
And maybe it won't be long until we can say he only USED to be just another
random newuser.
|
naftee
|
|
response 24 of 299:
|
Mar 28 19:04 UTC 2005 |
CANADIAN TIDAL WAVE><<<<<<
I guess my account is going to be suspended soon :(
|