|
Grex > Coop > #284: Grex Town Hall -- How do we move forward? - Fall, 2010 |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 334 responses total. |
twinkie
|
|
response 37 of 334:
|
Sep 29 07:22 UTC 2010 |
I thought broad user support was where verification came from?
|
slynne
|
|
response 38 of 334:
|
Sep 29 15:12 UTC 2010 |
IIRC the issue with verification is this: If we don't verify, we tend to
have problem users taking the system down. If we had more staff
resources, we could probably handle this. But we don't. Still, I recall
that it was a short term solution and in the long run, if we don't make
it really easy for new people to sign up, there is no future. On the
other hand, if the system keeps being brought down by malicious people,
there is no future.
|
cross
|
|
response 39 of 334:
|
Sep 29 16:23 UTC 2010 |
resp:30 Well, since you asked.... Because you, Richard, stamp your
foot every time someone questions one of your suggestions; nevermind
the fact that they come across more as demand than otherwise.
resp:36 It's certainly not perfect. But every time you bring this up,
I remind you that Chad and Mickeyd were taking down Grex every chance
they got, and we had no way to block them without putting in some kind
of verification system.
Oh, and by the way? You come across as a real asshole in that
response. Just food for thought, man.
|
kentn
|
|
response 40 of 334:
|
Sep 29 17:04 UTC 2010 |
In terms of verification, yes that was a user vote a while back, so the
users at the time agreed enough with it to approve it. See the coop
cf for background and proposals for this (item 23 covers a lot of this
policy, there may be other items that apply).
Note that if you want to change this policy you can propose a new policy
(see Grex by-laws for how to do this). If you're not a member (hint
hint), though, you can't vote on it.
For the restricted access for new users, yes, it is due to trying to
keep the system protected from malicious people. It works, but I think
it may be chasing a lot of non-malicious people away. Unfortunately,
we need something in place to help, otherwise we'll be up and down all
the time--which users complained about (rightly so), and our staff will
spend most of their time dealing with the situation.
If there is a better alternative to leaving the system open to malicious
users, let's hear it. I'm sure we'd all like to go to a more open
system, but not at the cost of being frequently locked out due to system
downtime and/or inability to use the system (denial of service).
|
jep
|
|
response 41 of 334:
|
Sep 29 18:03 UTC 2010 |
Richard is just frustrated that we don't have any new users because of
the verification issue. He's right that the verification issue is a
problem. He's wrong to insist on a solution when he is unable and
unwilling to do the work himself. Richard, Unix programming is not an
innate talent like extreme good looks (my own contribution to the
world), or a limited resource like hydrogen. It's an acquired skill.
Anyone can get it, just as anyone can get the skill to drive a car. If
you're frustrated that no one else does something you want done, there
is an alternative available to you which will get the job done, and in
the best possible way at that. It is to do it yourself.
|
jep
|
|
response 42 of 334:
|
Sep 29 18:07 UTC 2010 |
There are a lot of things Grex could do to attract new users. Some of
them may be compatible with doing what it does now, the things which
keep us all here. How about a smart phone app? Bring back the
multi-user Unix games like Phantasia. Acquire a bigger computer and
host video messages in place of text based messages. Attract some
people who will make the specialty conferences interesting. It can be
done; it was done some years ago, and we haven't devolved *that* much as
a species.
I like Grex as it is. I'm not going to devote any resources to changing
it substantially. I'll toss out ideas, though, if I think of any and
there is any interest.
|
slynne
|
|
response 43 of 334:
|
Sep 29 18:11 UTC 2010 |
resp:41 Small and completely off topic quibble: using hydrogen as an
example of a scarce resource might not be a good idea. It is the most
common element in the universe.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 44 of 334:
|
Sep 29 18:47 UTC 2010 |
Helium, on the other hand...
|
tod
|
|
response 45 of 334:
|
Sep 29 19:06 UTC 2010 |
hydrogen is limited?
(ever put a helium balloon in a microwave? Star Wars, baby!)
|
jep
|
|
response 46 of 334:
|
Sep 29 19:32 UTC 2010 |
re resp:43: Thanks! I thought baloney was the most common element.
(Hydrogen is limited, just not as limited as anything else.)
|
slynne
|
|
response 47 of 334:
|
Sep 29 20:17 UTC 2010 |
resp:46 Yes, I guess I can't argue with that
|
rcurl
|
|
response 48 of 334:
|
Sep 29 21:42 UTC 2010 |
Hydrogen is certainly common in the universe, just not on earth. Molecular
hydrogen, that is. The hydrogen in water is already burned and cannot be
recovered as molecular hydrogen unless you expend more energy than you will
get in using the hydrogen as a fuel, or whatever.
|
richard
|
|
response 49 of 334:
|
Sep 29 21:58 UTC 2010 |
This could all be moot soon anyway. In coop #283 Aruba reported Grex's
finances for the last two years as:
August 2008 balance: $6,238.21
August 2010 balance: $2,717.39
At present rate of expenditure, approx. $1,750 per year, Grex will be
lucky to see the end of next year.
Has there been any further talk of grex leaving provide.net and going
virtual, i.e. no hardware and the software running virtually on
somebody else's system?
|
kentn
|
|
response 50 of 334:
|
Sep 30 00:46 UTC 2010 |
To my knowledge, there is not a lot of support for a virtual Grex on
either the Board or staff, for various reasons. I agree, it would be
good to lower our cost of co-location if we can.
Yes, we've been saying for the better part of this year that we have
a year plus a little more before we run out of money. So for those
who said Grex has too much money as the reason they would not become
members, I'll ask again: at what bank balance will you consider Grex to
have not enough money and will become a member to help support Grex's
operations?
|
richard
|
|
response 51 of 334:
|
Sep 30 01:10 UTC 2010 |
You have to provide a product that is worth supporting. This item so
far isn't an advertisement for grex. Ideas are asked for and the very
few who offer any are bitch slapped. We can keep things the way they
are and grex can quietly go away next year or we can have the courage
to change.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 52 of 334:
|
Sep 30 15:21 UTC 2010 |
I think you need to have a viable idea to not get "bitch slapped".
I think Grex should get a million dollars. Money is very important in this
day and age, and the more money Grex has, the longer Grex will be around. If
we don't get a million dollars soon, I just don't know what could happen.
Wait... you want *me* to help get a million dollars? But I don't know anything
about having a million dollars! I'm more of an "idea guy". Stop shitting on
my awesome idea that nobody's had before!
|
nharmon
|
|
response 53 of 334:
|
Sep 30 15:25 UTC 2010 |
Nailed it.
|
cross
|
|
response 54 of 334:
|
Sep 30 16:15 UTC 2010 |
I believe Richard is conflating two things: multiple levels of
verification of users, and the restricted shell for completely non-
verified users.
The former was agreed upon by the users. Some form of it basically
must be used for legal indemnity purposes no matter what.
The latter initially came as an emergency measure to stop mickeyd and
chad from bringing Grex down, basically, every day. There is some
precedence for it: SDF uses a restricted shell until users go through
some form of validation.
I'll agree that "Cross's little patch" (the restricted shell) is
probably stopping some users from really getting involved in Grex.
Not as many as a person like Richard would like to believe (really,
there just aren't that many accounts being created on a daily basis,
and TS has been keeping up with validation requests). But at this
point, turning away almost anyone is a problem.
But, on the other hand, unrestricted access has proven to be a
problem, as well.
So we've got a quandry. Unrestricted initial access - without some
kind of barrier - is going to cause problems. Experience has proven
that. However, we need to give more access to the system so that
people have some incentive to check us out: something to pique their
curiosity, as it were.
Let's step back for a moment and examine, from a technical
perspective, the problem and the current setup. Giving brand new
users unrestricted access to Grex gives them access to too many things
that let them muck with the system. They can post thousands of
messages to the BBS, or send spam, or flood another computer, or send
endless telegram messages to other users, or exploit OpenBSD (which is
a lot more buggy than we were led to believe when we first decided to
use it, but that's a topic for another item) to crash the operating
system. And these are not hypotheticals, they're actual events that
have happened on Grex. Everyone who has responded in this thread has
been a witness to them.
In order to prevent that, we must necessarily lock brand new users out
of some services. For instance, we don't give them instant access to
outgoing network services: doing so has been the source of many forms
of abuse over the past. Forms of abuse that have nearly lost Grex its
connection to the Internet. That's what the current system does.
So, what's the problem with the current system? Well, there are
several.
For starters, it's *too* restrictive. The set of things that new
users can do is embarrassingly small. I believe that it can be
exanded significantly, without undue risk to the system. The
challenge here is technical; we've got to make sure that brand new
users can't "escape" out of the restricted environment and get to an
unrestricted shell. It's always something of a delicate balance here;
too many restrictions make the system uninteresting. Too few make it
unstable. Adding too much into the restricted environment means more
chances for that instability (in that someone could potentially find
some obscure way to escape to a shell or something like that). How
hard it is to find something like that (and thus whether it's worth
it) and how hard someone is likely to look are debatable. It was my
senes that with, e.g., Chad and Mickey, they were both very motivated
and enjoyed the search. The second you give access to a programming
language interpreter or compiler, or even a text editor, you're
essentially done.
But on the whole, I think the current restricted shell environment
errs too far on the side of caution. So that's one problem, and
loosing it up can mitigate that problem to some extent.
The other problem involves the mechanics of the verification system:
it's based on humans. That implies a certain amount of latency is
involved, because a human has to look at a validation request and
manually respond to it. If the latency is *too* great, the
(potential) user just goes somewhere else. I submit that any system
involving human verifiers is going to result in too much latency.
So how does one reduce it? Well, I think that one can automate it.
That's effectively what SDF did: they tied into PayPal and implemented
an instant verification system on top of their restricted shell, and
as a result, they have a huge membership. I think we can do the
same.... In fact, I don't even think it's that hard. It's just a
Small Matter of Programming.
A lot of people bring up things like web interface and other bulletin
board software and the like. These are all really good ideas; I agree
with essentially all of them. Grex does need to modernize (and at the
same time streamline) its web interface. I did a lot of work in that
area a year or so ago; just trying to clean up the HTML. I agree with
Richard that some web based tools for things like real-time chat would
be cool. Certainly, backtalk needs (at least) a facelift.
But I don't think that any of these are the ANSWER that people are
looking for. Because people don't really want chat and conferencing;
that stuff exists elsewhere, and is done better than Grex could ever
do it. Grex may have been a pioneer in a lot of ways, but it didn't
retain the leading edge over time. Blogs exist elsewhere. If Grex is
going to survive, it's got to be different, and its got to be
compelling. I think it needs to find a niche that its good at and
really embrace that. I'm not sure what that is, though.
|
mary
|
|
response 55 of 334:
|
Sep 30 16:46 UTC 2010 |
Excellent summary.
|
keesan
|
|
response 56 of 334:
|
Sep 30 18:08 UTC 2010 |
SDF offers 600MB of space (for email and webpage etc.) including images in
your page, for $36 one-time payment. Grex offers 1MB without images.
|
kentn
|
|
response 57 of 334:
|
Sep 30 18:10 UTC 2010 |
Just because some applications and services are available elsewhere or
even that someone else does the same service better, does not mean that
we can't offer the same thing here. Other places offer unix accounts,
e-mail, etc. I don't see a reason why we couldn't encourage users to do
their communication in a different environment if they so choose (which
implies that our current environment/apps will remain for those who
want to continue doing what they are currently doing). Part of what
attracts people to a particular site is the community that exists there.
If we could encourage more sub-communities to exist here, that might
help.
I think the PayPal automation idea for verification deserves some
serious discussion as does the idea of allowing a little more
functionality into the restricted shell.
|
krj
|
|
response 58 of 334:
|
Sep 30 18:33 UTC 2010 |
On the restricted user accounts as a defense against vandals:
My theory: There are two different types of hostile users.
The everyday type is interested in using Grex to go annoy people
somewhere else.
The special ones are interested in screwing with the Grex community.
This is total speculation on my part, but I wonder if we need a
2-tier defense system controlled by a switch.
Under Alert Code Yellow, normal conditions, newbies should be
allowed access to party (especially), BBS, and maybe some other
stuff which can't upset the outside world too much.
Alert Code Orange would be the status we have run on for the
last couple of years, with pretty much everything locked down.
We'd save that for when a party hostile to Grex was actively
after us.
"Orange" might have to force users who newuser'd under "Yellow"
to validate. Otherwise the malicious anti-Grex person might
just stockpile IDs under Condition Yellow.
This all sounds like work. :-( But locking newbies out of party
has pretty much killed the party community.
|
tod
|
|
response 59 of 334:
|
Sep 30 19:05 UTC 2010 |
My theory: There are two different types of hostile users.
There's also a third kind. These are the people who go to Zingerman's
and pay $9 for coleslaw with bacon bits then tell everyone they had
an equisite Appalachian salad. And anyone whom hasn't partaken of this
health elixir is not qualified in Grex governance.
|
jep
|
|
response 60 of 334:
|
Sep 30 19:34 UTC 2010 |
re resp:47: My point was lost. It was that Unix programming does not
need to be a limited resource. Anyone can acquire the skill. Richard
can contribute to Grex if he wants to see changes.
re resp:50: When I feel like my contribution is not mainly adding to a
big pile of money being accumulated for no apparent purpose, then I will
contribute to Grex as I used to do in the past. I was not aware Grex
was below the $3,000 mark. I was not aware it was below the $6,000
line. I refused to send more when it was at around $4,700. It climbed
much higher after that. No one missed the money I didn't send.
I'll go on record now. If Grex hits $1,000 I will pay for a membership,
provided I can afford one.
|
tod
|
|
response 61 of 334:
|
Sep 30 19:38 UTC 2010 |
The mission doesn't need money as much as it needs volunteers, imo
|