|
Grex > Coop > #299: Discussion of newuser. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 85 responses total. |
veek
|
|
response 52 of 85:
| 
Dec 14 19:09 UTC 2010 |
is the src available for viewing? we could modify it to make sure users
understand the risks.. seen that in eclipse.cs.pdx.edu:7680, it's a
MUD. They ask the users a lot of questions that they have to get right,
before they are allowed into the main area. eg: Dear user, is it safe
for you to use the same password to signin to Grex, that you would use
at your bank web-site? and he would have to answer no.. stuff like that
given the privacy issues we now face.. it would give us a bit of
leeway.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 53 of 85:
|
Dec 14 19:18 UTC 2010 |
I too tested the command line new user recently and liked it a lot.
|
veek
|
|
response 54 of 85:
|
Dec 14 19:30 UTC 2010 |
resp:52 nm found it
|
cross
|
|
response 55 of 85:
|
Dec 15 00:48 UTC 2010 |
I am typing on my phone, so excuse the brevity. All the text is still in text
files. Source is in subvversion. It probably needs a soak.
|
tsty
|
|
response 56 of 85:
|
Dec 15 01:12 UTC 2010 |
i am -elated- taht newuser text&html have had the cross-soak applied.
that it took this much rancor to get there .. well, someitmes it does.
tnx cross & testers.
|
cross
|
|
response 57 of 85:
|
Dec 15 16:39 UTC 2010 |
Web newuser is still broke.
|
kentn
|
|
response 58 of 85:
|
Dec 15 16:44 UTC 2010 |
But on our collective list to get fixed Real Soon Now.
|
cross
|
|
response 59 of 85:
|
Dec 15 16:46 UTC 2010 |
True dat.
|
tsty
|
|
response 60 of 85:
|
Dec 15 17:50 UTC 2010 |
jsut di d the web thing this time/date:
Error in Account Creation
Your application for an account on Grex has not been processed due to a system
problem.
* Could not access directory /usr/noton/nu/
Sorry.
|
tsty
|
|
response 61 of 85:
|
Dec 15 17:51 UTC 2010 |
however i did notice this selectable option:
Privacy: Who may see the information in
this section of the form?
All users.
Grex staff
only.
validate necessitates, sometimes, 'grex staff only'.
i;ll try the cli version
|
tsty
|
|
response 62 of 85:
|
Dec 15 17:59 UTC 2010 |
he captcha -is- case sensitive ... that needs to be -clear-.
|
tsty
|
|
response 63 of 85:
|
Dec 15 17:59 UTC 2010 |
re 57 ... oops didin;t see that .. my bad.
|
cross
|
|
response 64 of 85:
|
Dec 15 18:14 UTC 2010 |
resp:61 That has NOTHING to do with validation. That's just managing a
user's expectations so that they understand that staff *can* read their files;
that doesn't mean that staff *should*.
|
richard
|
|
response 65 of 85:
|
Dec 15 22:07 UTC 2010 |
sounds like the issue is that too many staffers have root access.
Change the root pw and declare that one, and only one person, has that
access. Designate one person the root staffer. This eliminates issues
like what was being discussed with TS. Most staff work doesn't require
root does it?
|
cross
|
|
response 66 of 85:
|
Dec 16 09:58 UTC 2010 |
No, it does not. But it's useful to have multiple people with root. The
issue is what to do when that access to abused.
|
richard
|
|
response 67 of 85:
|
Dec 16 10:24 UTC 2010 |
No the issue is whether the usefulness of having multiple staffers with
root outweighs what to do when that access is abused. I want to know if
Cross would accept root access being limited across the board, including
possibly himself, as opposed to banning staffer he doesn't like.
|
richard
|
|
response 68 of 85:
|
Dec 16 10:26 UTC 2010 |
Or better yet, if Cross is so concerned with TS having root access,
would he as a trade off, be willing to agree to give up his own root
access in exchange for TS losing his? If he were willing to do that, it
would lend more credence to his claims.
|
jep
|
|
response 69 of 85:
|
Dec 16 16:25 UTC 2010 |
Richaqrd, Dan needs root because he is the primary system admin.
|
richard
|
|
response 70 of 85:
|
Dec 16 19:49 UTC 2010 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 71 of 85:
|
Dec 16 19:50 UTC 2010 |
re #69 who made him the primary system admin? I thought staff acted as
an ensemble. It seems to me that grex has gotten into problems in the
past when there have been attempts to get one person to do too much, to
unofficially designate someone a 'primary system admin'. Look at what
happened with STeve last year when Grex was down. He was the only staff
trying to fix the box and with other staff willing to let him do
everything, it probably became too aggravating. He doesn't even post
much anymore. Besides Cross is in New York, he has no physical
proximity to the hardware so if there was a 'primary system admin' it
logically
shouldn't be him anyway.
|
jgelinas
|
|
response 72 of 85:
|
Dec 16 20:08 UTC 2010 |
It's not an appointment, Richard. It's a statement of fact. Answer me
one question: who has been doing the work of late?
|
jep
|
|
response 73 of 85:
|
Dec 17 18:16 UTC 2010 |
re resp:71: I made him the primary sysadmin. I had the position to do
so because I fit into a position between those with power and influence
(Board members, staffers, paid members) and those with no interest or
ability to decide. I am the average user, and can represent both types
of Grexers, so I made the appointment. TS, can you please make sure it
shows up in his paycheck? Thank you. Dan, it's official, you can use
it in your signature if you like. Also, did you send STeve the
customary bonus for his past contributions?
|
nharmon
|
|
response 74 of 85:
|
Dec 17 18:20 UTC 2010 |
I move to add another zero to Dan's paycheck.
|
jep
|
|
response 75 of 85:
|
Dec 17 18:42 UTC 2010 |
No voting. I've already decided that. Due to budgetary restrictions,
we will only be replacing one 0 with another this year.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 76 of 85:
|
Dec 17 19:59 UTC 2010 |
Times are tough.
|