Subject:
|
The Problem (was Re: Eeek! I've been multiply moultoned!)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Jun 2001 23:06:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
343 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
>
> I'm still here, and I'm working to resolve the issue. Clearly we need a
> workable mechanism for authenticating email addresses. I've got some ideas
> and have spoken with people off-line about these. It won't be pretty.
Todd, (et al)
I'm worried about a technical solution to authentication problem. In fact,
I'm a bit worried about whether we're solving the right problem at all.
To me it seems the problem is not enforcing a ban on individuals, it's more
a case of trying to reduce the number of unsavoury posts in the community. I
don't think there's a purely technical solution to this problem. However, I
think trying to implement one which causes more hassles for the community
isn't a good idea - a solution which causes more problems than it fixes
isn't a solution.
Also, the idea of banning individuals necessarily puts the burden on an
individual, namely Todd, to make the ultimate decision, and chances are
people will find a way around it anyway.
So I would propose that a community problem requires a community solution. I
think:
1. Mad Hatter's posting rights should be re-instated. This will eliminate
the need for him [1] to post using other identities. Unfortunately, it
doesn't mean he will stop spoofing...
2a. People should refrain from posting replies to inflamatory posts (from
anyone!). Such replies (IMHO) should be e-mailed, or taken off-line altogether.
2b. People should try to refrain from posting inflamatory comments! This is
hard, and I'm guilty of 2a & 2b myself, but if we can all try & keep these
kind of posts private (ie e-mail), I think it'll help a lot.
3. If members see others participating in flame wars on Lugnet, they should
politely e-mail *both / all participants* [2] asking them to take it
off-line. Posting such messages to the thread doesn't help.
4. Maybe, if these measures fail to work, institute a policy of temporary
[3] bans for *both / all participants*. This should be a last resort.
This takes the responsibility for a community problem out of the hands of an
individual (Todd), and puts it squarely in the hands of the whole community
(except if point 4 is needed). We've already identified (and Mad Hatter has
actually confirmed in various posts) that if we want the posts to stop, all
we have to do is avoid replying publically. I think if the community takes
some responsibility for keeping things running smoothly, we'll all get a lot
more out of this fantastic resource.
Regards
ROSCO
[1] I've assumed Madd Hatter is male, as it's generally accepted that his
real name is Matthew Moulton, which sounds male to me.
[2] Flame wars can involve many people, but generally, when the initial
burst quietens down, it gets down to 2 or 3. In my experience.
[3] My initial thought would be about 3 days.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Eeek! I've been multiply moultoned!
|
| (...) I'm still here, and I'm working to resolve the issue. Clearly we need a workable mechanism for authenticating email addresses. I've got some ideas and have spoken with people off-line about these. It won't be pretty. I've been generally quiet (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
