Subject:
|
Re: 'My recent LUGNET Posts' idea
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:25:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
216 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Tim Courtney writes:
> > The upside is that it's possible to get a large percentage of names matched
> > up quickly and easily. The downside is that the rest of those that can be
> > matched up have to be matched up by hand. Thus, it probably needs to be a
> > very incremental approach.
>
> If only a few need to be matched by hand, then why not take that approach
> and the rest by hand may not need to be matched?
When I say "a large percentage" above, I mean that roughly, say, 80% are
crystal clear match-ups. That leaves, say, 20% which aren't, and should be
checked by hand. As there are 5200 registered 'From:' lines and 850 members,
we're talking about matching across a set of more than 6000 names, and it's
not a 1-to-1 mapping. The number of nodes that will need to be either matched
or checked by hand is definitely in the hundreds. I happen to know that there
are two people in the community both named David Ellis, so I'm sure there must
be other overlaps as well.
At any rate, having a thingy to match names up automatically is going to be
the best starting point. Most importantly, it'll need to be able to handle
error corrections.
> Are you going to take the approach we discussed - assigning EVEYRONE a
> member number and turning on or off a variable for paid membership? That
> way you can be 100% sure who is who, and a member could assign different
> email addresses as posting email addresses the server recognizes, while only
> taking up one account or member number slot.
I still think this is inevitable, yes. Remaining backward-compatible with
all the existing stuff is no small hurdle and it's not clear when the best
time would be for a major change like this, but it would certainly make a lot
of things easier.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 'My recent LUGNET Posts' idea
|
| (...) Sounds good. (...) Good idea there, but - (...) If only a few need to be matched by hand, then why not take that approach and the rest by hand may not need to be matched? Are you going to take the approach we discussed - assigning EVEYRONE a (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
7 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
|
|
|
|
