Banning Codes

[catch]

LMAO, thanks catch, I needed the chuckle. Ah, but were it only so simple...

It is that simple, such a system doesn't need to be particularly secure, just a casual check to ensure that they are new... however I agree that there is no point in doing this because annoying users have no impact on revenue.

cheers,

catch

[Some Dumb loser]

Not one... not two... but three search bars at the bottom of this page, big banners at the top, thread AP, other features that have sat to rot back when JP was in charge, and for some reason JupM added blue to all this yellow and purple.

How about focusing on running this site in the right direction. In doing this, all of these senior members would have less justifucation to come back and poke fun at the moderators and administration.

And just think...

All this started pretty much after I was banned and blocked for saying that no one has leverage over me.

[gore]

He's no where near the first person to do this ****. One upon a time someone named "Memory" and "Nemory" had a running splurge on AO and really got annoying. They were banned a lot, and just as sudden as it started, he stopped and now is a decent member of AO.

I can understand the first couple bans, he was bumping threads left and right. That problem is gone. Not sure why he got banned the last time for one post, I mean **** Katja started more **** in one day than he has the entire time he's been here. The only difference is he doesn't put everyone on ignore and doesn't have ****. He's a Lesbian too, don't you geeks just get hard as Assembler over that?

[dinowuff]

Yup Gore, I remember the whole passwords issue in IRC and I always thought - once he/she became Nemory, things had lightened up a bit.

People let us not forget the "Community" that is a BBS. Some of the older members remember 300 - 1200k modems and BBS'.

There was always a character - Always One that was excepted. Perhaps c.r. is the accepted, pardoned one and spec is screwed.

Anyway, live and let live. I think that the pronounced AO dike is without original thought and void of any knowledge whatsoever; however, I just gave her +ap's for digging up memories.

I guess that makes me a hypocrite

[Tim_axe]

The code @ ProBoards just makes that paticular forum not display for the "banned" member. The workhorse of the whole thing is:

javascript:document.getElementById('forum').style.display = 'none';

Just fix the display style (or do a quick change to your cookie string) through the address bar, and that member can see the forum again.


It should be mentioned that in a larger community preventing a single person from posting in a paticular forum open to the public is somewhat pointless (so the functionality isn't there, but you could do so through groups). But whatever floats their boat I guess. It does nothing to prevent them from actually posting there...just makes the uneducated poster not see a forum to post in...




In the end no amount of features will prevent it from happening. You just have to report it & let the mods sort it out...

[steve.milner]

Originally posted here by catch
It is that simple, such a system doesn't need to be particularly secure, just a casual check to ensure that they are new... however I agree that there is no point in doing this because annoying users have no impact on revenue.

Trouble is any idiot can get a digital cert for a few $ saying they are just about anyone they like.

To get identity confirmed digital certs costs loads more and would preclude lots of members of this site.

Steve

[zencoder]

Originally posted here by catch
It is that simple, such a system doesn't need to be particularly secure, just a casual check to ensure that they are new... however I agree that there is no point in doing this because annoying users have no impact on revenue.

cheers,

catch

I agree the process of utilizing Digital IDs for registration is simple. It's the primary and preferred method of authentication inside my employers network for web resources, and it's simple and slick.

I'm commenting on the backend processes of having proper, approved, supported Digital IDs in use by everyone. What CA (or CA's) are trusted for this purpose. What type of certificates are allowed? Who supports certificate issues. What if a legitimate security pro comes from a company that uses an alternate method? Et cetera ad naseum.

Aesop's Fable Belling the Cat comes to mind.

[Egaladeist]

Hi gore,

He's no where near the first person to do this ****. One upon a time someone named "Memory" and "Nemory" had a running splurge on AO and really got annoying. They were banned a lot, and just as sudden as it started, he stopped and now is a decent member of AO.

I can understand the first couple bans, he was bumping threads left and right. That problem is gone. Not sure why he got banned the last time for one post, I mean **** Katja started more **** in one day than he has the entire time he's been here. The only difference is he doesn't put everyone on ignore and doesn't have ****. He's a Lesbian too, don't you geeks just get hard as Assembler over that?

As you well know the reason I supported getting rid of katja was because she was being more disruptive than the Spec ( in regards to her ability to get on people's nerves )...and I stood behind that stand right up till the end ( my poll which decided in her favor, only two senior members supported her staying of which one was you...which really surprised me...the rest of her support came from non-seniors )...I respected my own poll and dropped it...after the result proved there was no majority that wanted her out.

The Spec is another case entirely...he's a fixture here...he has caused more disruption than katja but it just doesn't seem like it because, like I said, he's a fixture...we accept that he's going to act like an a@@ and do stupid things like bumping threads or pretending to be someone he's not ( eg. katja's other profile )...
so...when he does do something it's not surprising...it's expected.

Eg

[Juridian]

Momma always said, stupid is as stupid does.

[catch]

Trouble is any idiot can get a digital cert for a few $ saying they are just about anyone they like.
To get identity confirmed digital certs costs loads more and would preclude lots of members of this site.

Reread what I said... the dig cert would just be used to allow registration beyond a few newbie forums. And if some user wants to throw money away so that they can be annoing and get themselves banned... well, at leas they have to pay for it.

I agree the process of utilizing Digital IDs for registration is simple. It's the primary and preferred method of authentication inside my employers network for web resources, and it's simple and slick.
I'm commenting on the backend processes of having proper, approved, supported Digital IDs in use by everyone. What CA (or CA's) are trusted for this purpose. What type of certificates are allowed? Who supports certificate issues. What if a legitimate security pro comes from a company that uses an alternate method? Et cetera ad naseum.

You're over thinking the issue, it doesn't need to be secure... it merely needs to increase the effort required for someone to make multiple, non-matchable accounts.

It doesn't need to be a proper dig cert processing system... it could even accept personal/expired certs... but doing so would dramatically up the amount of effort required for someone just looking to troll.

Again though this isn't justified by the ROSI.

cheers,

catch