ongoing AP abuse

I say go for it, Intmon. If it turns out to do more harm then good, change it back.

P.S. Another reason I like this idea is that I don't have to keep signing my name, the system will do it for me. Sorry but I'm lazy when it comes to this.

I think adding the username to the AP assignment is definately a good idea.. However I'd object very much to having my IP attached to the assignment. If you want to log my IP feel free to, but I don't want everyone I assign APs to to see my IP. My IP changes as seldom as possible and I host several services on my box, I'd rather not neg a script kiddie/packet monkey for a stupid question and then find out they're packing my box or attempting to exploit one of my services. I just don't think it's the greatest idea for a security related site.

Finnally this happens..

But i for damn sure dont want my IP to be displayed. Most of my Antionline surfing is done from the Network Operations Center for Rackshack/Everyone's Internet, I dont want my Admin IP address displayed to everyone and the dog. I suppose, If you go through with posting IPs, then I can surf via our proxy server, but i dont want to do all that. Thank you and goodnight. Just my 2 cents

I doubt they are seriously considering tagging APs with IP addresses, it just doesn't make any sense for the person to see your IP address. Logging them for administrative purposes is a good idea though.

I agree with what souleman said that if all ap's are tagged then people will probably feel more inclined to give greens to those that give them greens, which encourages alliance-type behaviour. I think that maybe tagging all negs is the best way to go and then giving people the option of whether or not they want to tag their greens.

Will be interesting to see how it works out.

Am I going to be banned because I use a friends computer? Mine is not working very well right now and we are all working on it to fix it so for now iv been using a friend's. actually while were there all of us check our mail and stop by to see whats going on and listen to music and have some fun....i just dont want to be accused of anything because my computer isnt working right now so like a hundred people use the same one. :(

Quote:

---

I realize it's not a perfect solution, but right now it's something that can help fix the current AP problems. If it doesn't work out, nothing is written in stone, so we can always change it later down the road. Thoughts?
Thanks,
intmon

---

I have to agree with HTRegZ, DrToker, et. al, that the IP should be logged, but not displayed. By showing who is doing the negging and and showing their IP you are trying to battle people who are acting childishly, which IMHO is a noble effort; however, the people responsible for 'drive-by neggings' have already proven themselves childish and immature and for this reason, I would have a problem with my IP floating around. While I am not particularly worried about my security posture, I wouldn't want to draw any more attention from all the maliciousness on the net than I already do and I feel that showing the IP's could have a very negative impact...

With that being said though, I would think that tagging point assignments with names would help with the current state of things and might even end some of the nice blank assignments and unhelpful things that float around in the anti-point messages; afterall, if your name is tied to what you say, I think that would be a good impetus to behave yourself in what you say and provide a constructive criticism.

IHMO, I think the benefits would outweigh the possible negative effects of people seeking retribution. The only time I would be very concerned about retribution is in regards to people without many AP's, after all, a senior member is much more able to absorb a massive AP assignment (> 50 AP's), where a new member would be facing banishment from it...

/nebulus

I sign most of my AP's so I wouldn't care one way or the other..


And luckily I havn't been targeted by any aliances as their victim-of-the-day/week/month

As prettymuch anyone who cares I'll have to agree on intmon's conclusions.
I'm very happy knowing there's actually some folks behind the scenes really working.

Thnx Big Brother....

By displaying a name next to the assignment you beat about the purpose of the antipoint system. Noone likes to get neggs and they'll all think it wasn't for the right reason they got them (most of the time). You'd better scrap the negative side of the antipoints then. I'd believe very few (if not no) people who ould not take revenge in some way. I know antionline to long for that. I think it's right to watch the system a bit, especially for the ganging up etc. Unfair neggs wil stay, I think. The fear for them is worse then the things themselves really. Like imo so many things of life, you'd live alot happier if you just ignore them intentionally. The gangin up can be reported and it will be dealt with, that's enough for me to know...

Point well taken about the IPs....we'll just display the username next to the area where the comments are.

As far as the display of the username defeating the purpose of the AP system, those folks who are abusing it are already seriously defeating the purpose of the system, and making it almost useless, as well as causing too many folks to have to waste time dealing with it. We're just trying to bring things around enough that the AP system can work as it was designed again...
Thanks,
intmon