Death to soptest
-
Yes, but what can you do ? He obviously meant to pull down the forum, but with anonymous posts allowed, and a new account as easy as www.hotmail.com, all it would do is start a vendetta. The best we can do IMO is let it be known that his actions make him unpopular. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
Christian Graus wrote: Yes, but what can you do ? I dunno how CP works behind the scenes, but his connection must have an IP reference, and thus it can be blocked from making future postings. When I set up some PHP forums stuff a while ago I managed to implement that although never tested it. Of course you have two problems he could use a different ISP, or he could use a spoofing service. And of cause you might inconvienience some innocent bystanders. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
-
Christian Graus wrote: Yes, but what can you do ? I dunno how CP works behind the scenes, but his connection must have an IP reference, and thus it can be blocked from making future postings. When I set up some PHP forums stuff a while ago I managed to implement that although never tested it. Of course you have two problems he could use a different ISP, or he could use a spoofing service. And of cause you might inconvienience some innocent bystanders. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
Colin Davies wrote: but his connection must have an IP reference, and thus it can be blocked from making future postings. Well, if he's on a dialup w/ dynamic IP that might be tough. You could end up blocking someone else instead... --------_**
The real problem is that you don't have to be religious to be a religious fanatic, you just have to be a fanatic.
**_
-- Stan Shannon, the lounge
-
Colin Davies wrote: but his connection must have an IP reference, and thus it can be blocked from making future postings. Well, if he's on a dialup w/ dynamic IP that might be tough. You could end up blocking someone else instead... --------_**
The real problem is that you don't have to be religious to be a religious fanatic, you just have to be a fanatic.
**_
-- Stan Shannon, the lounge
Shog9 wrote: Well, if he's on a dialup w/ dynamic IP that might be tough. You could end up blocking someone else instead... Thats why I mentioned innocent bystanders, Also its more work for the servers to do etc. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
-
The title says it all. What is the point in bringing down the C++ forums ? If it's just for 'education' he could have pointed it out to Chris instead of making a nuisance of himself. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
Do you mean soptest's cssText stuff ? That script did no harm to my IE5 though... I don't know. Maxwell Chen Lets make bugs better!
-
Yes, but what can you do ? He obviously meant to pull down the forum, but with anonymous posts allowed, and a new account as easy as www.hotmail.com, all it would do is start a vendetta. The best we can do IMO is let it be known that his actions make him unpopular. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
Christian Graus wrote: Yes, but what can you do ? Very little without clamping down on everybody posting html in the forums, which would be a little overkill. I'm just glad that George W Bush doesn't use the forums, otherwise SOPTEST would have found his house bombed, his family arrested and anybody who shared his religion placed under suspicion. :-D Actually thinking about it, that's not a bad idea :-D :-D Michael :-) "Eureka" is Greek for "This bath is too hot"
-
Yeah. I admit I've tested stuff in the forums, as I'm sure others are aware. But geez, when you know you can cause a disaster like that you behave responsiblity about it. Post it in a crap article or somewhere with a warning message etc. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
-
Shog9 wrote: Well, if he's on a dialup w/ dynamic IP that might be tough. You could end up blocking someone else instead... Thats why I mentioned innocent bystanders, Also its more work for the servers to do etc. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
Colin Davies wrote: Thats why I mentioned innocent bystanders Oh I see, so now we lowly modem users are innocent bystanders?!?! Lol. :D ____________________ David Wulff Neil says: dave i am a homosexual and i am in love with your father Dave says: That's okay son, eighteen years ago I was in love with your mother.
-
Colin Davies wrote: Thats why I mentioned innocent bystanders Oh I see, so now we lowly modem users are innocent bystanders?!?! Lol. :D ____________________ David Wulff Neil says: dave i am a homosexual and i am in love with your father Dave says: That's okay son, eighteen years ago I was in love with your mother.
it would also apply to any cable modem users who get dynamic IP addresses, too. -c
Cheap oil. It's worth it!
Image Processing - just like mom used to make.
-
it would also apply to any cable modem users who get dynamic IP addresses, too. -c
Cheap oil. It's worth it!
Image Processing - just like mom used to make.
It'd also be a problem for someone behind a firewall - one single external IP for a whole office / school / etc. Banning an entire school, simply because someone there did something stupid is a bit OTT -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
Yes, but what can you do ? He obviously meant to pull down the forum, but with anonymous posts allowed, and a new account as easy as www.hotmail.com, all it would do is start a vendetta. The best we can do IMO is let it be known that his actions make him unpopular. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
Christian Graus wrote: The best we can do IMO is let it be known that his actions make him unpopular. Complete snubbing is the best course. That sort of infantile mentality is best ignored; after a while he'll grow bored when no one responds to him and return to his corner to play with himself. I Drowned Schroedinger's Stupid Cat!
-
Christian Graus wrote: Yes, but what can you do ? I dunno how CP works behind the scenes, but his connection must have an IP reference, and thus it can be blocked from making future postings. When I set up some PHP forums stuff a while ago I managed to implement that although never tested it. Of course you have two problems he could use a different ISP, or he could use a spoofing service. And of cause you might inconvienience some innocent bystanders. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
The majority of users have a dynamic IP address, so this technique would only work for the duration of a single online session. I Drowned Schroedinger's Stupid Cat!
-
Christian Graus wrote: Yes, but what can you do ? Very little without clamping down on everybody posting html in the forums, which would be a little overkill. I'm just glad that George W Bush doesn't use the forums, otherwise SOPTEST would have found his house bombed, his family arrested and anybody who shared his religion placed under suspicion. :-D Actually thinking about it, that's not a bad idea :-D :-D Michael :-) "Eureka" is Greek for "This bath is too hot"
Michael P Butler wrote: Very little without clamping down on everybody posting html in the forums I hope it doesn't get that far... would be rather a pity, but disabling html for anonymous posters would be a start (even though it wouldn't be very efficent)
Cheers,
Marc:beer: Click to see my *real* signature :beer:
-
Christian Graus wrote: The best we can do IMO is let it be known that his actions make him unpopular. Complete snubbing is the best course. That sort of infantile mentality is best ignored; after a while he'll grow bored when no one responds to him and return to his corner to play with himself. I Drowned Schroedinger's Stupid Cat!
Gosh you guys surprise me ? You do it on the ISP allocation, not on the specific IP Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
-
Gosh you guys surprise me ? You do it on the ISP allocation, not on the specific IP Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
Colin Davies wrote: You do it on the ISP allocation, not on the specific IP Thereby blocking everyone in the same subnet? Not good! Now if we required that a user enable cookies in order to post, anonymous or not, we'd be able to leave behind a little present that would let us identify the culprit no matter where he hides. Easy enough to defeat, I know, but it might be a help. Perhaps a little hidden script that could be made to take a snapshot of the rogue's machine and return it to the server, along with the IP, would be helpful. A visit from the same subnet, by a machine matching the stored profile of an offender's machine, could be a reasonable filter, though it would likely impact some schools where all the PCs in a lab are identical. All in all, I think merely ignoring the antics of the unpleasant few is the best course. They're not worth the bother... I Drowned Schroedinger's Stupid Cat!
-
Colin Davies wrote: You do it on the ISP allocation, not on the specific IP Thereby blocking everyone in the same subnet? Not good! Now if we required that a user enable cookies in order to post, anonymous or not, we'd be able to leave behind a little present that would let us identify the culprit no matter where he hides. Easy enough to defeat, I know, but it might be a help. Perhaps a little hidden script that could be made to take a snapshot of the rogue's machine and return it to the server, along with the IP, would be helpful. A visit from the same subnet, by a machine matching the stored profile of an offender's machine, could be a reasonable filter, though it would likely impact some schools where all the PCs in a lab are identical. All in all, I think merely ignoring the antics of the unpleasant few is the best course. They're not worth the bother... I Drowned Schroedinger's Stupid Cat!
The allocations are not subnets. TTBOMK Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
-
The allocations are not subnets. TTBOMK Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me :-)
They are here:-) I Drowned Schroedinger's Stupid Cat!