BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Applications update

 
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
13:49 / 09.01.08
OK. Over the last three months or so, we have had no new members. This seems to be a mark that the previous method of processing applications no longer works.

That system basically involved people who attempt to register to Barbelith being directed to email barbelith.apply@gmail.com with proofs of existence. I would then collate the email addresses and send them to Tom. Tom would do two things (this is the important bit):

1) Email the approved applicants with the method for creating their username and login.

2) Add the applicants' email address to a database that lists the email addresses that are allowed to have logins on Barbelith.

This second is an anti-duplication method, essentially, to stop people registering multiple identities with multiple email addresses.

However, recently (1) has not been happening. I don't know if (2) has been happening, but if the people don't have one login, it doesn't really matter.

Now, I don't know how often or indeed whether this second database is being updated. My suspicion is that if it is not an automated process, it is not going to happen in the nearish future. To get over the (1) hurdle, I am currently:

1) Inviting applicants to submit their desired usernames and passwords.
2) Creating their accounts myself, so they do not get to the duplication site themselves (and are thus able to use it to create duplicates).
3) Sending Tom a list of these approved email addresses, so that if the second database of approved emails is still running, it can be updated.

This is a test situation, and I can see a couple of possible issues, without a better understanding of the technology of which I think we'll struggle to answer. One of those is whether I am eventually going to get autobanned for using the registration option multiple times, which would sort of suck. Another is whether I will be banned if any of the identities I created are banned (doubtful, but I suppose possible). The third main one is whether the second database is updated or used to identify and kill fraudulent user IDs, and if so whether that killing is automated.

So, so far we've added about eight people using this - the first people to give me a username and password. Hopefully some of those will carry on posting for long enough to shhow that the deletion is not automatic, or for Tom to get back with further and better particulars. Personally, I doubt that it is, but better safe than sorry. If nothing happens, from the banning or the Tom perspective, I guess this might be the new way we let people in.

Thoughts, anyone?
 
 
Merely Ducard
14:10 / 09.01.08
When was the last time Tom was in communication with you about this or indeed any other aspect of Barbelith?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:35 / 09.01.08
Well, the last time he added any new users was about three months ago, I believe. As I said in the previous applications thread, Tom has gone dark on Barbelith - I think we have to assume that there will be no more support in the future, and any support that we do get from Tom/Cal is an unexpected bonus. Also that nobody else will be empowered to make changes to the code on their behalf.

Basically, as it stands Barbelith actually is dying, or rather becoming progressively less functional, since functions at 1 may move to 0 but functions at 0 will not move to 1. This is an attempt to use existing technology to eke a bit more time for the community, either for some reawakening of tech support or to find or build liferafts. I've notified him of my plans, and basically told him to contact me if I'm about to do something bad.
 
 
Merely Ducard
15:24 / 09.01.08
I was specifically asking about the last time he contacted you - as far as you're comfortable answering that. I just want to be clear on the extent to which even your direct attempts to contact Tom have gone unanswered.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:19 / 09.01.08
Ah, right. I'm not sure, to be honest. He hasn't responded to my recent emails, although I have basically put "sing out if this is a terrible idea" on them. So, the last email that got a response relating to Barbelith was probably the last set of successful applicants who got added - four months or so ago?

I think I've said before that Tom is probably very, very busy at present - move to a new continent, new job, big project... I doubt that Barbelith is going to find its way onto his to-do list in a meaningful way for some time if ever, and am proceeding on that assumption.
 
 
grant
17:25 / 09.01.08
I get the same impression.

I think what you've outlined above looks great, Haus, and in theory could go on indefinitely.

I'm actually wondering, now, about using it to test the banning functionality by signing on a new account from an unused IP address - something like the local library.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:26 / 09.01.08
A tug to scuttle? Yes, that would probably work, as long as the IP blocking didn't take out Florida.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:39 / 09.01.08
Oh, I got an email from Tom just now, by the way. Broadly as I expected - there's a bit of clarification needed, but we'll see how we go.

Before we go any further on this, I'd like to test our banning - in particular, whether we can unban people after a banning, and what happens if you try to log in once banned. I'll work on that this week.
 
 
gamma globulins
20:51 / 09.01.08
Haus, just wanted to say that we all (I think) really appreciate all the effort you're putting into jury-rigging a working site together.
 
 
grant
21:55 / 09.01.08
I'm equally terrified by the prospect of 1. Florida having a single IP address and 2. Florida being taken out by Barbelith.

What would we wear?

But I'll be on a university computer later this evening (about 3.5-5 hours from now) and can try signing on from there.
 
 
grant
22:06 / 09.01.08
Ack - I just thought of something.

I can email you from a gmail account (I just made it! It's called "bannablesuit"!) and log in to barbelith from a university connection. My IP address will thus be the university's IP.

However, if Haus is the one who actually creates the user - putting the username and password into the system, then emailing my gmail - isn't Haus the one whose IP address is getting logged as the originating IP?

Would every IP used by the user be logged and blocked?

Would the IP used to create the account thus be at risk of blockage?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:43 / 09.01.08
Just so. It seems checking is still ongoing, which makes life slightly easier, but I'd rather not give people the backdoor if possible nonetheless, if we are trying to pass people twice as quickly.

I propose this: Grant, could you do me a favour? I will give you the means to create logins. You then create not one but _two_ suits at the aforementioned University - call them bannable1 and bannable2, let's say. We then ban bannable1. We ban it to shit. Once bannable1 is gone, you go back to the university and try logging in as bannable2, and see what happens. Sound credible?
 
 
grant
22:59 / 09.01.08
Good to me!
 
 
Closed for Business Time
11:44 / 10.01.08
Whappened?
 
 
grant
18:29 / 10.01.08
Give it a couple days - I was at the university and gone before everything fell into place. I'll try the library on Saturday.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:02 / 10.01.08
We could save some time by... BANNING GRANT.

BURN HIM

BURN HIM

BURN HIM.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:03 / 10.01.08
(Editor's note: this would not actually save any time.)
 
 
gamma globulins
06:56 / 11.01.08
And so now we wait in fear for Grant's grand act of trolling. How will he smash our realitee tunnelz? And just how many pages will his banning thread run to?

Quake barbelith, quake, for now you know fear!
 
 
bannable1
21:36 / 12.01.08
dead dog in an alleyway this morning...



what can i do with this suit?
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
22:24 / 12.01.08
As a minor point, the ban request doesn't mention the name of the person that's up for being banned. In the magical sunshine world where Tom makes changes to anything ever again that could do with being added to the ban window.
 
 
grant
23:11 / 12.01.08
That was a strange experience - voted on two jobs for banning my second self.

The name's not there, but the "reference" link goes right to an offending post.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
07:32 / 13.01.08
As you've often said in your work, grant, all things move naturally towards their end. 'We return, and begin again', or whatever it was. Couldn't you at least show some dignity, FFS?
 
 
Olulabelle
11:12 / 13.01.08
I have agreed the ban on the basis of outrageous trolling. Outrageous.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
12:05 / 13.01.08
Wait... Should we try and see his point of view? Oh, I've already voted to ban. Oh well...
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
15:26 / 13.01.08
Banning a suit just because it existed only to be banned? You're just like the Nazis etc...
 
 
Mordant Carnival
(prev. 3 HUNGRY VELOCIRAPTORS)
16:06 / 13.01.08
Banning is the last refuge of scoundrels.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
17:42 / 13.01.08
Let's start a "bring back grant's banned suit" campaign.



...so did it work?
 
 
Smoothly
20:49 / 13.01.08
It was on 4 out of 5, and I just agreed it, so we should be able to find out now.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
21:07 / 13.01.08
You'll like this.

I just went to 'Edit User' on bannable1, to see if the board would tell me that the suit is already banned.

But it didn't. In fact, it's let me start the whole process of banning over from scratch.

Awesome.

Ly shit.
 
 
grant
22:17 / 13.01.08
Yeah, I just noticed that. What's up with that? I'm hoping it's not to do with there being two bannings from two fora simultaneously.

I'm also wondering if there's a by-hand element to the "automatic" banning process. Hmm.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
15:45 / 14.01.08
First they came for the suits that existed only to be banned, and I said nothing...

So did it work? Did it? Huh? Did it? Huh? Tell us! Did it?
 
 
bannable1
16:35 / 14.01.08

I'm not stuck in here with you.


YOU'RE stuck in here with ME.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
18:21 / 14.01.08
Excellent.

Ly useless.
 
 
Semiotic Robotic
19:02 / 14.01.08
I guess that means the "ban" function doesn't work?
 
 
gamma globulins
19:09 / 14.01.08
Well we won't know until grant tries logging back in.

?
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply