XOOPS 
Forum
Forum Index General Forums Community Support Modules Support Themes Support Development International Support Module Hack Reviews Theme Designer Talk
  1. Board index / 
  2. General XOOPS.org forums / 
  3. XOOPS Project Teams 
  4.  / Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification
Register
21
BlueStocking
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

Many things have been suggested MANY TIMES and they go ignored. (most of the suggestions much more important than this issue)
__________________
We discussed the TOS agreement (offically) and you flew your ideas and we flew ours past the council (offically). I haven't changed at all. The TOS agreement is perfectly fine as it stands. The status of the TOS was addressed and published in the inital ok'ing of this Team Coordinators call to action.
___________________
Someone is bowing to anothers personal request, it has nothing to do with the actual mechanics of making the TOS agreement enforceable.

IF a rule creates more problems then it will solve then it should not be enacted.

Who gets the job of going through a 50,000 member database and cull for persons using duplicate accounts -- or do you already have in mind who the multiple user accounts are you are going to delete.

I suspicion the last is mostly correct.

Brings to mind, more than one way to skin a cat.

I have over 500 email addresses I could use and a phone book to pick names from -- if so inclined. How do you propose to enforce such a stupid regulation, and for what purpose.

BS
hhttps://xoops.org/modules/repository .. It is time to get involved - XOOPS.ORG
22
kc0maz
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

  • 2007/9/14 17:52

  • kc0maz

  • Quite a regular

  • Posts: 216

  • Since: 2005/4/18


Quote:

BlueStocking wrote:
Many things have been suggested MANY TIMES and they go ignored.

I can't and won't deny that has happened, However, changes are being made.

from https://xoops.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&topic_id=60672&forum=3
Quote:

Mamba wrote:
Suggestion for XOOPS officers (members in a leading position) - I would like to suggest to start working using the real names.

lead to this:
https://xoops.org/modules/wfchannel/index.php?pagenum=17

yes we are listening, and taking action.

Quote:

Someone is bowing to anothers personal request, it has nothing to do with the actual mechanics of making the TOS agreement enforceable.


On the contrary, I am tired of trying to guess who is behind what username. Its like the worlds' largest shell game, and the ball keeps moving

Quote:

IF a rule creates more problems then it will solve then it should not be enacted.


I agree with statement. That is what this discussion is about. to see if it will create more problems than it solves.
Quote:

Who gets the job of going through a 50,000 member database and cull for persons using duplicate accounts -- or do you already have in mind who the multiple user accounts you are going to delete.

Since you brought it up, are you doing anything the next few weeks? (just kidding)
I really haven't gotten that far yet. Right now I am seeing if the community would support such a measure
Quote:

I have over 500 email addresses I could use and a phone book to pick names from -- if so inclined. How do you propose to enforce such a stupid regulation, and for what purpose.

BS


It would mainly be on the honor system. However we could follow the rule of other sites, and say if you are found to have more than one, all of the known accounts will be deleted.
Some dream of success, while others wake up and work for it.
--unknown
23
skenow
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

  • 2007/9/14 18:02

  • skenow

  • Home away from home

  • Posts: 993

  • Since: 2004/11/17


Isn't this discussion a bit like straightening the deck chairs on the Titanic?

I'm sorry, but this is not a productive topic
24
vaughan
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

  • 2007/9/14 18:08

  • vaughan

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 680

  • Since: 2005/11/26


why would it create problems to have a 1 account per person rule? sorry i'm lost on that regard. and i don't find BS's opinion in that matter credible enough to discount the rule change whatsoever.

why the need for multiple accounts? unless you're a certified schizophrenic.

and i take my hat off, i was against having anonymous names, but a few people voted for it, now people are saying they don't want to hide behind anonymous names.. well i can honestly say i did see that 1 coming.. you can't please everyone.. but anonymity is a bad idea when everyone seems to be asking for open & transparent communication..

and yes, as for enforcing it, there's not many ways to tell if a user has multiple accounts, but if you are found to have them, then you were warned. and in most cases eventually you will be discovered..

if you think this site was bad, then you should have been on audiogalaxy in it's hey day, now that site was a job & half to moderate on, that i can assure you, when some users were discovered through time to have over 300 accounts each.

and besides the fact multiple accounts increase the membership numbers and therefore it portrays that there are more actual members than there actually is, in effect it's false advertising and a waste of database time and processing power..
25
Peekay
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

  • 2007/9/14 18:11

  • Peekay

  • XOOPS is my life!

  • Posts: 2335

  • Since: 2004/11/20


Quote:

hervet wrote:

just to avoid that some stupid person use it.
Nothing else.

A fair point. People do the same thing with domains.

I agree with skenow it's a bit pointless to discuss. If you put a one-name-per-member condition in the rules, people will either comply, or not. As has already been mentioned, with dynamic IPs I can't see how you could possibly enforce it.
A thread is for life. Not just for Christmas.
26
BlueStocking
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

kc0maz, Quote:
Quote: BlueStocking wrote: Many things have been suggested MANY TIMES and they go ignored. kc0maz replied: I can't and won't deny that has happened, However, changes are being made.
kc0maz replied: I can't and won't deny that has happened, However, changes are being made talked about. ____________ NAME ONE CHANGE THAT HAS BEEN MADE, PLEASE. IMPORTANT EDIT: @kc0maz: I APOPOGIZE... THERE HAS BEEN ONE CHANGE MADE https://xoops.org/modules/wfchannel/index.php?pagenum=17 Thank you Giba, for being the driving force to putting it in motion and phppp for helping make it a reality. END OF IMPORTANT EDIT Talking about changes doesn't count. We have been doing that for years. If there has been ANY CHANGE ACTUALLY MADE, I missed it completely, until today!!! Updated on September 8th 2007 -I missed the announcement!!!! Got this information from xoopsinfo.com just before the db connection failed. (Their poor server couldn't handle this kind of news. It was a shock to the system) People come and go ... that is no change. What changed, really? What we have now is the honor system, but there are those who refuse to honor others as they would like to be honored themselves. BS
hhttps://xoops.org/modules/repository .. It is time to get involved - XOOPS.ORG
27
hackbrill
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

  • 2007/9/14 20:29

  • hackbrill

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 283

  • Since: 2005/7/14


Quote:

vaughan wrote:

and i take my hat off, i was against having anonymous names, but a few people voted for it, now people are saying they don't want to hide behind anonymous names.. well i can honestly say i did see that 1 coming.. you can't please everyone.. but anonymity is a bad idea when everyone seems to be asking for open & transparent communication..


Huh? What anonymous users could you be referencing? Is it the moderators? Because if it is, I believe everyone here will agree that that idea has been working quite well.
28
vaughan
Re: Terms of use and XOOPSiquette modification

  • 2007/9/14 21:47

  • vaughan

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 680

  • Since: 2005/11/26


Quote:

hackbrill wrote:

Huh? What anonymous users could you be referencing? Is it the moderators? Because if it is, I believe everyone here will agree that that idea has been working quite well.


well? i beg to differ. when i want a moderator i goto kc0maz or javesey, when i want to have a go at a moderator i'll goto kc0maz or javesey, when i want to report something, we all goto kc or javesey.. lol

what's the point in them having a forumModerator1 & 2 username? we all know who the mods are, it is absolutely no different to how it was b4.. i don't complain to forummoderator1 because forummoderator1 is kc, javesey is forummoderator2. the only difference now is that they have to login with a seperate username just to moderate which is pointless when they can do it in their own name.
« 1 2 (3)

Login

Register now!  |  Lost Password?

Search

Advanced Search

Recent Posts

Who's Online

379 user(s) are online (291 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)

Members: 0

Guests: 379

more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Nov 30
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits