21
guardian2k1
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...

One thing I can't stand is being called a liar. Personally I think you are being stupid, in fact, I'm not going to waste my time on this because its a pointless argument that you seriously went the wrong way of dealing with.

Your argument carries no weight, no logic and is meaningless. XOOPS track record on security is pretty good considering it was originally a fork of postnuke. Anything that improves that record is welcome

As to the *we*, I don't see many backing you up on this.
"Linux is extremely user-friendly. It also happens to be extremely selective when picking its friends."

http://www.nuxified.com | http://debcentral.org

22
Mandlea
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 3:34

  • Mandlea

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 25

  • Since: 2006/2/3 0


Yes, don't waste anymore time here. Because you have nothing of any value to say anyway.

23
Chappy
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 3:58

  • Chappy

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 456

  • Since: 2002/12/14


Personally, Mandlea, I like the feature. I would like the option to disallow users to change their displayname for the reasons mentioned above. But, frankly, the value of the approach XOOPS has taken to securiy is one that has been hard earned, as anyone who has been around here for a few years can attest. The new approach makes common sense to me, your mathematics and quotes from someone you chatted with on IRC notwithstanding.

Nonetheless, I'm glad you brought up the change for examination and hopefully the feature will be adjusted somewhat as noted above.

At the same time, is this one feature really so odious that it brings about all this angst and anger? You have suggested a change. It has been heard. If you really care about your point, you might choose to make friends, not enemies. Or, perhaps, you could move on to another CMS (since you are familiar with their features). In any case, your approach to this discussion has won you, and, perhaps your argument, few friends. In this sense, perhaps you could learn something from this discussion: Having made your point, you devalued it. Learn to back off a bit. You said you are young. This is a good time to learn.
MMM...It tastes like chicken! ...

24
Mandlea
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 4:46

  • Mandlea

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 25

  • Since: 2006/2/3 0


Believe me, I am not trying to degrade XOOPS and I DO value and appretiate the hardwork and effort that has gone into the system as a whole. Overall I am very happy with XOOPS and I prefer it over any of the others I have tried so far. I'm not sure how I have "come across" in my posts but I am far from "angry" as you put it. Perhaps passionate and egar to see a silly/pointless feature removed or at least made optional and not have it tarnish and otherwise FANTASTIC CMS. If I didn't like XOOPS I would not be wasting my time here discussing this problem. There is no anger against XOOPS here, just passion Which is a good thing.

But surely my appretiation of XOOPS should not mean I have to totally ignore a poorly implemented new feature, which was probably coded in less than a day? I have been through all the scripts and code relating to this new Displayname field (and hacked out most of it) and I can tell you it hasn't taken a lot of work to tag this feature on. So it would not take a great deal of effort to remove it BEFORE it becomes too much a part of XOOPS and 3rd party modules forever.

Having said that, I can see there are many people - including yourself - who do see the value in this new Displayname field, eventhough in reality it adds nothing to security. So I would be happy if it stays as an optional feature, if only for the "comfort factor" it seems to produce. That I could live with

25
terrion
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 5:57

  • terrion

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 299

  • Since: 2004/9/19


For what it's worth I'd like to mention that the single question most often asked by "Newbie" users of the sites I'm assisting with since upgrading has been "What's the difference between display name and login name (or username or whatever.)

Since I've been upgradeing my XOOPS installations I've had at least a phone call a night. I've also noticed a decrease in user registrations over the last week which may or may not have anything to do with that particular field, but one has to wonder.

I'm in favor of the Display Name being option. But I really don't think that is the answer.

My users problem seems to be a lack of understanding of what these fields are and how they will be used which is a very simple matter of a more verbose explanation of ALL the required fields on the registration form.

Possibly a more descriptive explanation by default on the registration form that gives a novice, or fist time visitor to a site that is trying to register an extremely clear description of the difference between the two are and how they will be used would solve this problem entirely.
Terrion
Purchase, renew, or transfer your domain name to Ultranet Domains and get a FREE 10GB hosting account. Virtual Dedicated Servers around $35/monthly, no contract. FREE 24/7 telephone ...

26
Shine
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 9:40

  • Shine

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 822

  • Since: 2002/7/22


Obviously, this new feature cuts both ways. Some like it, others don't.
I'd say: make this new core addition into an option.

I also register on a lot of websites using different CMS's. And up till now never came accross to put in (as required) a loginname and a displayname at the same time.
I haven't installed 2.2.x yet. But what I ask myself is this:
May the loginname and displayname be the same during registration?

Grtz., Shine

27
MadFish
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 10:05

  • MadFish

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 1056

  • Since: 2003/9/27


Quote:
One thing I can't stand is being called a liar.


Mandlea I have to agree with this - guardian2k1 may (or may not) be *wrong* but referring to them as a *liar* is over the top.

I agree that making it optional would be useful, but changeable displaynames won't stop people making inappropriate posts - and if you look at someone's profile you will still be able to access a list of their previous posts (some of which will almost certainly contain their old name). Anyway, people can (and frequently do) register a new account with a different email address :)

The 'lockout after x attempts' feature, mentioned by john_n would be a better way to protect against brute force.

28
jdseymour
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...

Hi MadFish


Quote:
The 'lockout after x attempts' feature, mentioned by john_n would be a better way to protect against brute force.


Just a little info on this. The protector module by GIJOE does this already. It would be a great feature to incorporate into the core.

29
Bender
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 10:33

  • Bender

  • Home away from home

  • Posts: 1899

  • Since: 2003/3/10


Ok,

two things were a bit over the top so while i can see where the reaction came from ( this thread hilarious, stupid and a waste of peoples time)it´s still out of line (liar).

So please stop insulting each other and discuss in a civilized manner as many others do. Any further comments regarding this should be taken to pm.

Now back to the issue at hand ...
Sorry, this signature is experiencing technical difficulties. We will return you to the sheduled signature as soon as possible ...

30
davidl2
Re: Protest Thread to *REMOVE* Displayname Field From Xoops...
  • 2006/2/5 13:27

  • davidl2

  • XOOPS is my life!

  • Posts: 4843

  • Since: 2003/5/26


Thankyou B - agreed.

As a practical input, the prevention of editing the display name would be an excellent option, which I feel should be included at some course. (As JD and I suggested earlier)

Likewise, the lock-out feature JohnN suggested is a good one... stopping people from changing their names if they are trouble isnt the issue - preventing them from causing trouble is the important issue.

Login

Username:
Password:

Lost Password? Register now!

Who's Online

61 user(s) are online (35 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


Members: 0


Guests: 61


more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: May 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits