haha

will the new code finally ban mickey?

seriously needs to

From this:

And banning someone from ile is not ok, but bullying several posters off of posting to threads you start and being a hateful lunatic is totally ok?

I’m guessing it was Kate. xpost

Yeah, because mickey’s so much worse than any other annoying cnut round here

ok. ban kenan too.

It’s all about opinions.

xp

Yeah, because mickey’s so much worse than any other annoying cnut round here

there are others as bad as him but none seem to have quite the same fondness for the word “faggot”

hahaha xpost to Gerry

true xpost.

It’s all about opinions.

“Opinions are like assholes...”

opinions are like belly buttons

it’s all about the safety of your identities

LOL (xpost)

mickey’s “relationship” w/the RIAA lifts him above garden-variety internet assholism. he’s an undercover narc, 100000X the threat to ILX that many ppl seem to think JW is.

opinions are like the cellular composition of a body, they replace themselves completely every few years yet somehow remain almost exactly the same

All i can say is it’s only slightly amusing that I had started a thread about the depressing state of BBC ‘have your say’ threads only for this to happen.

or more accurately, a parole violator who will draw the heat here.

“stash the hash, man”

Mickey’s just a Jagger with EDGE.

I was just reading that BBC have your say thread, having not looked at ILX all weekend, when catastrophe did strike.

Mickey’s just a Jagger with EDGE. and men’s clothes.

Mickey Jagger?

Mickey Borchardt: “Sinking a Music Pirate” (L.A. Times, April 3, 2006)

This simpering piece of garbage could have been written by an RIAA operative: a college student busted for illegal downloading details how the FBI dragged him into court while concluding that “stealing of any kind is wrong.” Wonder if this essay was part of his plea bargain? If so, they should throw the book at him, though they probably won’t since he’s acted like such a good little tool.

Um how does one put up images again? (Sorry I should know this by now!)

but put it all a bit closer together

(img src=“www.comedykitten.jpg”)

but with pointy brackets instead of round ones.

Thanks ailsa. How did you know I wanted it for kittens? :)

(the html checker frowns on pointy brackets unless you do them in html too, which is probably where acrobat’s explanation went)

xpost—it’s ILX, dude, what else would you want it for?

To write actual pointy brackets on the screen, incidentally, you write &lt; for < and &gt; for >

Aye, see that’s where I’d fall down, because I’d write that and it’d magically turn into pointy brackets, hence missing the point.

so the few miserable cunts who dislike me can have a great argument for banning me?

FWIW jon (as if you care) I don’t dislike you but the whole hacker ethics bewilders me. The problems you find are important but it seems the methods you use to highlight just create more headaches for people who are ultimately volunteers.

On the bright side, I not only look ridiculous now, but people might remember me for my naivety. I guess I’m just throwing out halfway uninformed opinions after a few years of underposting and overlurking.

Aye, see that’s where I’d fall down, because I’d write that and it’d
magically turn into pointy brackets, hence missing the point.

If you want to write &lt, write &amp;lt;—and if you want to write &amp;lt; write &amp;amp;lt;... oh the hilarity.

xpost—it’s ILX, dude, what else would you want it for?

OTM. Have done my work on the other thread. I’ll stop now for fear of the madness that might be unleashed!

Anyway, the point is that Starry Sarah is totally noize.

<

<

</life>

I think that I trust Jon enough to not fuck with things.
have i woken up in a parallel universe or something?

Well, he could have, but did he? As far as I can see, he didn’t reallty (except maybe ban Kate, but that’s not really THAT harmful). Like Ms Misery, I don’t get the hacker mentality/code/whatever, but I’m happy he did hack into the database and showed us it was fragile. So ok, maybe the admins knew, but I think it’s stil (sort of) a good thing.

(I just mean: cut him some slack.)

cap’n save-a-hax0r

Nath, there is a fundamental difference between reviewing the code and reporting a problem and ‘hacking into the database’ and causing problems — without telling anybody, and letting the mods discover what had happened after the fact. If that distinction isn’t clear then I don’t know what to say. I’ve had my own questions about these last couple of days but you have no idea about the level of anger these and previous instances have caused among the mods.

Pash, Stet and KeefW in particular are dedicated to providing — as has been noted, on a strictly *volunteer* basis — the best possible home for ILX at the present time. They coordinated the effort, they have shown a hell of a lot of energy and good judgment in general, and they do want make sure that ILX runs efficiently and securely. No offense but you might want to cut *THEM* slack first.

As Matt says though, most of the time you don’t register much with me, and I guess I don’t register much with you either, but why is it that whenever you DO it’s for things like this?

Because you only post on Chicago threads?

— jw (jo...), February 11th, 2007.

Uh, that is not Chicago Sarah.

This thread is about QA, right?

Also, Jon hasn’t done much (though random banning of people you don’t like must raise some sort of ethical issues), but he’s threatened enough, and fucked shit up in the past enough, that the mods thought it wasn’t a risk worth taking.

As Ned says, a helpful person would send an email going “look, here is a loophole I have found, do you want to fix it” rather than fucking shit up for everyone else and claiming that somehow that was a better way of drawing said loophole to the attention of Keith, Stet and Pashmina, if he’s really doing this for the collective good of ILX.

I think it was more the banning that was for the collective good; getting to point out a hole in the code is basically a fringe benefit.

xpost But hasn’t Jon reported the errors numerous times to the mods? What exactly did he do wrong? He hacked into the database, but what did he do wrong there save (?) making himself a mod and banning Kate (which is a somewhat crap thing to do... I know). I mean, I’m not saying he should be applauded for what he did, but in some crazy ass way I can understand (from his snooty geek point of view wink wink). He should be spanked (heh!), I mean, told off for what he did, but it’s not the end of the world/ILX.

I mean, everyone acts as though he’s destroyed ILX. FFS, he just hacked into the database and banned/elected himself mod. That’s quickly solved, no?

lol

xp

Nath I think the point is that, rightly or wrongly, some of the mods/coders do not trust Jon to have access to mod priveleges and not abuse them whenever he’s in the mood to do so.

He hacked into the database, but what did he do wrong there

Excuse me, I’m going to go find a wall to bang my head against.

it appears he does not need to have access to mod priveleges seeing as how he can make them and take them when he pleases.

FFS, he just hacked into the database and banned/elected himself mod

Oh, that small matter of TOTAL POTENTIAL TO FUCK SHIT UP? That’s all right then. Hurrah for Jon! Boo to over-reacting coders/admins!

There is a post upthread that apparently people either haven’t read or are willfully ignoring. Let me repost it:

Everybody:

Jon found a security hole in ILX that lets him get access to the database. Full access, so he can give himself mod privs, delete posts, threads, boards, the whole site.

He didn’t tell Keith or me how he did it, he just took advantage of it. Keith and I are the only people with access to the server right now. We both have full-time jobs. The old ILX code running depends on people not trying to break it, or hack in.

If Jon is going to hack the boards by finding holes — of which there are many — we can’t leave them up without doing a lot more admin work to try and stop him. On top of which, the new host’s backup system hasn’t been set up yet, so we have no backups right now.

We’re going to move to the new secure code. It’s not quite ready, it hasn’t had all the features fleshed out, but it lets you post and is largely secure.

— stet (bonald...), February 11th, 2007. (later)

yes hacking into the main db is a very, very bad thing. which is, from what I understand, why he did it. to show how dangerous it was.

“He didn’t really _shoot_ anyone, I don’t see what the fuss is about.”

x-post — I need to look for that wall again.

also, yeah, lolz at Laurel. But I’ll be all little miss principle here and suggest that if Jon had decided to ban, say, Ned or Dan or Allyzay or Nabisco or someone who isn’t quite the polariser that Kaet is, the reaction might be slightly different.

but he didn’t!

BAN ALLYZAY

Oh yeah! xpost to onimo

(someone please randomly ban nathalie for experimental purposes)

The guy broke into the house, and he only took a couple of CDs. I think it’s cool, cos it shows me that broken lock that I KNEW WAS BROKEN and had the LOCKSMITH BOOKED TO COME FIX was broken. He didn’t steal the TV, after all.

Yeah but the CDs he stole were all shite ones no-one wanted to listen to.

rofl

(I should just read the kittens threads tbh)

I don’t think that’s exactly what principle means (xp or randomly) :)

The principle is that you don’t ban people because you don’t like them. Which, yeah, isn’t a Fundamental Human Right or anything, and obviously jon comes from the noise board where that principle doesn’t hold at all. But that’s part of why he doesn’t have site-wide powers, and why people are anxious about him giving himself them.

Of course it’s wrong, you have to be retarded not to realize this but he did it to show how loopy ilx was. FFS he could have wrecked ILX but he DID NOT.

Ned do you want me to move the wall a bit closer?

Could you please?

Nath, can I repeat something I JUST FREAKIN’ POSTED FROM STET’S EARLIER COMMENT:

The old ILX code running depends on people not trying to break it, or hack in.

If Jon is going to hack the boards by finding holes — of which there are many — we can’t leave them up without doing a lot more admin work to try and stop him.

In otherwards, could you please allow for the fact that, perhaps, the mods maybe possibly kinda knew that there were problems with the code as it stands?

xpost

yeah but Nath that’s like saying “Sure he had a gun, but he only shot that person in the foot. He COULD have killed him!” ;) (I’m just having fun with you.)

also, we must all remember that this is just ILx. Not terribly huge and important in the great scheme of life. (as opposed to our feet.)

In other words, it’s the hacking itself that’s the problem, not what he did or didn’t do once he’d hacked in.

I don’t know how many other ways there are for people to say this.

Of course it’s wrong, you have to be retarded not to realize this but he did it to show how loopy ilx was.

And the first time he did this, people took his intentions into account and said “thanks, but don’t do it that way”. But this isn’t the first time he’s done this kind of shit, or even the tenth.

7th?

I’m happy he did hack into the database and showed us it was fragile

mmm, yes, because NONE of us knew that, did we?

come on: this code is held together with chewing gum and string. that’s why it’s being recoded, FFS! which jon knows, as does everyone else: what the fuck is the point of “pointing out” security holes in something that’s about to be canned anyway?

i can’t believe anyone’s buying this “it was for the public good” line. it was to noise people up (pun vaguely intended), as is so often the case with jon’s little escapades. in which case:

I just mean: cut him some slack

no. don’t get me wrong: i like jon some/most of the time, and enjoy his posts. but every so often he seems to have this compulsion to stick his dick into ILX, which only serves to fuck it up for everyone else. why doesn’t he cut the board some slack?

The principle is that you don’t ban people because you don’t like them.

Yeah, and why I’m saying it’s all very well going, “oh it’s just Kate, she’s a bit loopy and annoying haha”, but I imagine it being someone other than Kate may lead the likes of Nathalie (in fact,it is just nathalie, isn’t it?) to taking this a bit more seriously.

In case you were suggesting I didn’t know what a principle was. If it wasn’t me you were getting at, ignore me.

also, we must all remember that this is just ILx. Not terribly huge and important in the great scheme of life.

Entirely true. Those who have made it part of their lives on a regular basis via site maintenance, coding, etc., however, have an understandable interest in database and hacking concerns that I think is being ignored or misunderstood by a number of those who haven’t. And that’s a damn shame. Nobody’s looking for hosannas to boost our collective ego, but exactly what is so surprising to you about moderator worries about this situation?

Those who have made it part of their lives on a regular basis via site maintenance, coding, etc., however, have an understandable interest in database and hacking concerns that I think is being ignored or misunderstood by a number of those who haven’t.

Also, those who have made it part of their lives on a regular basis by READING and CONTRIBUTING (that aren’t morons).

Though this is going to end with RJG turning up and telling everyone to let go, isn’t it?

I hope so.

Great, now I’m singing Frou Frou in my head.

if Jon had decided to ban, say, Ned or Dan or Allyzay or Nabisco or someone who isn’t quite the polariser that Kaet is, the reaction might be slightly different.

Well, duh, but he’d’ve had no reason to ban those people. Okay, maybe Ally...but not the others! Point being: there are a number of people on the boards behaving badly in various ways and NO ONE IS DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THEM. Like, not even really standing up to them and saying “Your behavior sucks. Please stop or don’t be my/our friend/s.” Jon is arguably one of them, everyone’s perspective on this will differ. But the lovely virtues of tolerance and politeness and cultivating NICENESS in the world are running up against the fact that plenty of people are oblivious or unconcerned about tactful silences and the gentle pressure of suggestion. It’s occasionally helpful to have people around who don’t mind rocking the boat, as much of a pain in the ass as they inevitably are.

Hi Kim! Remember when we had Noise Admin powers and Jon threw a huge shitfit even though we didn’t cause the least bit of damage (and never had any intention of doing so)? Remember how I told Jon to calm the fuck down and noted that if he ever did the same thing with ILE, he’d find the whole thing hilarious and would tell us all that it wasn’t such a big deal? I’m sure he’ll show up soon with his nose running and try to tell us that the two situations aren’t the same though ...
— No Time Before Time (mbvarkes...), February 12th, 2007 8:21 AM.

I’m still waiting for Jon to explain how this is different.

Shooting someone in the foot isn’t the same as having your foot shot!

Point being: there are a number of people on the boards behaving badly in various ways and NO ONE IS DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THEM.

This is a fully legitimate but still separate concern from the hacking question. Conflating the two issues is doing nobody any favors here.

(these analogies omg)

Well, duh, he had no reason to ban Kate either. Also, if I was appointing people to be the judge of who ILX would be better off without (which I’m not, and never would)—Jon wouldn’t exactly be top of the list, so why the fuck he gets to appoint himself the guardian of ILX is anyone’s guess. xpost to Laurel

(also, Kate doesn’t even know about any of this, so it hasn’t exactly worked)

(Haha, I know!)

Yeah, and why I’m saying it’s all very well going, “oh it’s just Kate, she’s a bit loopy and annoying haha”, but I imagine it being someone other than Kate may lead the likes of Nathalie (in fact,it is just nathalie, isn’t it?) to taking this a bit more seriously.

Yeah, but it’s not much of a principle if you have to go “imagine if it was someone who counts” (er, not that Kate doesn’t count). The principle is that it matters more if it’s someone unpopular (I’d make an analogy to legal representation for terrorists, but I want to be able to turn up to Nu-Shimura Curves gigs without wearing a disguise).

And I think Nathalie acknowledges that it was wrong, but doesn’t think it’s important—it’s Laurel that’s going “Go go gadget-Jon!”

In otherwards, could you please allow for the fact that, perhaps, the mods maybe possibly kinda knew that there were problems with the code as it stands?

Furthermore, from what the mods and Jon have both said: the mods are not aware of the exploit that Jon used, and it is an exploit that would seem to allow him to use the boards *as any user*—he certainly said he could carry out mod actions and have it recorded that another mod had done them.

As people upthread have said: if you find a hole like that, the ethical thing to do is inform the people responsible. If they ignore you, you’re then free to tell people about it. Actually *using* the hole is not ethical.

haha ‘confronting’ = ‘banning’. Yeah, BIG MAN.

I can understand why the moderators whould be upset with finding that Jon had somehow gained mod privileges, but everyone else using this incident as an opportunity to take pot-shots at Jon’s character can sit on a rusty eggbeater. You never him.

Oh yes, by all means, explain to me again about hacking and why it’s bad! (XXXP)

i find this whole thing wholely hilarious. what’s the old saying? arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics?

Laurel: I am coming to NYC at the end of this week, I would like to drunk with you / ian / jon / etc.

This is getting ridiculous.

Point being: there are a number of people on the boards behaving badly in various ways and NO ONE IS DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THEM

does ignoring them count? ‘cos, you know, that’s what i like to do. more people should try it some time.

unless someone’s particular brand of bad behaviour involves hacking the site and fucking off the admins. that’s kinda tougher to ignore.

Andrew, this is not MY principle (or lack of), I’ve said all the way through that this is wrong from top to bottom. I sort of guiltily laughed at Laurel going “lolz, it’s just Kate, we’re better off without her” and then suggested she might see it a bit differently if it was one of her friends instead of Kate.

You never him. = my new mantra

i find this whole thing wholely hilarious. what’s the old saying? arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics?

— chicago kevin has a lust for bacon

You don’t find it hilarious, you silly little twat, you’re just one of the kids who enjoys the opportunity to pat himself on the back for not being ridiculous enough to care about something other people do. These blow-ups are always plagued by that sort of shit, but for once maybe you could shut the fuck up about it and just let things get hashed out.

Elmo, you know I’m always available to drink with company. Email me/the boys/us about it and we’ll make a plan.

XP: Okay, whoah. I have no idea what Kevin did to piss you off so thoroughly but I have a feeling there are like three cases of mistaken identity on this thread. Starry Sarah vs ChILX Sarah being the most amusing and harmless so far.

It is not the moderators or anyone else’s job to stop people ‘behaving badly’, whatever that means. Pretty much the only people who ever get banned are persistent trolls, racists, people posting viruses and the occasional Marissa-type absolute fruitloop.

If we banned or cautioned everyone who was flaming or being a cunt towards another poster we’d a) never get any fucking work done and b) have no posters except Nabisco.

xpost

i don’t find it hilarious? are you sure? what are my thoughts on other topics? please enlighten me! because *i* think this is now getting funnier but i need your expert opinion on what i actually think.

BAN KEVIN

“Point being: there are a number of people on the boards behaving badly in various ways and NO ONE IS DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THEM.”

Laurel, you’re right about that, and I hope it’s going to change. But there are about a million better ways to deal with it than by sneaking in under cover of darkness and banning someone who pisses you off. Or did you think that would increase the peace somehow?

Do you really think Jon did it because there was too much bullying on ILX? Even after his Louis Jagger bully thread?

the next time this happens the culprit’s ISP should be informed that their EULA has been violated and given the necessary evidence to prove it.

right now, the mods have decided to leave the main board down instead of continuing to play whack-a-mole with probably further abuse of the old code, and have left the sandbox up for us to play in, so no loss really.

other than that there’s very little that’s pertinent at this time! ilx plays host to a number of terrible children, news to no one, ever, move along or get made fun of by bored civil servants!