Re: [Bug-gne]Moderation & Server setup

[Imran Ghory]

On 18 Feb 2001, at 8:01, Tom Chance wrote:

> > > Look we can't just let every article submitted
> > enter
> > > the resource, we've decided that already, so we
> > don't
> > > get binary bombs and adverts. The most open
> > moderation
> > > system proposed was mine and Rob's which is where
> > any
> > > article only needs a few "yes" votes to get in;
> > > there's no majority needed or anything similar...
> > no
> > > "reject" votes. 
> > 
> > That's open to total abuse though, it be trivial to
> > bypass such a 
> > checking system. And it will still rely on the owner
> > of the server not 
> > wiping anything they don't like.
> 
> Yes it is if anybody could vote, but thats not the way
> it would work. Moderators would be people who have
> submitted a couple of articles, the people on this
> list, and/or anyone else we know is responsible and
> committed enough to this project that they wouldn't
> let adverts and other rubbish it.

That would mean it would be trivial to become a moderator, anyone 
can write a couple of dozen decent articles to "get in" and once in 
they could abuse the system.

> But it does mean
> there is bound to be enough people on at any on time
> to alllow anything in. If there's any yes/no voting,
> we're bound to start losing a lot of articles.

If we have multiple servers then people can submit the article to a 
server which they think is more likely to accept it and create a 
more fair system, if an articles reject by every server then chances 
are that the article doesn't deserve to be included. But at least 
going down this route would prevent a moderation system being 
abused.

> > > Stick it on a computer and just leave the system
> > > automated; don't let somebody sneak through it
> > > deleting references.
> > 
> > Unless the system is physically secure (i.e in a
> > lead box under the 
> > Atlantic), that's going to be impossible to do. Game
> > networking 
> > programmers have been trying for years to find a
> > method of 
> > ensuring data integerity on insecure computers.
> 
> I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Nobody in
> GNE is going to start ripping articles out of any
> index, are they? 

Do you know that for sure ?

We can't leave GNE to be vulnerable to being destroyed by a single 
person, no matter who that person is.

> And as to the rest of your system, I
> will wait until you or somebody else has actually made
> and tested it before I will reply. 

The style of distributed information has been used before by 
Gopher, we know that it can be made to work.

Imran