Comments on How open? a digital magpie2004-01-18T06:32:34Zhttps://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/feedWordPress
By: Phil Ringnalda Phil Ringnaldahttp://philringnalda.comhttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7534-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZSilly of me, linking to the 1.0 branch when I know that all the action’s on the trunk.
]]>
By: Dv Dvhttp://terrato.orghttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7535-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZHi, I’d just like to point out I only host it and maintain the Perl version, I don’t flood blogs, so don’t bother sending angry flames to my ISPs abuse address.
Thanks.
]]>
By: Phil Ringnalda Phil Ringnaldahttp://philringnalda.comhttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7536-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZHeh. While I love to rush straight to Godwin’s Law whenever possible, and there really aren’t very many good defenses for Hitler’s bankers, I’m a little distracted right now, wondering whether I’m quick enough to block all of the mtproxies list, or if I’m better off thinking in other directions than IPs. Don’t suppose someone’s going to run 1.1.5, clean up the proxy list, and then reupload it? No sense in my blocking the dead ones, is there?
]]>
By: Phil Ringnalda Phil Ringnaldahttp://philringnalda.comhttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7537-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZEh. Massive dups, really dirty list, but 9800? Don’t think I’ll be bothering to block, after all. Onward!
]]>
By: ROFL ROFLhttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7551-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZDo you know how many millions of anonymous proxies there are out there?
OMG, I’M SO LMAO NOW LOL
]]>
By: Phil Ringnalda Phil Ringnaldahttp://philringnalda.comhttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7553-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZYep, or at least I’m starting to realize. Something I never actually needed to know before. But, still, suppose you say to yourself ”oh, there’s millions out there, no sense blocking those 35” and the next day you wake up to several thousand comments all from the ones that ship with FloodMT. A couple of minutes work for a little bit of protection from feeling really stupid? I’ll take that deal.
]]>
By: Anonymous Anonymoushttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7580-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZEventually, we’re probably going to need to do some kind of web-of-trust thing. Any chance anyone could write a plug-in that integrates with GNUPG and signs the comment?
]]>
By: Phil Ringnalda Phil Ringnaldahttp://philringnalda.comhttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7581-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZThat’s sort of along the lines of what I’ve been thinking this afternoon: signed and known, your comment is immediately visible, and triggers a rebuild in MT, unsigned or unknown, you go into the moderation queue and are only visible through a fried cgi version of the comments (for those people who read /. at -1 ;)) until you get approved or dumped. Beats hell out of the awful idea of registration, anyway.
]]>
By: Mark Markhttp://diveintomark.org/http://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7591-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZThey’re branching out. Version 1.1.6 can flood LiveJournal too. These bastards are going to have a universal comment posting API before you know it.
]]>
By: Phil Ringnalda Phil Ringnaldahttp://philringnalda.comhttp://weblog.philringnalda.com/2004/01/17/how-open/#comment-7593-0001-11-30T00:00:00Z-0001-11-30T00:00:00ZI think Jacques said all that can be said about flooding an LJ:
Yep, crapping on her LiveJournal is surely the way to attract the attention of that girl you’ve been itching to talk to…