> > It would make filtering by identity on a fully public forum impossible.
>
> Which would effectively rule out any posts from other than the group
> regulars (who are specified in the "allow-file" -- a killfile would not
> work, obviously).
That's only one solution. You could also have a probation period in which
limited posting priviledges are allowed, working up to eventual unlimited
posting priviledges. And you can have membership sponsorship in which
someone says asks for a new person to be given membership. There are many
ways to have a restricted list and having a restricted list of any sort
supresses flooding. Your solution is to have members pay dues in the form
of CPU cycles, which is basically an economic method of selecting
membership. There are other methods of selection.
> We're going to be assaulted by punks delighted at what they perceive to be
> the opportunity to shatter our perfect crystalline heavens and all their
> divine motions. It's not going to be pretty.
Perhaps. We'll see what happens when it happens.
> But it needs to be filterable, somehow, and easily. When a flood begins,
> there should be mechanisms in place to ignore it, somehow, even if that
> means filtering out posts from all but group regulars. With a basic system
Of course. I'm just saying that hash cash isn't the only way and we should
explore a bunch of ways before we decide on one. We need to figure out
what all the options are and match them against each other.
> like fnnews, one malicious attacker can trivially destroy the entire
> system. He can insert archive posts for a hundred years, he can cram in so
> many posts that normal posters cannot afford to increment the appended
> integer all to way to the next available slot. There is absolutely nothing
On an unmoderated list, yes. On a moderated list you're matching the time
and energy of them attacker(s) with the time and energy of the
moderator(s).
> Moderation can ameliorate this situation to an extent. If The Moderator
> has a public submissions subspace and a secret subspace that only group
> regulars know about, if the public subspace is flooded horribly, the
> regulars can keep posting and nobody will even know. But that's a cop-out.
No, it's a solution. And a solution which doesn't require any new coding
and can be implemented today by an interested party. Of course that
doesn't mean there aren't other solutions which are better.
_______________________________________________
Freenet-chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-chat
