[FairfieldLife] Overposting = DoS
Some who have avoided the common TM malady of having brain matter the consistency of the lightness of cotton fiber :-) may have heard of DoS -- a Denial of Service attack. That's where hackers and other social perverts use technological means to keep users of a popular site from contacting that site, or enjoying it. With companies or guvmint agencies, a common DoS attack strategy involves setting up automated phone machines to keep calling their customer service numbers so the line is busy and no one can get through. With websites, there are ways to set up a network of machines to keep banging on areas of the site that use a lot of computing resources, so much so that the site is slowed down and people can't access it or log on. With chat rooms and discussion groups such as this one, another form of DoS is to make the experience of being there so unenjoyable that users who have plowed through it once never want to come back. One of the best ways to do that is to flood the group with angry, hostile, off-topic, and often-crazy posts -- and so MANY of these posts that they can't be ignored. Most people *have* to slog through them, just to get to any topics more interesting. DoS attacks on the Web are now designated in the United States as a form of terrorism. I guess I'm trying to make the case that DoS attacks on discussion groups are another form of terrorism. Back in the day, *many* people brought up how these DoS overposting attacks were ruining for them the experience of reading Fairfield Life. It was such a pain to slog through the hundreds of posts made by a small group (only 3 people, but who consistently made 30% of all FFL posts) that many people no longer wanted to bother coming here. The result of the discussion surrounding this mass exodus was the FFL Posting Limits, which *succeeded* for some time in bringing the noise level of the group down, and simultaneously improved quality in many of the remaining posts. Fairly recently, some of the same people who were responsible for the Posting Limits being created in the first place (along with a few naive newbs like Share) lobbied to have them removed, and Rick complied, largely because his co-moderator Alex felt that policing the Posting Limits was too much trouble. Voila. Here we are, a few months later, and ONE PERSON is now making 30% of all posts to Fairfield Life. Over 1600 of them, in the last two months alone. His constant cascade of crazy is seen by many people as a form of terrorism -- a calculated DoS attack to make the reading experience at Fairfield Life so terrible that its users eventually abandon it. I see it as similar in many ways to another warped former FFLer's attempt to destroy the group by posting porn to it and then notifying Yahoo. That asshole was trying to get Fairfield Life taken down because he disliked some of the things said on it. In my humble opinion, Richard Williams is trying to do the same thing with his constant stream of crazy. He's trying to destroy Fairfield Life by making at least 30% of it unreadable. Given how many people actually seem to support him, he may well have already succeeded -- people are so used to the level of noise he creates that they don't even notice it. Only time will tell. I've started the ball rolling here (hopefully) by commenting on what everyone else was ignoring, the elephant in the room, the person talking so much and so loudly that it was clear he was trying to drown out all other conversation. If that doesn't bother you, don't bother to register an opinion or reply to this thread. If it does, appeal to Rick and see whether anything can be done about this strange form of Net terrorism and the creep perpetrating it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting = DoS
But, can you levitate, Mr. Wright? Can you levitate? On 9/3/2014 8:04 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Some who have avoided the common TM malady of having brain matter the consistency of the lightness of cotton fiber :-) may have heard of DoS -- a Denial of Service attack. That's where hackers and other social perverts use technological means to keep users of a popular site from contacting that site, or enjoying it. With companies or guvmint agencies, a common DoS attack strategy involves setting up automated phone machines to keep calling their customer service numbers so the line is busy and no one can get through. With websites, there are ways to set up a network of machines to keep banging on areas of the site that use a lot of computing resources, so much so that the site is slowed down and people can't access it or log on. With chat rooms and discussion groups such as this one, another form of DoS is to make the experience of being there so unenjoyable that users who have plowed through it once never want to come back. One of the best ways to do that is to flood the group with angry, hostile, off-topic, and often-crazy posts -- and so MANY of these posts that they can't be ignored. Most people *have* to slog through them, just to get to any topics more interesting. DoS attacks on the Web are now designated in the United States as a form of terrorism. I guess I'm trying to make the case that DoS attacks on discussion groups are another form of terrorism. Back in the day, *many* people brought up how these DoS overposting attacks were ruining for them the experience of reading Fairfield Life. It was such a pain to slog through the hundreds of posts made by a small group (only 3 people, but who consistently made 30% of all FFL posts) that many people no longer wanted to bother coming here. The result of the discussion surrounding this mass exodus was the FFL Posting Limits, which *succeeded* for some time in bringing the noise level of the group down, and simultaneously improved quality in many of the remaining posts. Fairly recently, some of the same people who were responsible for the Posting Limits being created in the first place (along with a few naive newbs like Share) lobbied to have them removed, and Rick complied, largely because his co-moderator Alex felt that policing the Posting Limits was too much trouble. Voila. Here we are, a few months later, and ONE PERSON is now making 30% of all posts to Fairfield Life. Over 1600 of them, in the last two months alone. His constant cascade of crazy is seen by many people as a form of terrorism -- a calculated DoS attack to make the reading experience at Fairfield Life so terrible that its users eventually abandon it. I see it as similar in many ways to another warped former FFLer's attempt to destroy the group by posting porn to it and then notifying Yahoo. That asshole was trying to get Fairfield Life taken down because he disliked some of the things said on it. In my humble opinion, Richard Williams is trying to do the same thing with his constant stream of crazy. He's trying to destroy Fairfield Life by making at least 30% of it unreadable. Given how many people actually seem to support him, he may well have already succeeded -- people are so used to the level of noise he creates that they don't even notice it. Only time will tell. I've started the ball rolling here (hopefully) by commenting on what everyone else was ignoring, the elephant in the room, the person talking so much and so loudly that it was clear he was trying to drown out all other conversation. If that doesn't bother you, don't bother to register an opinion or reply to this thread. If it does, appeal to Rick and see whether anything can be done about this strange form of Net terrorism and the creep perpetrating it.
[FairfieldLife] Overposting Ban
From now on, when someone gets banned for overposting, the ban will cover not just one calendar week from the day they overposted, but the remainder of that week, plus the entire following week, Friday to Friday. So for instance, Shemp, who overposted yesterday, will be out until a week from Friday - i.e., midnight on the 17th.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting Ban
On Oct 8, 2008, at 1:09 PM, Rick Archer wrote: From now on, when someone gets banned for overposting, the ban will cover not just one calendar week from the day they overposted, but the remainder of that week, plus the entire following week, Friday to Friday. So for instance, Shemp, who overposted yesterday, will be out until a week from Friday – i.e., midnight on the 17th. Yavol, Herr Rick! Sal (Channeling shemp here...)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting Ban
Rick Archer wrote: From now on, when someone gets banned for overposting, the ban will cover not just one calendar week from the day they overposted, but the remainder of that week, plus the entire following week, Friday to Friday. So for instance, Shemp, who overposted yesterday, will be out until a week from Friday - i.e., midnight on the 17th. As I mentioned a while ago I though that you should have done that all along. Someone may mess up on the count towards the end so they will be penalized less than those who overpost earlier in the week (often intentionally). This also makes it easier for you as you have to restore posting rights only once a week rather than multiple times. It is possible though rare to receive duplicate posts via email so I may be looking into adding the message ID parsing to the Post Count script so it can eliminate duplicates. I even received a duplicate of one of mine this week.
[FairfieldLife] Overposting
Here are the overposters for last week: Spraig – 99 New Morning – 62 Vaj, Turq, and R. Williams – 51 I’ll give the last three the benefit of the doubt, because sometimes I get duplicate emails, so my count isn’t 100% accurate, but Spraig and New Morning are clearly over, and I’ll have to suspend their posting rights for a week. Try keeping count on a scratch pad. Low tech, but accurate. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.13/1378 - Release Date: 4/15/2008 9:12 AM
[FairfieldLife] Overposting
Judy and Shemp are both over by 2. Turq intentionally went over by one last week and I didn’t suspend him, so in fairness to them, I’ll cut them some slack. But if either of them posts again before Friday night, I’ll have to suspend them. Judy for one week, Shemp for 3. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.17/1252 - Release Date: 1/30/2008 8:51 PM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
On Jan 31, 2008, at 11:02 AM, Rick Archer wrote: Judy and Shemp are both over by 2. Turq intentionally went over by one last week and I didn’t suspend him, so in fairness to them, I’ll cut them some slack. But if either of them posts again before Friday night, I’ll have to suspend them. Judy for one week, Shemp for 3. Rick, with such a liberal policy, Shemp just might have to reconsider his opinion that you're the next coming of Mussolini. :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Overposting - Angela's done for the week
59 posts since Friday midnight. Judy has 30. No one else is very close. The limit is 25 per week. Please keep a tally of your own posts. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.22/1112 - Release Date: 11/5/2007 7:11 PM
RE: [FairfieldLife] Overposting - Angela's done for the week
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Archer Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 9:35 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Overposting - Angela's done for the week 59 posts since Friday midnight. Judy has 30. No one else is very close. The limit is 25 per week. I meant 35 per week, which averages out to 5 per day. Pace yourself and favor quality over quantity. (I’m not implying that the two are mutually exclusive.) No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.22/1112 - Release Date: 11/5/2007 7:11 PM
[FairfieldLife] Overposting?
I'm seeing 38 posts for Judy and 37 for Shemp, and we've got one day to go. Yahoo has been sending some duplicate emails, so if you're certain of a more accurate count, you may be within the limit, but you must be getting close. Rick Archer President SearchSummit http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmapaddr=1108+S.+B+St.csz=Fairfield% 2C+IA+52556-3805country=us 1108 S. B St. Fairfield, IA 52556-3805 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: fax: Skype ID: http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?src=jj_signatureTo=641-472-9336Email=r [EMAIL PROTECTED] 641-472-9336 914-470-9336 Rick_Archer https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=25769982909v0=356483k0=1251699766v1=35648 4k1=804482755src=client_sig_212_1_card_joininvite=1 Always have my latest info http://www.plaxo.com/signature?src=client_sig_212_1_card_sig Want a signature like this? image001.gif
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
Why mess with what already works so nicely? On May 3, 2007, at 1:17 AM, Rick Archer wrote: Judy posted 10 times today, so she joins Shemp in moderation land. No posts for her until Friday. Curtis overposted by one. Light slap on the wrist. Even though everyone but New Morning is opposed to it, I’m seriously thinking of trying the 35 posts-per-week system. You can shoot your wad in one day and we won’t hear from you for a week, or you can pace yourself. Either way, the daily average should be about the same. I overpost myself some days, and other days don’t post at all. So this way I wouldn’t violate a rule I’m supposed to enforce. If we try this, we’ll start it Friday night at midnight, so weekend warriors will have free reign. My email client (Outlook) shows me the total of posts, if I sort by posters’ names, so it won’t be hard for me to keep track of. Maybe we’ll try it for a week, then reevaluate.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
It would be easier for you, Rick, if you informed the overposters that their posts beyond 5 or 35 would be deleted. I certainly would not get into the hassle of storing them and approving them so that 11 posts today are approved at the rate of 5 today and 5 tomorrow and 1 the next day. --- Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy posted 10 times today, so she joins Shemp in moderation land. No posts for her until Friday. Curtis overposted by one. Light slap on the wrist. Even though everyone but New Morning is opposed to it, I'm seriously thinking of trying the 35 posts-per-week system. You can shoot your wad in one day and we won't hear from you for a week, or you can pace yourself. Either way, the daily average should be about the same. I overpost myself some days, and other days don't post at all. So this way I wouldn't violate a rule I'm supposed to enforce. If we try this, we'll start it Friday night at midnight, so weekend warriors will have free reign. My email client (Outlook) shows me the total of posts, if I sort by posters' names, so it won't be hard for me to keep track of. Maybe we'll try it for a week, then reevaluate. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
On May 3, 2007, at 7:20 AM, Vaj wrote: Why mess with what already works so nicely? On May 3, 2007, at 1:17 AM, Rick Archer wrote: Judy posted 10 times today, so she joins Shemp in moderation land. No posts for her until Friday. Curtis overposted by one. Light slap on the wrist. Even though everyone but New Morning is opposed to it, I’m seriously thinking of trying the 35 posts-per-week system. You can shoot your wad in one day and we won’t hear from you for a week, or you can pace yourself. Either way, the daily average should be about the same. I overpost myself some days, and other days don’t post at all. So this way I wouldn’t violate a rule I’m supposed to enforce. If we try this, we’ll start it Friday night at midnight, so weekend warriors will have free reign. My email client (Outlook) shows me the total of posts, if I sort by posters’ names, so it won’t be hard for me to keep track of. Maybe we’ll try it for a week, then reevaluate. Rick, I think it's a great idea. My guess is, Judy and her latest sidekick, Jim, will keep trying to start arguments with whomoever's convenient in the hopes that you will be forced to agree that the limits don't work (doesn't abolish the fighting,) and therefore give up. Hopefully you won't, but Id guess right now that's part of their deal. In that spirit, Id say the 35 post weekly limit is great--we can get all or most of Judy's/Jim's over with in a few days, and not have to deal with them the rest of the week. I hope you'll try it.___ Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
In a message dated 5/3/07 12:17:43 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I’m seriously thinking of trying the 35 posts-per-week system. You can shoot your wad in one day and we won’t hear from you for a week, or you can pace yourself This plan has my vote. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vaj Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 7:21 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting Why mess with what already works so nicely? We can always go back to 5 a day if 35 a week doesn't work out. No harm in experimenting.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
On May 3, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Vaj Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 7:21 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting Why mess with what already works so nicely? We can always go back to 5 a day if 35 a week doesn’t work out. No harm in experimenting. Sounds fun, let's try it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
lets stay as we are but for the sake of change do so for a week. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Overposting
Rick Archer wrote: Judy posted 10 times today, so she joins Shemp in moderation land. No posts for her until Friday. Curtis overposted by one. Light slap on the wrist. Even though everyone but New Morning is opposed to it, I'm seriously thinking of trying the 35 posts-per-week system. You can shoot your wad in one day and we won't hear from you for a week, or you can pace yourself. Either way, the daily average should be about the same. I overpost myself some days, and other days don't post at all. So this way I wouldn't violate a rule I'm supposed to enforce. If we try this, we'll start it Friday night at midnight, so weekend warriors will have free reign. My email client (Outlook) shows me the total of posts, if I sort by posters' names, so it won't be hard for me to keep track of. Maybe we'll try it for a week, then reevaluate. You're still using Lookout! (That's what Microsofties call it). :) 35 posts per week is better than 5 a day since some people will post in spurts and may find on a certain day that they want to respond to more than 5 posts and maybe none the next day. It's the closest thing to rollover posts without the effort. By observing the way people post here I assume that the majority are somewhat computer illiterate. I notice that most post in order so if you reply to the head of the topic it may ignored but read if you post in some extending chain. Interesting paradigm that I also don't see on other groups.
[FairfieldLife] Overposting
Judy posted 10 times today, so she joins Shemp in moderation land. No posts for her until Friday. Curtis overposted by one. Light slap on the wrist. Even though everyone but New Morning is opposed to it, I'm seriously thinking of trying the 35 posts-per-week system. You can shoot your wad in one day and we won't hear from you for a week, or you can pace yourself. Either way, the daily average should be about the same. I overpost myself some days, and other days don't post at all. So this way I wouldn't violate a rule I'm supposed to enforce. If we try this, we'll start it Friday night at midnight, so weekend warriors will have free reign. My email client (Outlook) shows me the total of posts, if I sort by posters' names, so it won't be hard for me to keep track of. Maybe we'll try it for a week, then reevaluate.
