Moderation reports

[Karel]

Would it be an idea to use two-factor authentication (for registering only) that uses an sms verification?

The forum has a 2FA option, I use it myself, but it's not compulsory.

What about enforcing it (for registering only) to avoid problems with people who create multiple accounts?

[tggzzz]

Would it be an idea to use two-factor authentication (for registering only) that uses an sms verification?

The forum has a 2FA option, I use it myself, but it's not compulsory.

What about enforcing it (for registering only) to avoid problems with people who create multiple accounts?

If the second factor is a phone, no thanks. I get too many spam SMS/calls as it is.

Yes, I know Dave wouldn't knowingly allow that, but before joining I knew very little about Dave and even so the italics are important!

[Simon]

2FA is security, not spam. You only get the SMS for logging in. that has been the case for for any of the several people i use 2FA with

[PlainName]

Doesn't matter what it's meant to be for or actually used for. No-one I've just bumped into is going to get my phone number - having to change that is far FAR more serious than changing an email address, and I don't hand that out willy-nilly either. 2FA using a phone would be a great way to reduce the traffic on this forum, IMO.

[MK14]

To the person who has effectively ‘gone to war’ with the moderators.......

I would love to know the original incident, that has sparked this activity off (if applicable).
Was it a previously banned member, who got annoyed with the mod(s) ?
Or is it plain trolling, just for the sake of it ?

My gut feeling is that the original Angrybird account, seemed to be trolling us (in some form of fashion or other), right from the beginning. Even the user name "ANGRY" of "ANGRYbird", seems to hint at some annoyed member, somehow.

[tggzzz]

2FA is security, not spam. You only get the SMS for logging in. that has been the case for for any of the several people i use 2FA with

True, but irrelevant.

See, for example, the recent VirginMedia data breach giving email/phone/DoB/etc info to malefactors: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51760510

I think I've been caught by that, based on increases in spam and "helpful" phone calls. I've yet to do a subject data request to see what info of mine they got.

[Simon]

2FA is security, not spam. You only get the SMS for logging in. that has been the case for for any of the several people i use 2FA with

True, but irrelevant.

See, for example, the recent VirginMedia data breach giving email/phone/DoB/etc info to malefactors: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51760510

I think I've been caught by that, based on increases in spam and "helpful" phone calls. I've yet to do a subject data request to see what info of mine they got.

But if they have your mobile number anyway what is the difference in letting people use 2FA?

[Simon]

To the person who has effectively ‘gone to war’ with the moderators.......

I would love to know the original incident, that has sparked this activity off (if applicable).
Was it a previously banned member, who got annoyed with the mod(s) ?
Or is it plain trolling, just for the sake of it ?

My gut feeling is that the original Angrybird account, seemed to be trolling us (in some form of fashion or other), right from the beginning. Even the user name "ANGRY" of "ANGRYbird", seems to hint at some annoyed member, somehow.

They started chest beating and idolizing trump. It resulted in a temporary ban during which i turned a blind eye to them using 2 other accounts. They then started having an argument they would not relent on about the morality of hacking things like rigol scopes in a totally unrelated thread. They refused to stop whilst accusing me of shilling mp site by having to constantly take part in the discussion to try and restore order to the chaos they caused. So ban was made permanent. Now they keep re-registering just to prove...... I don't know what. No one said that we have a system that can detect angrybird's umpteenth account and stop them at registration, other than people reporting post by a new user that still tries to make trouble.

It's all rather childish. But you get one now and then.

[tggzzz]

2FA is security, not spam. You only get the SMS for logging in. that has been the case for for any of the several people i use 2FA with

True, but irrelevant.

See, for example, the recent VirginMedia data breach giving email/phone/DoB/etc info to malefactors: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51760510

I think I've been caught by that, based on increases in spam and "helpful" phone calls. I've yet to do a subject data request to see what info of mine they got.

But if they have your mobile number anyway what is the difference in letting people use 2FA?

Random websites don't have my phone numbers unless absolutely necessary. Why? Because each company with my number is another chance for malefactors to get access to my number.

The "sim swap scam" has been around and active for a while: https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/beatthescammers/article-7571099/Sim-swap-fraud-fraudster-managed-swipe-80k-bank.html "Sim swap scam saw £80,000 swiped from my bank account...    Fraudster managed to convince mobile firm Three to give away number"

The only way I can see of combatting that is to have one phone that is used for banking only.

[Simon]

Yes i know SIM swapping has been around a while. It was not the other day I heard about it but months to a year ago. The problem with it is that it relies on the profit hungry scruples of corporations that will stop at nothing to squeeze every last drop out of their workforce and customers. It's not a technological hack but a people hack. As phones are now used in 2FA it's a serious matter. Will phone companies be made liable for money lost due the pressure they put on staff which results in people being allowed to make changes to an account when they clearly don't have the required authority.

[MK14]

They started chest beating and idolizing trump. It resulted in a temporary ban during which i turned a blind eye to them using 2 other accounts. They then started having an argument they would not relent on about the morality of hacking things like rigol scopes in a totally unrelated thread. They refused to stop whilst accusing me of shilling mp site by having to constantly take part in the discussion to try and restore order to the chaos they caused. So ban was made permanent. Now they keep re-registering just to prove...... I don't know what. No one said that we have a system that can detect angrybird's umpteenth account and stop them at registration, other than people reporting post by a new user that still tries to make trouble.

It's all rather childish. But you get one now and then.

Thanks. That is a wonderful, explanation!   

I guess you have the occasional, childish (or whatever), forum poster.

Perhaps, because a 'moderator', is psychologically seen, as being like a teacher/headmaster/boss/parent/leader like person/personality, some people seem to think it is alright, to be significantly disrespectful, to such people.

As regards enforcing using our real life mobile/cell phone numbers, to register. Here are three reasons, AGAINST it.

(1)...Many, many people, WON'T want to register that way, and will simply never register. So, a huge, future loss of membership, could occur (as mentioned by other poster(s), as well).

(2)...As I mentioned earlier. I researched using such a method (quickly, after it was mentioned in this thread). Unfortunately, it turns out to be easily cheated. Especially, by people, already knowledgeable in getting around IP bans. tl;dr It probably won't work.

(3)...From my experiences, on other forums (which I don't want to list or publicly mention, here).
It would/could open up the forum, to being hacked. Because it would have too much of peoples real life information, making it a target, for hackers. Forum software, tends to be relatively weak/susceptible to hacking.

At least two of the forums, I've previously (or currently) been a member of, have been hacked in the past, and everyone's details, were stolen. So, these days, I would avoid ones, insisting on having personal information.

Lots of websites, (forums and others), have been hacked in the past. E.g. The Sony Play Station Network.
So best, if the database(s), don't have our personal information.

[Simon]

Well all sites are under constant attack. Having a VPS I quickly realised just how much of the traffic is hacking, I would have a list thousands of records long of people trying to log into anything they could. Obviously the more data you have the me cautious you have to be which is why in setting up another forum with someone that wanted everyone's particulars I cautioned and said that the policy should be based on the need to know.

[MK14]

Well all sites are under constant attack. Having a VPS I quickly realised just how much of the traffic is hacking, I would have a list thousands of records long of people trying to log into anything they could. Obviously the more data you have the me cautious you have to be which is why in setting up another forum with someone that wanted everyone's particulars I cautioned and said that the policy should be based on the need to know.

This forum, seems to be rather successful, and useful.
Because we can create a relatively complicated/difficult/obscure thread, but the membership is so (relatively) large, varied, active and helpful. That you will often get the answers, that you want, and often in a relatively short timescale.

But, if the moderators, decided to heavily "lock down", this forum. With heavy registration requirements and stuff. Although, it would help keep out the riff raff (Un-savory people), we would probably lose the critical mass of posters, which helps keep this forum alive and kicking.

As you said, there are lots of hackers. Unfortunately, it seems to be something, we have to accept, in the modern age of the internet.

[EEVblog]

Would it be an idea to use two-factor authentication (for registering only) that uses an sms verification?

The forum has a 2FA option, I use it myself, but it's not compulsory.

What about enforcing it (for registering only) to avoid problems with people who create multiple accounts?

That would not stop any malicious actor, as the 2FA is Google Authenticater based and and anyone can use that without tracking.

[EEVblog]

To the person who has effectively ‘gone to war’ with the moderators.......

I would love to know the original incident, that has sparked this activity off (if applicable).
Was it a previously banned member, who got annoyed with the mod(s) ?

Some people don't like being told to pull their head in when it comes to off-topic stuff. And then when they don't stop and they get a temporary ban they go into anger mode.
So much so that we have former banned members who create multiple accounts, post things to try and get the site shut down under the DMCA, and ones that post child porn or do a DDOS attack on xmas day as a "present" to us. Even years later they still can't let it go. Unfortunately these people exist and it's just a nature of running such forum as it gets big enough you get the bell curve outliers.
The only alternative to not triggering these people is to have no rules at all and let it be a usenet style free-for-all.

[MK14]

If there was a 'magic bullet' solution, on how to run the perfect, forum (or website). It probably would have already been discovered, and then most of the forums (and websites), would probably follow suit.

I think this forum, has a nice balance between, some moderation, and being too restrictive.
I do miss politics, but agree, it needs to be disallowed, because it is rather problematic, and can need huge amounts of moderation, to even attempt to keep it under control.

The days of 'Wild west', totally free/open, internet (usenet or whatever), seem to be partial limited. As Governments and large organisations, are increasingly clamping down on such things**.
**Ironically, I have to stop this paragraph there. To stop breaching the no politics rule.

E.g. Youtube, increasingly clamping down, on more controversial, subject areas.

But, as EEVblog/Dave, has often said, and I fully agree. It (Politics) leads to disagreements and arguments, and so is best left, out of this forum.

[bitseeker]

Yep, we get more than enough arguments about oscilloscopes.

[james_s]

They started chest beating and idolizing trump. It resulted in a temporary ban during which i turned a blind eye to them using 2 other accounts. They then started having an argument they would not relent on about the morality of hacking things like rigol scopes in a totally unrelated thread. They refused to stop whilst accusing me of shilling mp site by having to constantly take part in the discussion to try and restore order to the chaos they caused. So ban was made permanent. Now they keep re-registering just to prove...... I don't know what. No one said that we have a system that can detect angrybird's umpteenth account and stop them at registration, other than people reporting post by a new user that still tries to make trouble.

It's all rather childish. But you get one now and then.

I wondered what was going on with all those low post count banned members I've been seeing. Many times the post I saw from them was quite reasonable so they must have been misbehaving in some thread I wasn't in. It's a shame people can't just behave like adults, perhaps mental illness is involved? I don't know. This place certainly is refreshing compared to the endless flame wars that raged on in usenet groups, back before they all got completely overrun by spam.


Personally I don't think it has been *that* big of a nuisance, certainly not enough to change the way people authenticate or whatever. When the culprit shows up just ban them when they misbehave and sooner or later they'll get bored and find something else to obsess over.

[Simon]

Would it be an idea to use two-factor authentication (for registering only) that uses an sms verification?

The forum has a 2FA option, I use it myself, but it's not compulsory.

What about enforcing it (for registering only) to avoid problems with people who create multiple accounts?

That would not stop any malicious actor, as the 2FA is Google Authenticater based and and anyone can use that without tracking.

Quite. Really the forum standard is mostly driven by members reporting suspicious people or unsavory behavior. There is no way to stop and otherwise fine member going off their head.

[Shock]

Bad idea to require compulsory 2FA or other verification, it will badly hurt the forum stats. Just at discretion hide posts from banned accounts such as low post repeat offenders, ghost accounts and hide or delete the spam.

For the banned users you could use "Ex Member" or something if you don't like to see the word banned. This should only be reserved for clearly contributing members not malicous ones.

[Fraser]

I will risk a verbal beating here, but how about changing absolutely nothing ......

This forum appears to work well and is the best I have been a member of. From the user perspective the issue of renegade members is very rare indeed. There have been some exceptions that got all our attention, but is it really warranted to make membership and login a more complex process ?

This recent dispute with Angrybird seems to have generated an awful lot more comment in this thread than it truly deserves. Compared the the MJC incident, it is a non event !

I am now putting on my Kevlar helmet and ducking for cover 

Fraser

[Cerebus]

I will risk a verbal beating here, but how about changing absolutely nothing ......

This forum appears to work well and is the best I have been a member of. From the user perspective the issue of renegade members is very rare indeed. There have been some exceptions that got all our attention, but is it really warranted to make membership and login a more complex process ?

This recent dispute with Angrybird seems to have generated an awful lot more comment in this thread than it truly deserves. Compared the the MJC incident, it is a non event !

I am now putting on my Kevlar helmet and ducking for cover 

Fraser

I think that the only change that is desirable would be one that made it harder for the wholesale creation/rapid turnover of accounts a la 'grumpy tit-puppet'. That's really for moderatorial comfort and, to a lesser extent, keeping the fools out of the hair of the rest of us.  The problem is that it's difficult for the mods to ban someone malicious and persistent, and keep them effectively banned without a lot of manual work and vigilance on the mod's behalf. Beyond that I'd agree that there's no real need for change.

[Simon]

Yes I don't think there is anything to change. The whole point of moderation is that it requires manual intervention and decision making.

[Brumby]

Yes I don't think there is anything to change. The whole point of moderation is that it requires manual intervention and decision making.

Absolutely (IMHO).

Automate, codify or otherwise put a defined process or structure in place and some people will count it as a challenge to circumvent.

Human assessment allows for the subtleties to be worked through on a case-by-case basis as and when they present themselves.  Automation requires a lot of design work to define and deal with as many of these subtleties up front as possible and/or modify the process as experience dictates.  This can end up being a massive maintenance burden, especially since you could expect something that might be complex to implement in code (with potential for ongoing refinements) but can be resolved by a human in a minute or two.

Also, relying on an automated system can result in a level of trust that is unwise.  As it has been said - You cannot create an idiot proof system, since idiots are so creative.


As for those who cause discussions like this - I have no doubt they are grinning from ear to ear with every word written as a result of their efforts.  They would be ecstatic to see changes made as a result of their behaviour.  This is why I walk away once they have shown their hand and why I'm happy for the current moderation process to stand.

They aren't worth my time for anything more than clicking on the "Report" button.

[ebastler]

Absolutely (IMHO).

 

Thanks for making me smile, whether that was an intended pun or not.