|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jan 18, 2008 17:02:08 GMT -5
Okay so the board is closed off to only OO original members. I have no problem with that. The new OO is like McDonalds to me right now. I'm lovin' it.
But there's an elephant in the room and I'm not sure why we aren't addressing it. The poll on whether or not to allow Tux in given his technical skills and his past of using these skills to breech security has been taken. The majority said no. So that's it.
But he's still on the yahoo group asking why he can't get in and asking how long does approval take. Is NO one going to answer him? If the vote was no... then it was no. Shouldn't we at least just say so? Pretending to not see the question being asked seems cowardly to me. If you all want me to tell him I will - I just don't want to ignore in the inquiries.
Serious and sincere questions
-Damie
|
|
|
|
Post by coldfront06 on Jan 18, 2008 17:03:39 GMT -5
I hadn't checked the Yahoo group. I have no problem telling him that he was voted off...lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Versatile on Jan 18, 2008 17:15:52 GMT -5
I haven't checked the Yahoo group since I got comfortable on G9.
<----Goes to check it now.
|
|
|
|
Post by msurbana on Jan 18, 2008 18:00:41 GMT -5
Where's the poll? I didnt see it nor did I vote. Dang.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fraternal Design on Jan 18, 2008 18:06:07 GMT -5
I agree that he should be told.
|
|
|
|
Post by msurbana on Jan 18, 2008 18:09:50 GMT -5
Did you see the poll Fraternal? I can't find it.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldfront06 on Jan 18, 2008 18:14:49 GMT -5
He's been told. I didn't know it was a secret or that we were waiting for approval from GnG before telling him the truth, so I told him. GnG if you're upset sorry!
|
|
|
|
Post by Fraternal Design on Jan 18, 2008 18:17:24 GMT -5
Urban, I can't seem to find it right now.
Cold, I just saw it. I was personally waiting for GNG to get to it, as she told me she was very busy today.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Jan 18, 2008 18:19:19 GMT -5
The poll and the results were removed. Did you see the poll Fraternal? I can't find it. |
|
|
|
Post by msurbana on Jan 18, 2008 18:24:23 GMT -5
Okay thanks !
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jan 19, 2008 12:20:40 GMT -5
But there's an elephant in the room and I'm not sure why we aren't addressing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by FULLOFME on Jan 19, 2008 22:41:00 GMT -5
WOW...I just read the postings on the yahoo group and Tux seems hurt that he did not get approve...
<-----is e-sad for him
|
|
|
|
Post by msurbana on Jan 19, 2008 22:56:10 GMT -5
I am too.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gee-Are on Jan 20, 2008 23:55:48 GMT -5
The thing is...IF theoretically the board is eventually going to be made open to all...isn't he at some point going to have access?
Wouldn't this action give him more motive to do something at that time? If he ever actually did something the first time?
|
|
|
|
Post by 123Diva on Jan 22, 2008 15:37:17 GMT -5
Interesting thread...I'm just reading this now.
Im a little confused.
Has Tux been voted off/banned because of what he could potentially do or because of something he has done?
(FYI: I'm not taking an sides at the moment because I simply do not have enough info to have a justified opinion...just curious on the background.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Search1906 on Jan 22, 2008 15:50:13 GMT -5
Some told Tux he was rejected. He took it in stride but seemed to be a bit hurt.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jan 22, 2008 16:27:21 GMT -5
I missed this thread. There were a number of factors that folks considered in the vote. You'd have to poll people individually to know which one swayed them.
Issues included but were not limited to:
Past security breeches on OO
Potential security breeches on OOA
Crash of OO
He did seem to take it worse than what I expected. But the vote was the vote. Even though I voted yes to let him have access, I think it's unfair to the people who voted no to cast them as the villians. Those issues listed above were legit... it ultimately came down to a judgement call.
I remember the Tux that hacked accounts but also provided a proxy to keep OO afloat when people couldn't post. And if the concern was that Tux would crash OOA, well - he knows the url... OOA is still up and running.
Anyway, it's neither here nor there... we voted, the majority rules, and so as a group we decided to deny Tux. That's what it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Versatile on Jan 22, 2008 16:35:46 GMT -5
When OOA is opened up to the e-world he'll be able to join then anyways so alas.... the vote is only keeping him out for so long.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gee-Are on Jan 22, 2008 17:18:31 GMT -5
>>>>didn't have opportunity to vote
|
|
|
|
Post by Sweet&Chic on Jan 22, 2008 18:02:17 GMT -5
oh my
|
|
|
|
Post by mos06def on Jan 22, 2008 18:13:22 GMT -5
So how about we go ahead and overturn that vote anyway?
|
|
|
|
Post by 123Diva on Jan 23, 2008 10:34:37 GMT -5
About the OO crash being taken into account during the vote that half of us missed, has it been proven or discovered that Tux did it? (I know he has/had the capability...I'm specifically wondering if there's anything legit and definite that points his way. I know there was speculation...was there anything beyond speculation?)
<---just wants to be in the loop
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jan 23, 2008 10:58:33 GMT -5
Even SH didn't seem to know who was conducting the attack. He was able to trace the attack to a source, but the not the mastermind behind it, (as best I can tell). So it's speculation that Tux actually brought down OO. The evidence against him was compelling but circumstantial IMO. That's why I can see both sides of the argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by 123Diva on Jan 23, 2008 12:07:13 GMT -5
Okay, I see...
|
|
sigmad
I am just a newbie
Posts: 23
|
Post by sigmad on Jan 23, 2008 15:53:01 GMT -5
I think it's about time to get over the whole "Tux took down OO thing".
Hell, I could've taken down OO and so could a 12 year old that has a script. OO was a WEAK site.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bunny Hop on Jan 23, 2008 16:14:59 GMT -5
I don't know if I even voted.
But I always felt like if he wanted to take this site down he could and would do it. And if people are using smilies and stuff from his board isn't that rude seeing as how he's not even allowed on here? Couldn't he just take this down too without being registered? I'm just asking.
At least he got the address to the yahoo group because no one would give to me...
|
|
|
|
Post by Versatile on Jan 23, 2008 16:20:22 GMT -5
I'm using the smilies because I like them.
And why is SD @ -1 when he doesn't even log on? Imma exalt him next.
|
|
|
|
Post by Search1906 on Jan 23, 2008 16:22:41 GMT -5
<----Never saw the poll to vote.
<---Guilty of jacking G9 Smileys
<----Would have given bunnyhop the yahoogroup email if I'd known she didn't have it.
|
|
sigmad
I am just a newbie
Posts: 23
|
Post by sigmad on Jan 23, 2008 22:14:09 GMT -5
I'm using the smilies because I like them. And why is SD @ -1 when he doesn't even log on? Imma exalt him next. come on, would life be fair if there wasn't a random Dickriding hater on my nuts from this board? |
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Jan 23, 2008 22:37:40 GMT -5
Interesting thread. I missed a lot while I was gone...
|
|
