Ask About Money needs stricter control

Re: Why?

The major advantage is the ability to edit your post, if you need to clarify something or correct a heading or a typo.

The other huge advantage is the ability to mark forums and threads as "read". It allows you see immediately you log on which threads have new posts since you last visited.

Nobody else can post in your name. If you establish a reputation as the unregistered user, Tharg, someone else could destroy your reputation by using the name as well. If you register as a user, no one else can use that name.

Brendan
 
Re: Why?

Having given this minimal thought I would still think that regardless of the bonuses of registering or not...it would not get rid of some posters who try to make everyone's life difficult.

How long does it take to register...then register another name etc...

Not that it's that important anyway...just thought I'd point that out.
 
Re: Why?

How long does it take to register...then register another name etc...
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that you need a unique email address for each name registered, so the trouble-makers would have to register for a unique email address (with one of the free email providers) and then register with ezboard each time.

It is not an insurmountable barrier but it is a deterrent to casual trolling.
 
Re: Why?

new people come to the site to get advice on money matters first and foremost. I think getting into discussions on DAAM (LOS and The Craic) etc should be restricted to registered users

I know when I started using AAM I asked a few questions as an unreg (dipping a toe in if you like), eventually when I saw the value in the site I decided to register to avail of the features that Brendan described above.

I would be inclined to rename the top half of the forum to something like "Please ask a question about money" and leave it open to all users.

The bottom half I would rename to something like "Discuss Other Topics (requires registration to post)"

this would be open to all who want to read but only registered users to post.

If people feel strongly enough about a discussion etc they will go to the trouble of registering instead of throwing in some random reply

ie

Just my thoughts on it
 
Re: Why?

Nobody else can post in your name. If you establish a reputation as the unregistered user, Tharg, someone else could destroy your reputation by using the name as well.
Click to expand...
Of course you could self-inflict this.
 
Why register?

Brendan said (in relation to "Why register?")
Nobody else can post in your name. If you establish a reputation as the unregistered user, Tharg, someone else could destroy your reputation by using the name as well. If you register as a user, no one else can use that name.
Click to expand...
That used to be the case, but it's not strictly true now. A year or so ago, even if you posted as an unregistered user, you had to put something (anything) in the password box, even though there was no registered username/password combination to check it against. If you didn't, you'd get a message saying that you'd left a field blank, and you had to go back. Therefore, if there was someone who had already registered that name, and the password didn't match the registered one, your post wouldn't be accepted. However, now it's possible to leave the password box blank. If you type in a registered username and leave the password box blank, the post is accepted and is published with that username, as an unregistered user. If people aren't really paying attention, are they going to notice that the poster's name is in black rather than blue? More likely they'll accept it at face value as a post from whoever.

I've done this with this post here, just to show you. Compare it with the post beneath where I've used my password (but not logged in; I virtually never do that).
 
used actual password this time

I, for one, would prefer if this situation were changed back to the former one, if it's just a simple question of a moderator enabling an option for forums such as "Require completion of all fields". Could one of the moderators please check if this is possible?

I realise this might not be popular with our prolific <blank> poster, but perhaps a space could be used for a username and it would still look blank. Heck, perhaps that's what they're already doing – I haven't checked whether you have to put something such as a space in the username box or can leave it completely empty (and I don't really want to because the lack of a name has - rightly or wrongly - become a person's username on these boards now).

Note that my suggestion above is completely separate from requiring people to register. If the change suggested is implemented (and I hope it can be) posters can still remain unregistered, but will have to type something – anything at all, it doesn't have to be the same each time even if you are using the same unregistered name – in the password box when they post.

For myself, I'd like to point out that all genuine posts from cobalt (except the one above, and one other post on Microsoft prices in France a few minutes ago, where I tried leaving the password blank as an experiment) are as the registered cobalt. But it shouldn't be necessary to make such a declaration. Unfortunately, the system at present is wide open to abuse. I don't think there are many people that would seek to exploit this deliberately (although some newcomers who aren't familiar with frequent posters' names might accidentally use a registered name with a black password), but if the loophole doesn't have to exist and potentially create confusion about who posted what, why let it?
 
Re: used actual password this time

A year or so ago, even if you posted as an unregistered user, you had to put something (anything) in the password box, even though there was no registered username/password combination to check it against. If you didn't, you'd get a message saying that you'd left a field blank, and you had to go back. Therefore, if there was someone who had already registered that name, and the password didn't match the registered one, your post wouldn't be accepted.

That's an interesting point and an excellent suggestion. However, was it the case that this feature used to be available with the ezBoard based AAM as opposed to the earlier incarnation based on UBB? I checked the ezBoard configuation settings and can't see any option that seems to control the "mandatory password" functionality other than which seems a bit restrictive as long as we don't want mandatory registration? It would indeed be a good idea if unregistered users could be prevented from reusing registered names. Even <blank> would just have to accept that. ;)
 
reasons for registering

By the way, for anyone who's dithering about registering, I'd say the single biggest advantage is the facility to edit your posts. I didn't intend that smiley to appear in the unregistered cobalt's post - I must have accidentally used the punctuation combination that produces it and not unchecked the emoticons box - and now I can't get rid of it. I've even tried logging in as cobalt, but it's not recognised as my own post (unlike the one beneath). Tarnation.

But I would not be in favour of mandatory registration for all forums. (Ambivalent about requiring registration for the DAAM ones.)
 
ezboard

Honestly ClubMan, you need a little lightning flash avatar or something! This crossing posts business is frustrating! Maybe I just need to learn how to type faster.

No, I'm pretty sure it was ezboard. I've seen the old UBB archives (and used that software on another board) and it's different. But maybe it was a different version of ezboard? I started posting (as an unregistered user) just before the deadline for SSIAs expired, so it would have been around March 2002. If you look at the SSIA forum, there are posts in the current ezboard system from before that.

There was even a case where I accidentally fell across someone else's username and password in the beginning. Back then I used pretty much whatever username came into my head at the time - a different one for each topic, all unregistered - and in one case I used a name that someone else (not a regular poster) had registered. They'd used the username as the password, and when I unwittingly typed it for the 2nd time - as a convenient 'pseudo-password' into the password box, lo and behold it came up as a registered user. (It was only about the 2nd or 3rd post in that name. They'd obviously posted, got the info they wanted, and gone away again. I've never seen them post since either.) So I then posted a disclaimer/apology, and I think it was Marion who made the point that people shouldn't use obvious passwords.
 
mandatory fields

Could it possibly be in a different control section? The way I look at it, it's not really about controlling who can post (it's accepted in this scenario that anyone - registered or unregistered - can), it's a question of what fields they must include when posting. Is there anywhere that offers a control to make completion of the subject field mandatory or optional? (You get the 'some fields are missing' message I spoke about earlier if you try to post without a subject line at present.)
If you can find such a control, I'd expect the password = mandatory/optional one to be in the same control section.

Possibly in the same area as the 'post display order' option that you fixed the other day? (Thanks, btw.)
 
Re: mandatory fields

No - I've gone through the board and individual forum configuration settings in detail and I can't see anything that controls making entry of a password, even for an unregistered user, mandatory I'm afraid... :\
 
mandatory fields

Pity. Oh well, I guess as long as people are alert to the potential problems...
Thanks for looking.
 
Re: ezboard

I checked the and the options for controlling who can post do not seem to include one in which unregistered users are allowed but must enter a password to avoid reusing an existing registered name. Perhaps this is a deprecated or redundant ezBoard feature? Are you sure that in the early days you didn't automatically enter a password anyway or assume that it was mandatory even for unregistered posters? Or do you know for sure that ezBoard did insist on one being entered even for an unregistered username? The only way to ensure that there is no confusion about the identity of a poster seems to be to implement a policy of mandatory registration or use the MBA feature...
 
Can I post as Cobalt

Cobalt - I am confused.

Are we trying to protect registered users here?

I am pretending to be you. I typed in your name in the User Name box and didn't bother with a password. So this will come from an unregistered user Cobalt.

If this works, I agree it's a problem, but only a small problem. If any registered user disowns an unregistered post, any moderator will simply delete it.

Brendan Burgess
 
Re: Can I post as Cobalt

Reply from ezboard:

There used to be an option that prevented a guest from using a registered members username, but that was removed well over a year ago (longer actually).

The reason for that is that it's actually very easy to tell an unregistered user from a registered user. The username linking to the profile is the main one, but by default it also has "unregistered user" as the user level.

Brendan
 
Re: Can I post as Cobalt

Aha - thanks for getting to the bottom of that one Brendan. Which help forum did you find that answer in?
 
the real cobalt!!

Thanks for following that up Brendan. Yes, the intention was to protect registered users from the possibility that someone else could post in their name – whether accidentally (if a new or infrequent user simply doesn't know that a particular name is already in use by a registered user) or deliberately.

When I'm reading a thread, I really just notice the names – not the status written beneath them, nor whether they're blue (registered) or black (unregistered). I'd only really look at that if I thought a post was out of character – for example Jem giving out about how unpleasant smokers are, or rainyday praising Fianna Fáil. Otherwise, if something had a particular name beside it, I'd take it at face value. But many regular-ish posters wouldn't have any particular image/character associated with them (especially people who don't post much on the debate-type threads in DAAM), and posts therefore wouldn't attract attention as 'out of character', even if they had in fact been written by someone else.

As it stands, in order for a user to disown a post, they first have to notice it, and not everyone would browse all the threads.

However, I agree it's not likely to be a big problem. I just thought that if the option was still available, it would be useful to re-activate it.
 
Re: the real cobalt!!

Hi Clubman

I asked the question in the EZBoard supporters forum and the answer came back very quickly.

Brendan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top