1. Time for Pagination?
- Posted by euphoric (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2285 views
Forked from Re: Euphoria website down, members being lost
I guess you don't understand the ramifications of the 46058 views counted?
Jeremy, certainly this is a rare occasion, but it is sometimes prudent to plan ahead. 
Maybe it's time to get pagination for threads.
2. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by Fendaril Sep 29, 2009
- 2288 views
maybe its because of the logo contest.
3. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by euphoric (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2289 views
maybe its because of the logo contest.
That's a big part of it. I don't think the OpenEuphoria server is having to serve up any of the graphics because they're being hosted elsewhere. But I'm sure lots of people are curious as to the logo/icon subject matter.
Unfortunately, Jeremy doesn't think it's worthwhile to track individual users vs. simple number of page hits, so we don't know if there are 1,000 people interested or only 10. 
4. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2249 views
Unfortunately, Jeremy doesn't think it's worthwhile to track individual users vs. simple number of page hits, so we don't know if there are 1,000 people interested or only 10.
Man up and switch to message view. Problem solved.
The inflated views on the logo thread were due to a (malicious?) bot. This was also the cause of the forum being down quite a bit yesterday.
Matt
5. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by euphoric (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2272 views
The inflated views on the logo thread were due to a (malicious?) bot.
The only one I know who runs bots and hates Euphoria is [Removed by Derek - not kidding].*
- Just kidding! sheesh.
6. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by Fendaril Sep 29, 2009
- 2273 views
the exact reason why . knows so much about what is going on. Yes i is think its either . or .
7. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2263 views
the exact reason why . knows so much about what is going on. Yes i is think its either . or .
Unless you have actual evidence of someone doing this, please don't speculate. I doubt it was either one of them.
Matt
8. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by ChrisB (moderator) Sep 29, 2009
- 2269 views
Hi
I too strongly doubt it was . . just happens to know . stuff.
Chris
9. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by euphoric (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2257 views
the exact reason why she knows so much about what is going on. Yes i is think its either her or critic.
Unless you have actual evidence of someone doing this, please don't speculate. I doubt it was either one of them.
BTW, I was kidding when I suggested it was . and that . hated Euphoria. . obviously loves Euphoria. . just hates you, that's all. 
10. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2248 views
BTW, I was kidding when I suggested it was . and that . hated Euphoria. . obviously loves Euphoria. . just hates you, that's all.
Yeah, I know, but I think Fendaril missed your sarcasm tags.
Matt
11. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by jeremy (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2239 views
Forked from Re: Euphoria website down, members being lost
I guess you don't understand the ramifications of the 46058 views counted?
Jeremy, certainly this is a rare occasion, but it is sometimes prudent to plan ahead. Maybe it's time to get pagination for threads.
Sure, pagination should be there, euweb has a simple pagination tag as well that reused everywhere you see pagination. Just a matter of time to do it. Do you have euweb still installed? 
Jeremy
12. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2248 views
- Just kidding! sheesh.
Even "just kidding" can be hurtful and libelous. It is much better to not do it, and exercise self-control instead.
13. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by euphoric (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2219 views
- Just kidding! sheesh.
Even "just kidding" can be hurtful and libelous. It is much better to not do it, and exercise self-control instead.
Fortunately, there was nothing hurtful or libelous in what I said... so in this case, it was okay to do it.
I was going to further state that the "useless" one I was referring to was Critic! Would you have had a problem with it then?
14. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2226 views
Fortunately, there was nothing hurtful or libelous in what I said... so in this case, it was okay to do it.
I strongly disagree.
I was going to further state that the "useless" one I was referring to was Critic! Would you have had a problem with it then?
But you didn't state that, and if you had I would have a problem with that too.
In public, one cannot write things that bring bring disrepute upon people when you cannot not prove your assertions - in jest or not. It is far better for everyone concerned that one simply does not do it.
15. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by euphoric (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2240 views
Fortunately, there was nothing hurtful or libelous in what I said... so in this case, it was okay to do it.
I strongly disagree.
So if what I wrote originally was this:
The only one I know who runs bots and hates Euphoria is DerekP.
To me, it's silly because it's obviously not true. That's called sarcasm. Or... irony? I'm not sure. Or what if I said it about RobCraig? Is is obviously NOT true about either of those, and neither, to me, was it obviously true about the original target. And the only reason I chose the original target is because said original target has lots of experience programming bots. I don't know of anybody else who does. Not one.
Now, I suspect it's only because of who the original target was that there is a problem. Anybody else and it would've been silly (Matt, Jeremy, myself, etc.)
The only person who I might think it would not be silly for is Critic, because he seems to have an obsession with Euphoria such that he might carry out such an act. But I thought that even unlikely, because that would take some extreme psychosis, and he didn't seem the extreme psychotic to me.
In public, one cannot write things that bring bring disrepute upon people when you cannot not prove your assertions - in jest or not. It is far better for everyone concerned that one simply does not do it.
Yes. That has gotten The Onion in trouble at times. Here they are making fun of the President of the US of A, making him out to be a buffoon. But they're equal opportunity: Bush gets it too. And while this is extremely funny, it's completely untrue. Somewhat.
Next time I'll just slander myself.
16. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2246 views
- Last edited Sep 30, 2009
So if what I wrote originally was this:
The only one I know who runs bots and hates Euphoria is DerekP.
To me, it's silly because it's obviously not true. That's called sarcasm. Or... irony? I'm not sure. Or what if I said it about RobCraig? Is is obviously NOT true about either of those, and neither, to me, was it obviously true about the original target. And the only reason I chose the original target is because said original target has lots of experience programming bots. I don't know of anybody else who does. Not one.
Now, I suspect it's only because of who the original target was that there is a problem. Anybody else and it would've been silly (Matt, Jeremy, myself, etc.)
The problem is that what is "obvious" to one person may not be so to another. You just can't tell until its too late.
In public, one cannot write things that bring bring disrepute upon people when you cannot not prove your assertions - in jest or not. It is far better for everyone concerned that one simply does not do it.
Yes. That has gotten The Onion in trouble at times. Here they are making fun of the President of the US of A, making him out to be a buffoon. But they're equal opportunity: Bush gets it too. And while this is extremely funny, it's completely untrue. Somewhat.
There is an 'escape' clause in most libel/slander laws that exempt parody of recognizably public figures. But it is a close call and it doesn't take much to get lawyers involved.
Next time I'll just slander myself.
Not a bad choice
17. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Sep 29, 2009
- 2217 views
- Last edited Sep 30, 2009
In public, one cannot write things that bring bring disrepute upon people when you cannot not prove your assertions - in jest or not. It is far better for everyone concerned that one simply does not do it.
Well, laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. My experience on Australian blogs tells me that Australia is rather less tolerant of libel than the laws in the US, which has very tough standards for proving things like libel AFAIK...though I think the server is in Canada, for what that's worth.
That doesn't make it correct, of course.
Matt
18. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by useless Sep 29, 2009
- 2228 views
- Last edited Sep 30, 2009
This has zero to do with pagination, as the 46000 VIEWS did nothing to lengthen the amount of text POSTED.
I have no access to the logs (and i am sure no one here wants my help on fixing this flood problem anyhow), but let me point out that anyone on any OS can use wget.exe to do what's been done. Wget can also do posts, so you could consider yourself lucky whoever did this wasn't actually serious. It's not a bot, most likely, but like i said i don't have the server logs to verify this.
As for me being useless, let me point out Matt didn't get off my back until i deleted all code for task msg handling from my site. The handler can now handle msgs to/from other computers on my lan, but no way will i go thru what i did before. Obviously i still use Euphoria, and have for many years.
useless,
not by choice.
19. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by useless Sep 29, 2009
- 2214 views
- Last edited Sep 30, 2009
the exact reason why . knows so much about what is going on. Yes i is think its either . or .
Fenderil, despite *this* post of your's being edited, the copies people replied to weren't, and i know you meant me. I have 2 domains hosted in the same datacenter as this one is, and i exec on a 3rd one. Trust me, if i wanted to, i could bring this site down in flames and overcharges something fierce. Attacks across the same datacenter of the same host are not protected against. What i know about what's going on is plain clear text in this forum right in front of your face. Besides, i happen to know the hosting company of openeuphoria has a default connection log enabled with the timestamp and ip of all connections made. As long as no one did something stupid like turn that off, the admin here know it wasn't me, and they can work out who it was and contact authorities.
useless
20. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by CoJaBo Sep 30, 2009
- 2207 views
The IP making DoS-like activity was 96.224.53.203, however I cannot rule out for certain a server error having caused that (there are inconsistencies in the log).
It does not appear to be an open proxy, so filing an abuse report should not be hard. ISPs aren't well known for actually doing anything about these unless threatened with legal action, however.
21. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by useless Sep 30, 2009
- 2233 views
The IP making DoS-like activity was 96.224.53.203, however I cannot rule out for certain a server error having caused that (there are inconsistencies in the log).
It does not appear to be an open proxy, so filing an abuse report should not be hard. ISPs aren't well known for actually doing anything about these unless threatened with legal action, however.
Someone in Queens then. We've seen that ip before, in #Euphoria even.
Just ban that range, especially if it has no registered cookie? (we know who likes to use cookies here.)
useless
23. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by useless Sep 30, 2009
- 1259 views
I like ranges
Is that because you figure you can just switch to mibbit (or the other ip hiding services you've used, like igw/stc), or the school on electricfiber.net, or verizon-gni.net or verizon.net? With throttling, it's true you can still connect, just not for more than, oh lets say, a webpage per hour.
At least i hope Jeremy doesn't do permanent static banning of broad swaths of the internet. If he did that, i know you'd be howling in laughter.
And perhaps if you do force a change to a new host, it wouldn't change the look and feel of this site, nor any bookmarks anyone has made. To us common lusers, it wouldn't make any difference at all. Perhaps Jeremy will use of those hosts that allow dynamic feedback to the upstream firewalls and you could use all your available ip ranges at once, and accomplish nothing. I knew of some idiot once who tried to swamp dual-homed OC768 feeds to take an irc server offline, it didn't work, because the rack routers detected the ddos and fed back upstream to the firewalls on the fatter pipes. So why bother, fendaril? It's bad karma.
useless
24. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by jeremy (admin) Sep 30, 2009
- 1264 views
At least i hope Jeremy doesn't do permanent static banning of broad swaths of the internet. If he did that, i know you'd be howling in laughter.
We do not ban subnets. euweb now detects DOS attacks on the fly and takes appropriate action against only those offending IPs. I was, however, thinking that banning 0.0.0.0 would solve everything
Jeremy
25. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by Fendaril Sep 30, 2009
- 1238 views
I like ranges
Is that because you figure you can just switch to mibbit (or the other ip hiding services you've used, like igw/stc), or the school on electricfiber.net, or verizon-gni.net or verizon.net? With throttling, it's true you can still connect, just not for more than, oh lets say, a webpage per hour.
At least i hope Jeremy doesn't do permanent static banning of broad swaths of the internet. If he did that, i know you'd be howling in laughter.
And perhaps if you do force a change to a new host, it wouldn't change the look and feel of this site, nor any bookmarks anyone has made. To us common lusers, it wouldn't make any difference at all. Perhaps Jeremy will use of those hosts that allow dynamic feedback to the upstream firewalls and you could use all your available ip ranges at once, and accomplish nothing. I knew of some idiot once who tried to swamp dual-homed OC768 feeds to take an irc server offline, it didn't work, because the rack routers detected the ddos and fed back upstream to the firewalls on the fatter pipes. So why bother, fendaril? It's bad karma.
useless
You don't know how i operate yet do you? You think simply blocking a range from my location will stop me? Btw Im not using a proxy you sobbing bait. And if i wanted to come back to irc I could use a bouncer or ask a freenode op to cloak an account.
26. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by useless Sep 30, 2009
- 1218 views
You don't know how i operate yet do you? You think simply blocking a range from my location will stop me? Btw Im not using a proxy you sobbing bait. And if i wanted to come back to irc I could use a bouncer or ask a freenode op to cloak an account.
I think i do, but i don't care, you cannot do anything that's not already been done. I know range blocking seldom works with people like you.
useless
27. Re: Time for Pagination?
- Posted by Fendaril Sep 30, 2009
- 1256 views
Good glad you finally understand.
