From: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org (sheryl-crew-digest) To: sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Subject: sheryl-crew-digest V6 #39 Reply-To: sheryl-crew@smoe.org Sender: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk sheryl-crew-digest Saturday, March 1 2003 Volume 06 : Number 039 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [sheryl-crew] Attn: Gregg (SC Fan Forum) ["John D. Wilkinson, III" <] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 00:11:51 -0600 From: "John D. Wilkinson, III" Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] Attn: Gregg (SC Fan Forum) Custom. Tends to be bad (in that capabilities only get added when they are needed, not as selling points) (and hard to modify). At hundreds of messages per second, I would guess that someone is scripting it. No user base could sustain that very long (well, maybe slashdot :-)). If there are a few sources that account for a lot of the messages, you might be able to block them at the routers of whoever is hosting the site (sherylcrow.com, that is). For the longer term, many ISPs have policies against harassment. Might be worthwhile to fire off some e-mails. You might suggest to Interscope that they use one of the message board packages that are out there (one with, perhaps, better management features :-)), and devote their effort to customizing where required. Not much help to you now, though. John - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregg Dempsey" To: "John D. Wilkinson, III" ; "Sheryl Crew" Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 7:49 PM Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] Attn: Gregg (SC Fan Forum) It's something written in ASP (?) which is totally custom from what I understand. I don't think it's a DOS-based attack. These websites encouraged their drones to go to the site and flame. It's tough to deal with stuff like that. Gregg. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "John D. Wilkinson, III" To: "Gregg Dempsey" Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 5:22 PM Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] Attn: Gregg (SC Fan Forum) > Hmmm... Disregard some of my earlier message. This is clearly something > like a DOS attack; it's not hard to script. However, it should also not be > that hard for Interscope to insert some kind of a posting delay. Is the > forum software something that they designed and built, or is it purchased > and adapted? Interscope should have some tech people that can deal with a > DOS attack; the same kind of technique should be able to deal with this > message flood. > > John > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gregg Dempsey" > To: "C. Ketchum" ; "Sheryl Crew" > Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 7:11 PM > Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] Attn: Gregg (SC Fan Forum) > > > Chris, I didn't make the decision to shut down the forum unilaterally. > > Here's the problem with deleting the threads - which ones? Did you see the > site? Hundreds and hundreds of messages - coming in by the second. There > is no way that one person or a team of people can keep up with that. I can > delete threads, and do, and also ban usernames, but as long as these people > are signed on, banned or not, they can post. Do I adopt a hard line > Democratic/liberal/whatever you want to call it view? Or do I adopt a > conservative view? I have preferred to remain a neutral party and only step > in when conversations (both right and left) get out of bounds. > > The programming for all the Interscope b-boards are all tied in together and > they can't fix something just for the Sheryl forum. Interscope is learning > and adding more tools for moderators but it's not an exact science. > Changing the way users log in, restricting who can register, etc., all > requires big changes in the program. I have discussed all of this with my > Interscope contact to my great frustration and they can't change much at > this time. > > There's a new email Sheryl feature, and with the fan forum coming back up > tonight, I'm going to be tougher on sending people there and deleting the > crap... > > It would be very nice if Sheryl clarified her position on all of this. > Maybe she feels she has but she's left open a lot of questions about her own > conduct - for example I will give you two examples they cite: > > 1. No support for war in Iraq under a Bush Administration, but big support > to Clinton during Bosnia (she sang there as you know). > 2. Calling for higher fuel economy when she owns a big new BMW SUV and a '64 > Corvette, probably not the most fuel efficient vehicles, and uses busses and > limos for her and her entourage. > > I won't debate the issues, please - I'm not a critic - I understand the > reasons and I could debate both pro and con with ease. I am not debating > the issues with the folks who have showed up at the site, I don't have time, > but some have made good points. Please folks, don't take me as against her > on these things, I'm not, but her statements about her politics have been > kind of poor. I won't talk about this at all on the forum and I will here, > because I consider this a closed conversation. You wouldn't have signed up > for this if you weren't a fan. That's not true on the forum, many people > who have joined, joined to flame. > > Come to the site when it re-opens and help us keep it open. > > Gregg. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "C. Ketchum" > To: > Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 4:08 PM > Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] Attn: Gregg (SC Fan Forum) > > > > >Yes, I know. But the attacks to the fan forum were organized from two > > conservative websites. We'll just have to deal with it when it becomes a > > problem again, even if that's immediately. > > I don't have a magic solution to fix this problem, and if you do, I've > > love to hear it! I spent a lot of time on the telephone with Interscope > > discussing options, and this is a usual solution when a fan forum gets out > > of control. > > I am just trying to prevent shutting it down forever, and I would ask all > > of the members of the "Sheryl Crew" to help in that regard. > > Gregg.< > > > > > > > > I don't have a "magic solution", but I think when the forum gets shut down > > like this, it's telling the flamers that their tactics are working, that > > they are keeping Sheryl fans from communicating, and that it's really > > bothering those that own/run the forum. To me, shutting down the forum is > > kind of like the kid next door who gets mad, refuses to play, and takes > his > > ball home. > > > > I know it's easy for me to say, but I'd rather see the forum remain active > > at all times with the standard deletion of hate threads/posts and > Photoshop > > crap, and constant reminders to the regulars to keep their cool and leave > > the hate threads alone. The flamers will keep coming, but, as always, it > > will lighten up after awhile. That is, until Sheryl wears one of those > damn > > t-shirts again! ;) > > > > The only way to completely stop the problem is to shut the forum down for > a > > LONG period of time. > > If that ever happens, I will be the first in a long line to place my foot, > > with great force, upon your posterior ;) > > > > Chris ------------------------------ End of sheryl-crew-digest V6 #39 ********************************