Mark (Brazil) wrote:
> mmm, I'm not sure, but I don't think Martyn wrote that.
In fact I did write it. All the while the forum runs reasonably smoothly, it's easy to manage. Once people mess it up, it becomes impossible. So far only a few people have seen this loophole whereby one person can represent themselves as another. Think what could happen if the wrong person got hold of it and proceeded to use it maliciously. I won't be responsible for that.
Those who diagnosed an absence of sense of humour on my part clearly don't know me. (I thought you, at least, did, Mark.) I can take the piss with the best of you, and I can receive it too. But I do take The Back Room very seriously indeed (if for no other reason than that it helps pay my un-viirtual wages). So please respect that, will you?
|
"Think what could happen if the wrong person got hold of it and proceeded to use it maliciously."
Very unlikely and easily identified by their IP address.
As far as I know all the tom foolery was confined to two threads.
It was *not* a slur on the software.
We don't need registration and we don't need editing (that badly).
Let's stop legislating for problems we don't have.
|
Dave wrote:
>
> "Think what could happen if the wrong person got hold of it
> and proceeded to use it maliciously."
>
> Very unlikely and easily identified by their IP address.
That's not the case. First, you have no idea what might have happened over the past year to be able to judge what is unlikely or otherwise. Second, (---.pgb.philips.com), your published IP address, gets me nowhere if I want to come after you.
> As far as I know all the tom foolery was confined to two
> threads.
Two-ish. And that was enough. I don't want others to know about it.
> It was *not* a slur on the software.
I happen to know that the original posts were aimed at deficiencies in the current version of the Phorum software. They were completely without malice, but in the wider view they were ill-advised.
> We don't need registration and we don't need editing (that
> badly).
You personally may not need registration. When it arrives, if you don't like it you can choose not to take part. I decide what needs editing, and I have wider concerns than those of an individual contributor, whoever that might be.
> Let's stop legislating for problems we don't have.
You'll find this is probably one of the least-managed, or the most hands-off bbs on the net. If you're not happy, I'm sorry. But this is how it is.
|
|
|
|
Dave,
What are you doing on the site, you should be engaged in last minute bodging ready for your 12 car.
regards,
S
|
|
|
Martyn, this is a good bit of php you have written but maybe the backroom has grown out of it?
I was just wondering why a system like vBulletin or UBB couldn't be used? I don't think they cost much and (as I am sure you are aware) have a vast array of management options.
|
|
|
> > mmm, I'm not sure, but I don't think Martyn wrote that.
>
> In fact I did write it.
I am surprised. In particular the humorless style of it made me think it wasn't you. Normally your shining wit shows through and is a pleasure to all of us !
>So far only a few people have seen this loophole
Martyn, you are fooling yourself. Its actually been discussed in here three or four times and aside from that, its pretty obvious, anway. Mostly its not an issue since even if it is done, its always spotted, other than DW posting all those anti-freelander notes in my name.
> another. Think what could happen if the wrong person got hold
> of it and proceeded to use it maliciously. I won't be
> responsible for that.
Virtually nothing. Your liability neither begins nor ends the with author's name, whether it is genuine or not. It could only affect you if you were provably a willing participant with intent to fraudulently deceive for pecuniary gain.
I am particularly upset that you removed that devastatingly humourous reply from Tom. Nothing, and I mean nothing, has amused me as much as that in here, except possibly that I think you fell for the edit button thing as well.
Now that *is* amusing.
|
Apologies if I opened up a can of worms there - We are obviously having a light-hearted day on the Forum today but I had merely done it to highlight the fact it could be and whilst I had envisaged a little bit of light hearted abuse (which there was) I do not believe my comments would have affected the security of the forum.
I agree with Mark in the fact that if anyone was looking to cause disruption or just be an @rse generally then the loophole is blindingly obvious and an email describing it is not going to affect whether or not it would be used maliciously anyway though I do understand the concern.
I am only glad everyone had "email replies..." checked so after returning from the pub I got to read the very funny (though non motor related of course) posts which have now been deleted. Maybe not all were phoney, am sure we'll all be keeping a close eye on Mark to see if his wife ends up with a Freelander :)
|
|
|
|
"What are you doing on the site, you should be engaged in last minute bodging ready for your 12 car."
It's a Rover 414 I use every day. I checked oil and wather and topped up the screen wash.
All I need to do now is put an upside down washing up bowl in the passenger footwell for the Navigator's feet and get down to Wetherspoons early for a pre- race mixed grill!
That's all the race prep I plan to do!
|
Dave wrote:
> All I need to do now is put an upside down washing up bowl in
> the passenger footwell for the Navigator's feet and get down
> to Wetherspoons early for a pre- race mixed grill!
Then you can use the right-way-up washing up bowl for your post race mixed grill review! :)
|
|
|
|
Got a little sand in your ****** M,BRM?
South Park or not, that was unnecessary. As well as the protests here, others have written me to say so. So I've edited it. If I could've deleted it altogether without making the responses seem to have been beheaded I would've.
|
Oi!!
Unacceptable. I dunno whether he will delete that or not, but I object to it and find it offensive.
Mark.
|
|
|
Fun's fun, but that is not at all funny.
I'm not impressed.
|
|
|
Dave wrote:
>
> Got a little sand in your vag!na M,BRM?
Oh dear, Dave, too cheeky for most of us I fear. Clever, yes, but too cheeky.
Maybe all that bravado about your rally preparations is just that, so let's have some contrite silence from you until we hear how you got on.
We know where you live .....
Ronnie
|
|
|
|
I (ct), M. The sand thing is from South Park and has therefore passed into popular culture. Needless to say I didn't intend to cause offence.
I (ct): The advantage of the washing up bowl foot rest isn't lost on me!
|
Dave wrote:
> I (ct): The advantage of the washing up bowl foot rest isn't
> lost on me!
Read Jenks' excellent piece on Stirling Moss' Mille Miglia win, where he over-indulged in sandwiches at a refuelling stop... Lost his lunch (and spectacles) at 150MPH!
|
|
|
|
I only nipped out to town and come back to this.
Please someone mail me and tell all. Don't post it here!
David
|
Dan,
You said you had the e-mails.
Forward them to David Woollard for his enjoyment !
Mark.
|
Thanks Dan, how did you get those from the forum after they'd been deleted?
Just need an hour to read them!
David
|
|
|
|
I did say I wouldn't add to anything too controversial, but I must add my disapproval of this one Dave. I may well have said the occasional wrong thing myself, but if someone said that to me, I'd have the right 'ump. Given the diversity of characters here, as anywhere else, I'm sure it's difficult to judge exactly how a comment should be received. With the spoken word, we can tell by the sound of the voice and face to face, our expressions tell all. But with Emails and posts here, it's easy to give/get the wrong impression. Perhaps the dictionary of emoticons should be extended and used more in order to identify our true thoughts.
Martyn, I'm sorry that this has occurred and and I'm off down to the refinery to get some fully synthetic oil in order to calm these temporarily troubled waters. I know next to nothing about computer programmes and the like, but personally welcome some sort of registration. Having said that, I didn't think that the present Backroom technology was that bad.
Shame to go from the hyper long, 100+, reasonably well mannered diesel thread - to an apparent nuclear attack. Hope you're not personally affronted Martyn - keep it up.
|
|
|
What is South Park?
Might be worth remembering that the internet is international and South Park may not be a familiar item in South Africa, Brazil, the Philippines (or Norfolk for that matter!)
|
Brian,
I was somewhat amused to see Dave ( not unkindly meant Dave!) quote South Park as his justification for the popular culture phrase.
I find South Park inventive/hilarious/crude/disrespectful/non-pc. All those things but would never say "it's OK because it's on South Park".
If I had Dave's mail address I'd mail him an even more positive note of support but It's not going here!
David
|
|
|
|
