[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp / cry ] [ aut ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab2 ]

/qa/ - Questions and Answers

Questions and Answers about QA

New Reply

Options
Comment
File
Whitelist Token
Spoiler
Password (For file deletion.)
Markup tags exist for bold, itallics, header, spoiler etc. as listed in " [options] > View Formatting "


[Return] [Bottom] [Catalog]

File:1515547099445.png (400.93 KB,720x672)

 No.74752

What is a ban? What purpose does it serve aside from blocking one from posting and/or stewing bad blood. Aside from keeping out true undesirables, is there any reason to ever have them?

 No.74753

>>74752
I think you kind of answered your own question: it keeps dickheads off the site.

 No.74754

File:__kawashiro_nitori_touhou_….jpg (190.42 KB,700x700)

>>74753
My question is more, aside from those dickheads, are they ever actually effective for disciplining within the site?

 No.74755

>>74754
In theory, short (<= 1 day) bans can be used as "strong warnings". In practice that requires very patient moderation.

 No.74756

Speaking of bans, not to imply circumventing an ipv4 ban isn't relatively trivial, but how will IP based blocking work with practically infinite IPs when ipv6 gets widely adopted?

 No.74757

>>74756
It will never get widely adopted but I believe rangebans could work on ipv6 as well.

 No.74758

>>74757
>It will never get widely adopted
2022 is the year of consumer IPv6!

 No.74759

>>74758
just one more year

 No.74760

File:[MoyaiSubs] Mewkledreamy M….jpg (157.95 KB,1920x1080)

I'm going to retake 4/qa/ when my tripcode ban expires in 4 years!
HAHAHAHAHA! Fools!

 No.74761

What's the point, we can smell your faggotry from a mile away without the trip.

 No.74762

>>74760
Oh, forgot the serious part of the post. They're warnings, but the cost of them is generally pretty low on account-less places like imageboards. For a ban to be worthwhile it has to require more effort to escape from than it does for the giver to replace and reinstate them, which is generally the case for smaller boards if the moderators are active by their own volition.
Preemptive mass bans against proxies or TOR are often necessary stop certain illegal activity, sadly. I don't think we're talking about that type of ban here, though.

 No.74763

Is device fingerprinting any good yet?

 No.74764


 No.74766

>>74763
yeah for a long while it's been viable but the ethical questions of gathering device data are questionable. You have to forcibly disable javascript, kind of like what the New UI does except the old would have to be discontinued for it to be a foolproof solution. But most spammers aren't going to go noscript.

 No.74778

>>74766
you can reliably fingerprint browsers without javascript. I can’t remember the name of that paper right now but it’s supposed to work across browsers and can fingerprint the hardware characteristics of the device itself, so the distinct features and the implementation differences of browsers shouldn’t matter, this on every common architecture, x86 and arm - from exynos chips in samsung phones to the latest amd threadrippers.

 No.74779

>>74778
i was pretty certain javascript is required to do anything with HTML3 Canvas and manipulate the data that gets sent in a post request

 No.74781

>>74779
lossy file encoding and decoding can give you a pretty good idea about the hardware characteristics of a device. so this includes things like graphics formats like jpeg and webp (thumbnails) and audio formats like aac and mp3, which broadcast plenty of information about the sound profile of your computer. the absence of javascript makes fingerprinting pretty difficult, but it’s still far from impossible.

 No.74782

File:f319d7c21a7bb25dd31c7817b7….jpg (484.14 KB,2896x4096)

>>74778
>>74781
This is such nonsense that I have to interject.
Without JS, the server knows nothing other than the IP packet transferred. At most it can reveal some info about the network and TLS stack of the OS.
It has nothing to do with the factor you said at all, which all require JS to work.

 No.74783

>>74781
if I'm requesting a file then the useragent and my cookies will be all that's known to the server. The browser would have to be transmitting information to the website about how it handled the files which wouldn't be unexpected of a google product, but any other site unaffiliated by google shouldn't know.

 No.74786

File:8fa2124fec73f519a3265464a0….png (147.65 KB,453x295)

>>74752
Justified or not, there is no question that a ban is a signifier of moderator anger. When that anger is projected onto the errant poster, he too feels it in turn. It may repel the riffraff but when dealing with anyone who knows how to use a computer they have a choice to make. To evade, or not to evade. That is the question we must ask ourselves infrequently. Is it worth evading to siphon more emotional ichor from your enemy? Perhaps, but one cannot ignore the possibility that it simply isn't worth your time to come back. After all, what purpose would it serve if you are no longer allowed to have discourse with anyone because someone in power disagrees with you? At least, enough to censor you in the first place! Personally, I feel that issuing bans never accomplishes anything other than revealing your own insecurities.

Ironically, I had to evade a ban to make this post because someone despises or is afraid of proxies.

 No.74787

File:l8JPPK2.png (25.75 KB,386x264)

>>74786
> Ironically, I had to evade a ban to make this post because someone despises or is afraid of proxies.
for no good reason of course

 No.74788

>>74787
Well yeah, foreign spammers tend to switch IP addresses after every post anyways. A ban on them doesn't deter them as much as you'd want.

 No.74789

>>74788
That's true, but it did have a noticeable effect on the amount of CP ads. That and url shortener. Sadly a few turds ruin everything

 No.74790

>>74789
err, url shortener filters that is

 No.74791

>>74788
Proxies yeah. I only have some big blocks on IPs from UA and CN.

Tor is a different deal and people can give me some money for a tor ban bypass which displays who they are on the mod UI.

 No.74792

>>74791
I never bothered to deal with tor being available, but when it was more open it was just got used by people trying to start shit

 No.74793

>>74791
Deanonymizing someone and forcing them to pay for the privilege is beyond idiotic and always will be Mootles. At least offer the feature for free to those who want it. Pissu passes are one of the biggest reasons why I don't like the administration. I hate when my hobbies are turned into businesses. I'm so angry I can't eat.

>>74792
People are going to start shit regardless.

 No.74794

File:1385361830081.jpg (19.91 KB,236x250)

>>74793
>At least offer the feature for free to those who want it

But that's stupid? Do you not think before you speak?

 No.74795

>>74793
No one wants to waste their time to deal with tor users unless you're one of those retards who owns a webring/8chan spinoff.

 No.74796

>>74793
Are you sure it's your anger preventing you from eating, and not the fact that whoever feeds you may be out at the moment?

 No.74797

>>74794
A friend told me to stop thinking 2 years ago so I did. Best advice he ever gave me.

>>74795
Nice argumentum ad populum. I don't really use tor much myself but it's about the principle of the whole thing. Many opportunities to sell out have been presented to me but never once have I accepted.

>>74796
Mom is sleeping right now but I swear that's not why.

 No.74798

File:[Alexvgz] Azumanga Daioh 2….jpg (69.15 KB,745x734)

>>74797
My principles are flailing around like a retard smashing everything that lies in my wake and I demand you respect them and let me into your server room as well.

 No.74805

>>74786
You already made a post like this and the consensus was that you were retarded.

I get the impression you're too young to remember a time before social media ruined everything, so listen good: the web is a platform, not any of the sites on it. Those are the private property of the people who own them and they can decide who they're willing to allow in. What you're doing is paramount to sneaking into a fancy club with a strict dress code in nothing but a speedo and getting personally offended when you get kicked out.

 No.74837

File:thanks for comign.jpg (265.42 KB,926x719)

>>74798
Last time I had a server I gave out FTP access to everyone who offered to help me with it. Only one person like you used rm -rf /. One bad egg did not make me disable features for everyone.

>>74805
Just because I'm retarded doesn't mean that I'm wrong. I'm here to tell you that your arguments have no merit and your dress code is abhorrent. Casual fridey should be every day.

 No.74841

I don't collect statistics on bans or the effectiveness of blocking TOR, but if another imageboard or forum has done an analysis on the effectiveness of certain moderation procedures I'd be interested in reading about them.

Otherwise please stop ranting about how kissu isn't run the way you want it.

 No.74844

>>74755
I'd say it requires patient posters as well, as tensions could get heated if one isn't accepting of a ban.

 No.74851

>>74837
I'm not sure how that proves me wrong, but if you don't get it then I guess I should elaborate.

Refusal of service isn't censorship. Much like how a bar can kick rowdy customers, if a website doesn't want you there, they have the right to kick you out. It becomes censorship if there's no viable alternatives, but even then that's less the sites problem and more so the governments for not breaking up the monopoly.

When I said
>I get the impression you're too young to remember a time before social media ruined everything
I didn't mean it as an insult. I genuinely meant it. Back in ye olden times, users voted with their feet. If a site had crappy policies that nobody liked, everyone would leave. It was uncommon for people to say a website was "censoring" them until the 2010s, when things started getting centralized to a small handful of websites.

 No.74852

>>74851
>It becomes censorship if there's no viable alternatives
Ain't that the truth, you hit the nail on the head. There are no viable alternatives to some places, that's why I'm so uppity. Hell even this place doesn't have a viable alternative because I refuse to go back to 4 as of 7 years ago.

>If a site had crappy policies that nobody liked, everyone would leave.

Those days are fucking over, the goyim have grown complacent and now suffer from massive Stockholm syndrome where I'm from lad. I have been a lot more successful convincing people to cause change through shitposts rather than getting them to leave. Besides, I don't want to kill websites for no reason anyways. If I did I'd just do nefarious shit to get them shut down instead.

 No.74853

>>74852
Refusal of certain types of services or people who don't fit in the framework of a website are not aggressive attempts to shut down competitors.
There was a discussion in sageru and I voiced a few alternatives. But the problem isn't so much that there is a monopoly, it's that the problems people voice aren't big enough to create competition. If a site's running well, there won't be any competition.

4chan had a big problem so Kissu was created. Big problems happen and new sites get created. Other people must not think that TOR blocks are a big enough issue to require the creation or exodus to a new site.

 No.74854

not to say that a singular issue ever leads to the creation of a competitor, but markets not only exist to create new ideas but replace existing ones that are going bad... Government interventions tend to try to stop the latter from happening because they still hold money and power. In imageboards this doesn't yet exist

 No.74856

This is to say that claims of moderation/bans being the antithesis to free speech or a restriction of an individual's freedom on the internet are dumb. There's no driving monopoly force on imageboards and even the attempts to use violent methods against admins that don't do what someone wants are often only met by small changes that are in line with what the admin wanted to do anyways and placate the spam until improvments can be made to ward off the next wave of attackers.

 No.74858

I feel like a good way to make IP bans work better would be to log new IPs and only allow them to post after a certain amount of time has passed. It wouldn't fully fix the problem, but it would definitely discourage ban evaders.

 No.74859

>>74858
I think preemptively banning people makes a site so slow that no one can use it. Tor and mobile users cycle through so many IPs in a day that it would be worse off than an autoban policy/blacklisting certain ip types.

Berun has brought that idea up because apparently ota did it once upon the time.
Kissu has a system set up to do this as of a few months(year?) ago, but I'll only ever use it if the site is bombarded in spam.

 No.74863

>>74760
Let's work on growing a botnet in preparation of the crusade, friend!




[Return] [Top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]

[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp / cry ] [ aut ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab2 ]