SE Forum Visibility (split from Crash on M8 last night...)

[Edin430]

It wouldn't be SE unless a thread turns into a debat about something completely different

[woody]

Agree with everything Paul, and I have said it before, but I cant see why the forum isnt totally closed to "guests" viewing, like so many forums are.

+1

I agree that would be ideal, but there may be another issue with doing this.

My father's the regional editorial director for a part of Trinity Mirror (owners of the Record). He assures me, and I don't know how honest he's being (being a journo, he has a long history of being divorced from the truth), that at work he has access to software which can allow him into restricted areas of forums and non-public social networking profiles.

He has certainly been on here in the past as a result of googling my/our name, which as well as my contact details was splashed over a Kames thread.


ETA, if your reading this Dad

[fd]

at work he has access to software which can allow him into restricted areas of forums

. . . absolute rubbish . . .

Fd

[woody]

at work he has access to software which can allow him into restricted areas of forums

. . . absolute rubbish . . .

Fd

Thanks.

I was never quite sure, but I do feel a bit of a gullible tit now.

[Shug]

As the point was raised, we've long since believed that having the forums open was a great way to encourage people to read and get involved. That's why we mods batter on about this being a public place - it wouldn't matter if we locked it to members only - as a matter of fact, there's a thread of argument stating it'd be more dangerous if we did lock it up:

If it was locked to members only, there would be a feeling that it was 'secure' - when in actual fact, anybody can sign up for an account in the space of 30 seconds - protects nothing. I see no reasons for creating barriers to new members when it would achieve nothing but making the place more of a target (the old 'what have they got to hide' factor) Openness is the best policy as long as we remember it's public domain - it's on the internet, so will always be public domain, no matter if we hide it behind a password or not.

[philthy]

Shug, that would all stop if you had to have administrator approval to activate your account.

[Scotty C]

I see your point guy's. But anyone could send a e-mail to a mod.

Hi my name is joe bloggs and I am looking to buy a new elise. I was talking to the sales man at Murray motors (can't remember his name) and he pointed me to this forum for advice etc bla bla bla.

Why would you not let joe bloggs into SE and if Joe bloggs did get on would we then blame the mods???

Plus this is extra work for the mods who do everthing FOC?

just my 2p

Scotty

[Shug]

Shug, that would all stop if you had to have administrator approval to activate your account.

So, how does that change anything (as per Scotty's post) We used to do that purely to stop spambots (before we upgraded the software and had the image recognition question) No point in it at all.

You're posting on the internet. The internet is a public place. End of.

[philthy]

Granted would put a delay on someone like a journalist getting info they can use. Also having the forum private would mean googling for info wouldnt give any recent information on the users

[Shug]

We covered the issue some time ago and the group decision was to stay open - there are members-only forums for meets. If you feel strongly, stick up a poll and the mods will change it if the majority want to go that way.

I still maintain that it's a pain in the hole for no real advantage, but that's only my opinion at the end of the day.

[philthy]

fair enough, at the end of the day you are the one who has to deal with the forum, I just use it.

[ruadh08]

You're posting on the internet. The internet is a public place. End of.

Shug,

The internet is indeed a public place, but our enthusists forums do not need to be! If a person is genuine about wanting to join an enthusiasts forum, he will not mind jumping through a few hoops to get moderators approval. If a person is a journalist, troublemaker, or simply a member of the public that has just taken exeption to having been overtaken by an Elise going too fast, then they probably wouldnt be bothered going through any proceedure and vetting to get on, especially if the process took a few days .

We enjoy open, sometimes personal discussions on this forum with our friends, but sometimes I feel it could be likened to having a loud personal chat in a pub, and being overheard by all and sundry. None of us would do that if we were talking privatly amonst ourselves.

An example recently, Renmure posted a picture of his garage with all his toys in, as did Mass, and Iain B posted a picture of his watch collection. If I was them, I would be extremely concerned about publishing that invitation to burglars on a forum that ANY member of the public can go in an view.

With the examples of public forums being highlighted recently, we must not become too complacent about this. If Gush had been driving an Elise instead of the Gallardo, the press would have been all over our website like a rash!

[james]

at work he has access to software which can allow him into restricted areas of forums

. . . absolute rubbish . . .

Fd

Exactly. Is that the special "magic software" he was referring to?

[philthy]

at work he has access to software which can allow him into restricted areas of forums

. . . absolute rubbish . . .

Fd

Exactly. Is that the special "magic software" he was referring to?

Google proabably

[Shug]

You're posting on the internet. The internet is a public place. End of.

Shug,

The internet is indeed a public place, but our enthusists forums do not need to be! If a person is genuine about wanting to join an enthusiasts forum, he will not mind jumping through a few hoops to get moderators approval. If a person is a journalist, troublemaker, or simply a member of the public that has just taken exeption to having been overtaken by an Elise going too fast, then they probably wouldnt be bothered going through any proceedure and vetting to get on, especially if the process took a few days .

We enjoy open, sometimes personal discussions on this forum with our friends, but sometimes I feel it could be likened to having a loud personal chat in a pub, and being overheard by all and sundry. None of us would do that if we were talking privatly amonst ourselves.

An example recently, Renmure posted a picture of his garage with all his toys in, as did Mass, and Iain B posted a picture of his watch collection. If I was them, I would be extremely concerned about publishing that invitation to burglars on a forum that ANY member of the public can go in an view.

With the examples of public forums being highlighted recently, we must not become too complacent about this. If Gush had been driving an Elise instead of the Gallardo, the press would have been all over our website like a rash!

Paul,

Please don't read complacency into my response. The fact is we've discussed this before and come to the agreement that the current way is fine. Manual vetting of members is a PITA, but would be much less so now that we have the image recognition to weed out bots (which would try to join in the dozens per day before this system was implemented)

As I say, if you feel strongly, by all means, post a poll and we'll get the group as a whole's opinion of this - on which the mods will act. If the consensus is we lock up the forums and implement a manual check, we'll do that.

My point stands though - I think it would be dangerous in that an assumption would be made that we're all mates that can read it, therefore we'd post more freely than we would otherwise. We mods are not mind readers - if someone wants in, they will get in - do you think it'll put off a journalist, having to lie their way in - I don't.