[Freeciv-Dev] Re: The guy from .algonet.se

[Daniel Burrows <Daniel_Burrows@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 07:42:52PM +0100, Thue Janus Kristensen was heard to 
say:
> >   Would it maybe help to give users accounts linked to email addresses?
> > ie, have them register an account on the Web page (or in the client?) by
> > providing an email address, then send them a password at that address, and
> > require the username/password for games on civserver.  This would make it
> > possible to cut at least some abusers off (if they have access to an 
> > infinite
> > number of email addresses, of course, this is a problem :-) )
> 
> three words: web based email (like hotmail)
> They do have access to unlimited email addresses.

  Argh, yet another reason hotmail is evil..

  Anyway, I still think persistent accounts which start without permissions to
do nasty things would alleviate some of the problems on civserver.  The main
issue here is that, there's no incentive for someone without ethics (and such
people unfortunately do exist) to not cheat, assuming they don't mind being
universally regarded as an idiot and/or a jerk.  Nothing we can do can prevent
them from having this attitude [1]; however, we can make it less attractive by
providing consequences which prevent them from doing this again, at least in the
near future.  (of course, the real issue that might keep this from being
implemented is: how do you decide who to cut off?  what if there are disputes?
who settles them?  what about a DOS attack on the civserver admins by someone
who creates dozens of accounts at once an abuses the system on all of them?)

  Another thing I wonder (and I don't know the answer) is: how many of these
people are really determined enough to sign up for n hotmail addresses just so
they can screw up Freeciv games?  Certainly some people will do it, but I don't
think they all will (assuming that more people will try this in the future;
I've only heard of this one case) -- will this be a sufficient obstacle for
them that the majority either stop trying it or proceed at a slower rate? (due
to the "waiting period" for cmdlevel access)

  Daniel

  [1] If you can solve this problem, please let me know :)