Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 05:47:07 -0600 From: "Dragon Knight ][" <dragonk@mato.com> To: "Francisco Reyes" <francisco@natserv.com>, "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" <des@flood.ping.uio.no>, "Rod Taylor" <dark@idiotswitch.org> Cc: "FreeBSd Chat list" <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: FreeBSD essentials Message-ID: <01e801bed825$c1e2ac00$0101a8c0@mato.com> References: <199907271142.HAA02529@vulcan.addy.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 27 Jul 1999 13:37:36 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > >> Whelp... You could use the IP and block it from voting again for 2 > >> hours or something. This would allow dynamic people to both vote > >> (should they get the ip), and wouldn't allow one person to load it > >> up very quickly. > > > >Consider how many -chat readers work for (or are) ISPs. > > The only thing I could think of was verifying a user by sending > an email to which they need to reply and to verify this id is a > valid user of one of the freebsd lists... but I can't remember > if the lists currently allow to see members (which I actually > hope they don't since this would allow spammers to get the > names). > > Overall having people have to reply is one of the better methods > I can think off.. although somewhat of an inconvinience. > I would think that slight inconvenience is the whole idea. Because one being a slight inconvenience, 1000 = big inconvenience. Of course there are always ways around this, scripts and the like that auto-reply.. etc, .. But if a slight inconvenience is involved you might want to ask a person if they wish to vote? which might, again, taint the pool of votes. Samuel To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01e801bed825$c1e2ac00$0101a8c0>