FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

The first repeated vandelism occured. I have recieved threats for more vandelism. the transcript is attached

Last used IP: 12.222.122.13
AIM: Skatoulaki010

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

This probably wasn't appropriate (though to be fair, the other guy was more out of line). Also, as I mentioned elsewhere, you seem to be just feeding the flames. Trolls like this thrive on attention. The fact that he has your attention is why he does it (yes, I won't argue that it is immature). Let him change his IP, amass whatever army he claims to have ... just ignore him and deal quietly with the problems that you get. Postings like this that tend to imply he's a nuisance just give him more of a yearning to waste our time.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

very interesting :eek:

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Cool quote. Yes, your right. Ssshhh...
I just wanted to make sure we didn't flunk our first test as a wiki. (I didn't think I'd be doing this my first day as sysop!)

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Sigh...

I thought this wouldn't happen, but it's not hard to stop. Just quitely moderate the twit.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Was this guy actually serious?
(S)He's not too bright...
"[20:56:33] Skatoulaki010: i have started my rebellion, my minons are gathering as we speak..you and your few moderators will never be able to hold us back"
I have started my rebellion (remember that)
Followed by...
"[21:01:27] Skatoulaki010: now sir..i must depart from this conversation i have an army to round, a rebellion to start, and a website to destroy... good day.. good night... good life..."
I have an army to round, a rebellion to start....
I just don't like people who are incohesive in their conversations.

I'm not familiar with the setup of wiki's, but isn't there an administration team that reviews all the articles before they are posted? Just make sure they review everything that comes up (without saying anything) and we shouldn't have a big problem with it. Eventually, since the(se) idiots aren't getting the attention they believe they deserve, they will give up.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

is he actually serious?? why would he want to dostroy the site? if he is serious he sounds like a nut and he could be dangerous.

what are you planning to do about him?

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Reviewing things before they are posted is in contrast to our idea of open content (see wikipedia for more info). However, we do have abilities to block users and to revert the edits of vandals.

Incidentally, I forgot to mention the first thing that popped into my mind. It almost sounded like Bill Gates going on an attack against F/OSS. Re-read it with that in mind ... it's hilarious :D

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

The beauty of wiki is that no one approves contributions. There are no editors. If some [expletive deleted] screws stuff up, any other user can just come by and revert things. This guy really isn't a threat.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

HA!

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Currently, we plan to wait for his move. Only the one incident so far. At this point, block vandels, repair damage. There are 6 of us, and all know.

There is also another reason for putting this up: To make sure that the CD community knew that if their IP is blocked for no reason, they know why.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

^^So why are we worrying about this? We can just have the intelligent and mature people just keep the vandalous posts clean and there should be no problem at all.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Eh. Seems like a moron who has even more free time on his hands than we do. ;)

I wouldn't worry about it at all, he's just trying to be a pain. Just delete whatever he messes up and continue to block him. After awhile, he'll get tired of it.

I mean, do you really think he has "hundreds of minions" (or whatever he claims) who are waiting to jump into glorified battle to destroy some site they've probably never heard of? I mean, it's probably just a random person...I doubt it's someone who has some extreme grudge against FIRST.

Like phrontist said, he's not really a threat. I wouldn't worry about it.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

You know, one of the images on his page was from MIT's site, user: fdalan (no longer there). After some digging, I found that he had access to some keys, and that his name is Fabio Dalan. Whether or not this is our guy is left to be seen.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

To the people behind FirstWiki:

I wish you best of luck in holding off such attacks, and thank you for starting such a service to the community. I don't think that anybody will truly be able to take a well-designed Wiki down, as (has been said before) the ratio of good users to bad ones is too high. Unless a "large army of minions" with even less of a life than FIRSTers have has appeared, nobody is going to spend the effort to attack such a niche site.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

I dont think this is the place to try to publically expose somebody. If you want to deal with an issue like this, you need to do it in private and NOT in a public forum. That will only fuel the flames. One of the first things I learned about dealing with issues such as this is to deal with it in the background as a site administrator is supposed to do.

I am HIGHLY against what you dealing with this and posting a chat transcript in public. BAD BAD BAD idea....

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

I really really really agree with what was just said. Posting private converations between individuals without the written consent of all parties is a federal offense. I will look up the location in the USC where the details about this are, but the punishment is not trivial. Something like a $50,000 fine, and/or jail time. Be very careful when revealing conversations between individuals. Note, I don't know if this applies to chats on AIM, but it does to phones and email.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Calm down man! IANAL but IM is far to fluid a medium to be held in any regard in a court of law.

Take a deeeeep breath everyone. We're all giddy from the excitement :-)

"Oh boy! Our first monster!!! Wheee! Lets slay the troll!!!"

I feel like Dubya: Bring 'em On!

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

I don't believe it applies to AIM, so far as the federal statue goes (though I'm not familiar with it). I only say that, though, because I hear frequently that you have to be careful if you live (or the other party lives) in Mass. (d'oh... New Hampshire), because it is a state law there that it applies to. And if the guy is indeed from MIT ... (granted his threat wasn't the most legal action, either).

I half agree with what you said. But,
He was the one who started this in a public forum. He vandalized pages, and his IP is free to be posted on the wiki (a looser link could be made for here) as to his indiscretion, so that it can be avoided. (Is it publically exposing somebody when he doesn't try to hide his aims, and a complete history is publicly available on FIRSTwiki?). The AIM transcript might be a different matter, however.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

It is unfortunate that some people only want to spend their time on destructive actions trying to undermind other's constructive efforts to build a better community, especially when the reason for these actions is so unimportant.

I didn't get much out of that AIM log, except the fact that this person wanted to edit part of the Wiki page and for some unknown reason he wasn't allowed to do so. I am not familiar with your process of building this wiki page, and this person may or may not deserve to be "screw so badly", but I think there is a better way to handle this than publically denounce this person, reveal his screen name, and keep on posting names of people or information you might think is related to this person.

It seems like you are trying to say all these to the public as a warning to this person. I have a feeling that's the least of that person's concern. The more you try to stop him/her, the more he/she is going to want to fight back. There is no winner in these sort of fights. Frankly its a waste on both sides' time.

If he/she did something that you don't agree should be done on the wiki page, work it out. Come to an understanding on what you and he/she expect the wiki page to look like. If there are obvious difference on your and his/her vision, than accept the difference and move on. It seems like you expect a lot of people to work on the wiki page, so you should expect lots of different opinions, and know how to handle them appropriately.

It is obvious that this person's feelings are hurt. Anything that he/she does because of those hurt feelings is only going to waste more time on your side. Lets not make it worse for both side of this matter.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

This type of naivete can be your undoing. See here and here. You'd be suprised how ignorant the court can be in matters of technology. Also, as echoed by others ... posting information about other people shouldn't be taken so lightly.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

I just got so much perspective out of that.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

well i will put my input into this....i post on a few different messageboards (phishhook.com, sharinthegroove.org, etc) and over the past months we have had alot of problems with people like this posting tons of obseen material and causeing a ruckus. what we found is yes they try to take down the site for like a week and then give up.....i would say just don't respond to them and just fix the things they do eventully they will go away. most people on this site are more mature then these people, and lets not let them get in the way of further devlopment of this project.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Oh, I agree with that sentiment. However, before a user is blocked he is given repeated notices of what he is doing, asked nicely to stop, we try to get him to realize what he's doing is wrong ... and only then do we block him. All I was getting at was at this point he has clearly made it public, and I think we have every right to put his IP address on the wiki so that others can look out for him when the ban is expired to make sure he doesn't do any more vandalizations.

Though a certain over-excited administrator has indeed prompted a lot of constructive conversation on the whole issue ... which will cause me (and the other sysops more than likely) to review the whole process of what happened ... and a lot of which will soon find its way to the administrator's guide (which I'll try to bring up to par on the morrow). I'll post a link where further review of our policies can more appropriately take place.

For now, please keep the good advice coming ...

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

A quick search on this IP reveals:

12.222.122.13
12-222-122-13.client.insightBB.com
Win XP
Netscape 5.0
1400x1050
16 M colors

Darn Netscape Users.... :rolleyes:

Massachusettes has nothing to do with this particular attack.. This person may have been from there at one time, but not at the time of that posting on the wiki going by the info that you provided.

Astronouth7303, if you want to know the info I found - PM me.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

That is the dumbest thing I've heard in a while, to think that someone has the time and the stupidity to try and destroy a resource designed to help people.

Good luck in fending them off, I'll try to be around soon to help out.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

I know that maybe it probably wasn't the best idea ever to make this public, but there are a few things to be said for it:
A. If this person comes along and destroys someone's work (I know you can change it back, but that's beside the point...), they won't feel like it's an attack against them, it's just some trouble maker
B. Also, if anyone sees this guy making trouble again, they can know that it's not his first time and report it to the sysops/other admins.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Rousing up minions? Starting a rebellion? Sounds like an immature 12-year-old wannabe cracker to me.

Some people, geez. Well, we should be able to hold against this.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

I've come up with a first draft of our policy. The general Guide for administrators is here, and the specific policy dealing with vandalism is here. It is being debated, and everyone's input is certainly welcome.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

For some background: There were 8 seperate acts within a time frame of 40 minutes. For a list of pages, see User contriutions.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

It's been said many times before in this thread, but vandals like this thrive on attention. It's the only reason they do this sort of thing. By posting all this, their information, all the posts, etc, you're doing exactly what they want you to do. The more attention brought to them, the brighter the spotlight on them, the more they will vandalize- because they know people are watching. Really, the best thing you can do about this sort of thing is very quietly and subtley undo whatever damage they do. When they see their efforts yield no results, they will stop.

I've dealt with my share of trolls and vandals on my own forum, and by arguing and making a large public scene, you are only feeding their original purpose in destroying such things- attention. I know it's difficult to ignore, and very difficult not to act, but for these sorts of things, it's best to act quietly and quickly, and hope no one notices. The more people know about it, the more it will happen. The more you post and complain about it, the more it will happen.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

I agree. This doesn't need to be discussed here.

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Brandon has spoken. :)

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

i'm sry but that was such a funny conversation.
is he really serious? (i have an army to round, a rebellion to start, and a website to destroy... good day.. good night... good life...)lol weirdo!

Re: FIRSTwiki: The first battle
 

Don't know yet, I just realized we haven't unblocked him yet! (72 hours from the 13th!)