Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

DDOfabDDO - Jimtimmy/16kadams Interview

JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 12:22:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would like to thank JT/16k in advance for taking the time to answer some questions and clarify their platform. I respectfully ask other members to refrain from posting in this thread.

1 - You have said that Innomen's failed policies have hurt DDO for the past year. Could you clarify which policies you are referring to and how they have hurt DDO?

2 - You encourage a vote for real, positive change. What specific changes will you implement?

3 - Do you, or do you not support the current method of banning and trials for dealing with trolls and troublemakers? If you do not support the current method, how does your platform differ from current policy?

4 - How do you plan to change the TOS?

5 - You support eliminating cellphone verification, and that you are open to alternatives. Do you have any ideas for alternatives, or would you work to remove the verification with no other safeguard against abuse?

Thank you for answering these questions, I will have more after you respond.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
imabench
Posts: 21,216
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 12:24:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
post
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 5:52:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 12:22:52 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
I would like to thank JT/16k in advance for taking the time to answer some questions and clarify their platform. I respectfully ask other members to refrain from posting in this thread.

1 - You have said that Innomen's failed policies have hurt DDO for the past year. Could you clarify which policies you are referring to and how they have hurt DDO?

The argument is he has done nothing to improve the site.


2 - You encourage a vote for real, positive change. What specific changes will you implement?

See platform, also our major on is in the video at the top.


3 - Do you, or do you not support the current method of banning and trials for dealing with trolls and troublemakers? If you do not support the current method, how does your platform differ from current policy?

We think a slightly more lax system is beneficial, but we think a fairly moderate banning system is needed to prevent uber trolls.


4 - How do you plan to change the TOS?

Like everything else good contact with juggle.


5 - You support eliminating cellphone verification, and that you are open to alternatives. Do you have any ideas for alternatives, or would you work to remove the verification with no other safeguard against abuse?

2.) Cell Phone Verification- We support ending the cell phone requirement. We are also open to suggestions for a more reasonable alternative to stop mutli accounting.
http://www.debate.org...

We are saying we need people to suggest, one way would be to do an IP scan. Much more effective.


Thank you for answering these questions, I will have more after you respond.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 5:54:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Guys, taking an anti-Innomen stance is foolish and is obviously a ploy to attack the airmax/Innomen ticket. Innomen has done a great deal for the site . . .
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 5:58:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Since the last place I put this never got any of my questions answered, here is the platform...their statements in bold. Mine underlined.

1.) History Forum- We strongly support the idea of adding a history forum to DDO. This is something we have always been strong supporters of.


How do you propose getting Juggle to go along with this actually? Do you have a coherent plan?

2.) Banning- We only support banning in circumstances where it is very obvious that banning is appropriate. Nono and Russianfish99 both would be examples of this. However, we are willing to consider trials in other extreme cases, where the member in question is not a clear troll but does cause a substantial amount of harm. Izbo10 is an example of this.

In other words, you wish to keep the status quo.

3.) Big Issues Reform- As all candidates have pledged, we will be strongly fighting to reform the "Big Issues" to fill the needs and views of the DDO members of 2012.

This is currently happening. Under the Innomen administration which apparently has not done enough.

4.) Creation of a DDO Constitution- We support the creation of a DDO constitution, to protect the rights of the members of DDO. It also will lay out clearly how the banning policy will be carried out and in what situations it applies. There will be more specifics on this to come.

Who said we have rights? Using this website is a privilege is it not? Why is the TOS not enough?

5.) Creation of a DDO Legislative Branch- We support the creation of a legislative branch for DDO. Every 2 months, DDO will elect four representatives that will vote on various reforms. If their is a tie, the VP will break this. After the constitution gets ratified, all members of the DDO congress as well as the president must support any change.

Wouldn't this just make it harder to reform anything about the site? You wish to make this website more bureaucratic thus, decreasing the chance of you accomplishing anything. As a debate site, don't you think there will be much debate slowing the reform process? What makes you think a constitution will be ratified?

6.) Team Debates- We support and will fight for the creation of team debates. There are various ways that these could work. There will be more specifics on this to come.

How exactly are you going to force Juggle to do this?

7.) Cellphone Verification- We support the elimation of the cellphone verification requirement. We are open to alternatives ways to fight multi accounts for this issue.

Why? And what other ways?

8.) Profanities and Forum Censorship- We support eliminating all forms of forum censorship. This includes profanities and all caps posts, which we think should be allowed.

Why should profanities and all caps be allowed? A mature individual should be able to get their point across without cursing. Juggle has the full right to limit cursing. Oh yea, once again, how are you going to get Juggle to go along with this?

9.) Voting Requirements- We fully support returning voting requirements from 500 posts or 5 debates to 100 posts or 3 debates.

The president does not have this power.

10.) TOS Reform- The TOS can be changed if all members of the DDO congress and the president agree that it should be.

DDO does not have this power. The TOS is set by Juggle. The TOS can only be changed if JUGGLE wants it to be changed. Why would Juggle want to change a legal document which was constructed, most likely, by lawyers? Jimtimmy, do you have the legal expertise to construct a electronic contract?

This is the platform that 16kadams and I are running on for president and vice president.

We understand that these changes will be hard to achieve. But, we can pledge that we will do our best to achieve them.

Innomen has failed, in his most recent term, to achieve even basic reforms. Nothing is getting done.

Considering Juggle has just pledged they will support "change", something is being done.

The other candidates are largely running on pledges to continue Innomen's policies.

And you are running on empty promises.

That is not what we are doing. We pledge real change, and we are willing to say that Innomen has failed as a leader.

But, where is your plan to accomplish this change?
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 6:00:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
To conclude, Jimtimmy and 16k's entire platform is based upon the "failings" of the innomen administration. The rest of their "platform" which does not deal with innomen, in any way, is simply bluster on their part and half empty promises.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 6:10:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 5:54:07 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Guys, taking an anti-Innomen stance is foolish and is obviously a ploy to attack the airmax/Innomen ticket. Innomen has done a great deal for the site . . .

This is false as our main point was reform, we added in the innomen has failed to reform we are the only candidate that differs from him blah blah blah. Our reform policies are our main goal, but people are publicizing the innomen thing way to much
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 6:11:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 6:10:25 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 5:54:07 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Guys, taking an anti-Innomen stance is foolish and is obviously a ploy to attack the airmax/Innomen ticket. Innomen has done a great deal for the site . . .

This is false as our main point was reform, we added in the innomen has failed to reform we are the only candidate that differs from him blah blah blah. Our reform policies are our main goal, but people are publicizing the innomen thing way to much

I'm still curious as to why 16k keeps ignoring me :P

And reforming what exactly? How has innomen failed to reform? and how are you much different from him?
imabench
Posts: 21,216
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:17:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

I hit that point a while ago.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:19:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:17:59 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

I hit that point a while ago.

This is ridiculous...I'm getting there...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:28:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 5:58:21 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
Since the last place I put this never got any of my questions answered, here is the platform...their statements in bold. Mine underlined.

1.) History Forum- We strongly support the idea of adding a history forum to DDO. This is something we have always been strong supporters of.


How do you propose getting Juggle to go along with this actually? Do you have a coherent plan?

Communication is key to any reform policy. If we ask and they deny, then we will respectfully back down. If we are able to get them to approve, then we will proceed. Like the big issues debacle, we ask, they say Yay or Nay, and if they require other actions/details we comply.


2.) Banning- We only support banning in circumstances where it is very obvious that banning is appropriate. Nono and Russianfish99 both would be examples of this. However, we are willing to consider trials in other extreme cases, where the member in question is not a clear troll but does cause a substantial amount of harm. Izbo10 is an example of this.

In other words, you wish to keep the status quo.

Slightly more lax, but the majority of it is extended.


3.) Big Issues Reform- As all candidates have pledged, we will be strongly fighting to reform the "Big Issues" to fill the needs and views of the DDO members of 2012.

This is currently happening. Under the Innomen administration which apparently has not done enough.

Assuming it does not get completed, we will push it a little, but not to much, to speed up the process. He forgot to add the polling data. When you click it, it says "77% Pro, 33% con", we plan to reset that so people have to refill the big issues and it will be 0/0. This update makes it so inactive members data does not clog up the polls there and only active members are there.

Did that make sense?


4.) Creation of a DDO Constitution- We support the creation of a DDO constitution, to protect the rights of the members of DDO. It also will lay out clearly how the banning policy will be carried out and in what situations it applies. There will be more specifics on this to come.

Who said we have rights? Using this website is a privilege is it not? Why is the TOS not enough?

He wants to add rights, the TOS is more dont do X or Y, the constitution is so we can be able to do A
, B, or C with no interference unless that A violates the TOS.


5.) Creation of a DDO Legislative Branch- We support the creation of a legislative branch for DDO. Every 2 months, DDO will elect four representatives that will vote on various reforms. If their is a tie, the VP will break this. After the constitution gets ratified, all members of the DDO congress as well as the president must support any change.

Wouldn't this just make it harder to reform anything about the site? You wish to make this website more bureaucratic thus, decreasing the chance of you accomplishing anything. As a debate site, don't you think there will be much debate slowing the reform process? What makes you think a constitution will be ratified?

Depends, the majority of the people agree with our platform but are skeptical on how we are going to get it done. Also this makes it so we can make it more of a majority voice in the elected government. It is likely we can change this legislative branch as needed.

Also you contradict yourself. You say slow the debate process, but your reason against this measure is that is slows the process. So you are therefore for the process if you think it slows things down.


6.) Team Debates- We support and will fight for the creation of team debates. There are various ways that these could work. There will be more specifics on this to come.

How exactly are you going to force Juggle to do this?

Not a force, again a request.


7.) Cellphone Verification- We support the elimation of the cellphone verification requirement. We are open to alternatives ways to fight multi accounts for this issue.

Why? And what other ways?

IP checks are far more effective then cell phone verifications.


8.) Profanities and Forum Censorship- We support eliminating all forms of forum censorship. This includes profanities and all caps posts, which we think should be allowed.

Why should profanities and all caps be allowed? A mature individual should be able to get their point across without cursing. Juggle has the full right to limit cursing. Oh yea, once again, how are you going to get Juggle to go along with this?

The point is freedom of speech. Whether or not juggle will go along with this current measure is debatable.


9.) Voting Requirements- We fully support returning voting requirements from 500 posts or 5 debates to 100 posts or 3 debates.

The president does not have this power.

Again, this can be with communication with juggle.


10.) TOS Reform- The TOS can be changed if all members of the DDO congress and the president agree that it should be.

DDO does not have this power. The TOS is set by Juggle. The TOS can only be changed if JUGGLE wants it to be changed. Why would Juggle want to change a legal document which was constructed, most likely, by lawyers? Jimtimmy, do you have the legal expertise to construct a electronic contract?

He will likely draft a TOS and send it in. Also, he may not even make it! He could easily tell a lawyer to draft it for him, he is likely related to one, and if he knows know lawyers I can give my family (lawyers in there) to help. He does not need to be the one that makes it.


This is the platform that 16kadams and I are running on for president and vice president.

We understand that these changes will be hard to achieve. But, we can pledge that we will do our best to achieve them.

Innomen has failed, in his most recent term, to achieve even basic reforms. Nothing is getting done.

Considering Juggle has just pledged they will support "change", something is being done.

http://en.wikipedia.org...


The other candidates are largely running on pledges to continue Innomen's policies.

And you are running on empty promises.

He is promising to finish them, and if he fails he will not run for a second term.


That is not what we are doing. We pledge real change, and we are willing to say that Innomen has failed as a leader.

But, where is your plan to accomplish this change?
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:30:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
jimtimmy has 32 minutes to not forfeit our debate.
I intend to win it, even though I'm not even running in the election.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:34:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:17:59 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

I hit that point a while ago.

I lost it when you began to throw hissy fits all the time and began to troll
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:34:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

So from 0 -> -1?
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:36:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:34:12 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:17:59 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

I hit that point a while ago.

I lost it when you began to throw hissy fits all the time and began to troll

I trolled. Really. I merely asked you like your going to ask Juggle.
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:37:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:34:52 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

So from 0 -> -1?

oh no from like 2 --> 1 ---> 0
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:40:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:37:57 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:34:52 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

So from 0 -> -1?

oh no from like 2 --> 1 ---> 0

how in the hell was it even at 2?!?!

Also I responded a while ago on this forum XD
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:40:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:36:44 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:34:12 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:17:59 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:15:43 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
I am slowly losing respect for 16k due to his inability to defend his own platform.

I hit that point a while ago.

I lost it when you began to throw hissy fits all the time and began to troll

I trolled. Really. I merely asked you like your going to ask Juggle.

If you troll then its trolling that does not bug me
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:46:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:28:40 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 5:58:21 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
Since the last place I put this never got any of my questions answered, here is the platform...their statements in bold. Mine underlined.

1.) History Forum- We strongly support the idea of adding a history forum to DDO. This is something we have always been strong supporters of.


How do you propose getting Juggle to go along with this actually? Do you have a coherent plan?

Communication is key to any reform policy. If we ask and they deny, then we will respectfully back down. If we are able to get them to approve, then we will proceed. Like the big issues debacle, we ask, they say Yay or Nay, and if they require other actions/details we comply.

So you are going to ask...that's not really a plan.


2.) Banning- We only support banning in circumstances where it is very obvious that banning is appropriate. Nono and Russianfish99 both would be examples of this. However, we are willing to consider trials in other extreme cases, where the member in question is not a clear troll but does cause a substantial amount of harm. Izbo10 is an example of this.

In other words, you wish to keep the status quo.

Slightly more lax, but the majority of it is extended.

Thank you.



3.) Big Issues Reform- As all candidates have pledged, we will be strongly fighting to reform the "Big Issues" to fill the needs and views of the DDO members of 2012.

This is currently happening. Under the Innomen administration which apparently has not done enough.

Assuming it does not get completed, we will push it a little, but not to much, to speed up the process. He forgot to add the polling data. When you click it, it says "77% Pro, 33% con", we plan to reset that so people have to refill the big issues and it will be 0/0. This update makes it so inactive members data does not clog up the polls there and only active members are there.

Did that make sense?

wow...it takes so much effort for Juggle to hit a switch so to speak. It will happen. They said it will.



4.) Creation of a DDO Constitution- We support the creation of a DDO constitution, to protect the rights of the members of DDO. It also will lay out clearly how the banning policy will be carried out and in what situations it applies. There will be more specifics on this to come.

Who said we have rights? Using this website is a privilege is it not? Why is the TOS not enough?

He wants to add rights, the TOS is more dont do X or Y, the constitution is so we can be able to do A
, B, or C with no interference unless that A violates the TOS.

How can he add rights without Juggle?



5.) Creation of a DDO Legislative Branch- We support the creation of a legislative branch for DDO. Every 2 months, DDO will elect four representatives that will vote on various reforms. If their is a tie, the VP will break this. After the constitution gets ratified, all members of the DDO congress as well as the president must support any change.

Wouldn't this just make it harder to reform anything about the site? You wish to make this website more bureaucratic thus, decreasing the chance of you accomplishing anything. As a debate site, don't you think there will be much debate slowing the reform process? What makes you think a constitution will be ratified?

Depends, the majority of the people agree with our platform but are skeptical on how we are going to get it done. Also this makes it so we can make it more of a majority voice in the elected government. It is likely we can change this legislative branch as needed.

Also you contradict yourself. You say slow the debate process, but your reason against this measure is that is slows the process. So you are therefore for the process if you think it slows things down.

No. I say this will slow the process. More people in gov = more beaurocratic gov.



6.) Team Debates- We support and will fight for the creation of team debates. There are various ways that these could work. There will be more specifics on this to come.

How exactly are you going to force Juggle to do this?

Not a force, again a request.

Without a plan. Merely asking is what is happening right now (if I'm not mistaken) by someone with much more experience with this kind of thing.


7.) Cellphone Verification- We support the elimation of the cellphone verification requirement. We are open to alternatives ways to fight multi accounts for this issue.

Why? And what other ways?

IP checks are far more effective then cell phone verifications.


how?


8.) Profanities and Forum Censorship- We support eliminating all forms of forum censorship. This includes profanities and all caps posts, which we think should be allowed.

Why should profanities and all caps be allowed? A mature individual should be able to get their point across without cursing. Juggle has the full right to limit cursing. Oh yea, once again, how are you going to get Juggle to go along with this?

The point is freedom of speech. Whether or not juggle will go along with this current measure is debatable.

They won't. They want to look good. Curses don't look good.



9.) Voting Requirements- We fully support returning voting requirements from 500 posts or 5 debates to 100 posts or 3 debates.

The president does not have this power.

Again, this can be with communication with juggle.

Juggle does not set the standard either.



10.) TOS Reform- The TOS can be changed if all members of the DDO congress and the president agree that it should be.

DDO does not have this power. The TOS is set by Juggle. The TOS can only be changed if JUGGLE wants it to be changed. Why would Juggle want to change a legal document which was constructed, most likely, by lawyers? Jimtimmy, do you have the legal expertise to construct a electronic contract?

He will likely draft a TOS and send it in. Also, he may not even make it! He could easily tell a lawyer to draft it for him, he is likely related to one, and if he knows know lawyers I can give my family (lawyers in there) to help. He does not need to be the one that makes it.

So you really think a lawyer is going to draft a paper, when this lawyer likely works for another company is not a contract lawyer, and has no experience with this kind of thing. Why would Juggle accept a contract which someone that does not work for them wrote?



This is the platform that 16kadams and I are running on for president and vice president.

We understand that these changes will be hard to achieve. But, we can pledge that we will do our best to achieve them.

Innomen has failed, in his most recent term, to achieve even basic reforms. Nothing is getting done.

Considering Juggle has just pledged they will support "change", something is being done.

http://en.wikipedia.org...


The other candidates are largely running on pledges to continue Innomen's policies.

And you are running on empty promises.

He is promising to finish them, and if he fails he will not run for a second term.


That is not what we are doing. We pledge real change, and we are willing to say that Innomen has failed as a leader.

But, where is your plan to accomplish this change?
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 10:54:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Will respond tomorrow bomb.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 11:04:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 10:28:40 PM, 16kadams wrote:
IP checks are far more effective then cell phone verifications.

IP checks are actually much easier to abuse than cell phone verifications. A cell phone is a physical medium that must be owned, whereas a person can change their IP address as many times as they want.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 11:07:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 11:04:45 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:28:40 PM, 16kadams wrote:
IP checks are far more effective then cell phone verifications.

IP checks are actually much easier to abuse than cell phone verifications. A cell phone is a physical medium that must be owned, whereas a person can change their IP address as many times as they want.

Most users would not think of that, and people can use other cell phones and has been infective up to now.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 11:12:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 11:07:02 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 11:04:45 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:28:40 PM, 16kadams wrote:
IP checks are far more effective then cell phone verifications.

IP checks are actually much easier to abuse than cell phone verifications. A cell phone is a physical medium that must be owned, whereas a person can change their IP address as many times as they want.

Most users would not think of that, and people can use other cell phones and has been infective up to now.

Verification doesn't matter for most users. It only matters for those who are trying to abuse the system. People who are willing to put in the effort to troll/multi-account/abuse voting are much more likely to be willing to change their IP, or access DDO through a different network/hotspot, or even simply unplug their modem with dynamic IP. It takes more work to come up with phone numbers than IPs.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 11:14:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 11:12:41 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 5/21/2012 11:07:02 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 11:04:45 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:28:40 PM, 16kadams wrote:
IP checks are far more effective then cell phone verifications.

IP checks are actually much easier to abuse than cell phone verifications. A cell phone is a physical medium that must be owned, whereas a person can change their IP address as many times as they want.

Most users would not think of that, and people can use other cell phones and has been infective up to now.

Verification doesn't matter for most users. It only matters for those who are trying to abuse the system. People who are willing to put in the effort to troll/multi-account/abuse voting are much more likely to be willing to change their IP, or access DDO through a different network/hotspot, or even simply unplug their modem with dynamic IP. It takes more work to come up with phone numbers than IPs.

No his point is many great users dont have phones, dont want to give phone numbers out, or lost them etc. He is making it easier for those people, a great example is contradiction.

I dont know how IP's work, you lost me at hotspot.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 11:34:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/21/2012 11:14:37 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 11:12:41 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 5/21/2012 11:07:02 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 5/21/2012 11:04:45 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 5/21/2012 10:28:40 PM, 16kadams wrote:
IP checks are far more effective then cell phone verifications.

IP checks are actually much easier to abuse than cell phone verifications. A cell phone is a physical medium that must be owned, whereas a person can change their IP address as many times as they want.

Most users would not think of that, and people can use other cell phones and has been infective up to now.

Verification doesn't matter for most users. It only matters for those who are trying to abuse the system. People who are willing to put in the effort to troll/multi-account/abuse voting are much more likely to be willing to change their IP, or access DDO through a different network/hotspot, or even simply unplug their modem with dynamic IP. It takes more work to come up with phone numbers than IPs.

No his point is many great users dont have phones, dont want to give phone numbers out, or lost them etc. He is making it easier for those people, a great example is contradiction.

I dont know how IP's work, you lost me at hotspot.

It's not a good idea... it would just make DDO much easier to abuse. It's much easier to work with members who can't verify for whatever reason individually.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13