Re: Forum

We would need a normative, conduct of code, or something else. If
not.. it would be a crazy task...

2009/4/17 Jens Kasten <[email protected]>:
> Hi,
>
> Iam would help too, to take parts from moderations tasks.
> So the minimum from moderators site would be fullfilled.
> I hope the forum does grow on running time.
>
> grüsse
> jens
>
> Am Freitag, den 17.04.2009, 09:58 -0400 schrieb Paul D. Robertson:
>> Amon Ott wrote:
>>
>> > - The forum is hosted in a virtual server forum.rsbac.org. If Paul is still
>> > willing to set it up and maintain it technically, I would gladly accept this
>> > offer and support him at the server side. If we feel daring and find more
>> > people, we could make it more general and call it forum.kernelsecurity.org
>> > with general and RSBAC topics seperated (yes, we own that domain. :).
>> >
>>
>> I'd think that making it more general would be a good idea.  I generally
>> use SMF as I find it to be as good as the commercial forum packages.  It
>> needs MySQL and PHP- about the only thing you can't do from the admin
>> interface is back up user-submitted images (avatars if allowed and
>> images embedded in posts that are uploaded to the server.)  Are you
>> proposing hosting it?  I can host it, but all my hosting is on
>> Virtuozzo-based VPSes, so they're not RSBAC'd- I can set up a forum on
>> one over the weekend, or early next week- or if you wish to host, we can
>> coordinate that.
>>
>> I'd suggest the following main boards:
>>
>> General Trusted Computing Base
>> RSBAC
>> SeLinux
>> TrustedBSD/Darwin
>> Other Trusted Operating Systems
>>
>> With appropriate sub-boards under that- perhaps News,
>> Configurations/Tips, and Assistance to start.
>>
>> I'm assuming AppArmor is dead and going too much further will just be
>> lots of emptiness, which isn't good, and starting up at LSM would bury
>> things too much- we can always rework the tree after getting enough
>> traction.
>>
>> As part of the administration, I'd do regular database backups, deal
>> with registration issues/problems, keep the software up to date, make
>> any structural changes, ban spammers, and provide any other general
>> forum admin tasks.
>>
>> > - Posting is only allowed after registration, read access is free. Condition
>> > for registration is that people accept the usual conditions, e.g. that we
>> > keep the right to delete inappropiate postings and that all content may be
>> > used in the official RSBAC documentation with a free license
>> >
>>
>> SMF supports this well, and the anti-spammer captcha is generally pretty
>> good spammers actually end up having to manually register- I think I had
>> about twelve incidents over a two-three year period, and once I'd banned
>> the offending user/email/IP a couple of times they gave up.  It also
>> supports things like limiting private messages for people who haven't
>> made many postings.
>>
>> > - At least two people volunteer to moderate the forum. This means that they
>> > keep a regular eye on all postings and block or remove inapropiate stuff and
>> > feel responsible for everything. These volunteers should be none of kang,
>> > michal and me, we are too busy developing.
>>
>> Depending on volume, I find it takes 5-10 minutes a day and I'd say that
>> two people would be great- the last forum I moderated (for a client-
>> commercial stuff) took only ~5m a day and users generally reported spam
>> the days I hadn't gotten to it yet.  I'd be happy to fill one of the
>> moderator slots.
>>
>> > - At least one volunteer tracks tipps and solutions in the forum and compiles
>> > them into official documentation at www.rsbac.org. Frequent questions go into
>> > a FAQ at www.rsbac.org. When the answer is officially in docs, the forum
>> > thread is finished with a link to it.
>>
>> This is very difficult- even with a commercial client with paid
>> employees, meeting this goal wasn't done.  My "solution" to this was to
>> have a read-only board that postings could be moved to once they were
>> considered dead if they were the kind of thing that was a tip/trick.
>>
>> > - If the forum does not work out, I would rather close it down than keep a
>> > dead forum. This includes inactive or missing moderators, because we are
>> > legally responsible for postings.
>>
>> Yep, it takes up to six months to get enough critical mass to make a
>> forum work- assuming it's not very active after about six months that's
>> where I'd probably put it out of its misery.  I'm not sure what it's
>> like in the EU, in the US my impression (I'm not a lawyer) is that
>> you're generally only responsible for content if you edit postings or
>> fail to remove someone else's intellectual property or contraband images
>> (reference is a case outcome known generally as "The Prodigy decision.")
>>
>> Paul
>
> _______________________________________________
> rsbac mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.rsbac.org/mailman/listinfo/rsbac