+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 51
General Chat Thread, Verified Role Status for EduGeek in General; Originally Posted by laserblazer A possible solution would be to have a group of verified members (those that are known ...
  1. #31

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    10,074
    Thank Post
    1,384
    Thanked 1,887 Times in 1,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by laserblazer View Post
    A possible solution would be to have a group of verified members (those that are known to be in the trade) who are willing to nominate prospective trade members.

    For example, I email Grumbledook expressing the wish to join. He can then email office@........sch.uk verifying who I am. I think the idea of a more secure forum is good. Not only for the reasons mentioned. I had an irate supplier email me on the basis of a post. I should hasten to add I've also had suppliers email me with the best of intent - Dan
    And this is where it gets a bit tricky. You are now talking about a secure area where trade members can't see things in case you say something that gets them annoyed. I'm sure that myself and the other admins would be interested to hear which supplier gave you grief as well ... PM me if you want to chat about it. A dim view is taken of suppliers that give grief to members *unless it is justified* (usually someone having a rant and not painting a full picture or just airing dirty laundry in public!).

    Where do we draw the line?

    Do we have a special area for 'respected' members ... people we know and trust and are happy that they know what they are talking about and are the uber-edugeeks? We already have people worried that there are cliques and that people are treated differently ...

    And what would we talk about in there that we would not talk about elsewhere? Rants about suppliers? I thought people were happy now that it isn't rants that make things better but constructive criticism (or name and shame). Security concerns? Refer back to my previous post about obscurity ... all we can do is add a layer of obfustication which is why the security forum is not a public feed and not indexed by google search.

    The one thing that we do have an issue with is spam, and verification is handy there ... but a lot of work.

    When we have 15-30 new members a day it is a chunk of time to do verification.

    I am not ruling it out ... and no doubt the other admins and mods are happy to chat about how they feel about it (I'll go and get some discussion going about it) but personally I can't see much to gain from it, but happy to have someone try and change my view.

  2. #32

    witch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Dorset
    Posts
    11,517
    Thank Post
    1,531
    Thanked 2,634 Times in 1,824 Posts
    Rep Power
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by WithoutMotive View Post
    Create a webpage with a message for the admins on their school webserver. Forward the address to the admins. That would surely verify identity.

    On the registration for Edugeek:
    "If you are a tech, please place this code somewhere on your school/company website and type the address in the box below. This will verify your identity as a genuine tech and you will have access to more secure areas of the Edugeek Forums. Once you are verified, you are free to remove this page."

    Just an idea.

    No more work for the Admins other than verify the page exists for tech registrations
    That is presuming that all techs have a) a school webserver and b) access to the website
    Some of us don't! But we are still proper school techs - what would you do about us?

  3. #33
    markcuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    592
    Thank Post
    29
    Thanked 60 Times in 55 Posts
    Rep Power
    38
    god might as well make this place for mods and admins only at this rate!!

  4. #34
    button_ripple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Luton
    Posts
    346
    Thank Post
    93
    Thanked 20 Times in 18 Posts
    Rep Power
    18
    I like the idea.

    Lets say I had a problem on my network and I needed help with it, but it would involve giving up information on the network setup then you could post in the private forum and the trusted and verified techs can help and you can get a good nights sleep safe in the knowledge that no pupils/staff have got access to the information.

    I'm not sure how you could do the verification, but I think this idea has a lot of potential!

  5. #35

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    10,074
    Thank Post
    1,384
    Thanked 1,887 Times in 1,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by button_ripple View Post
    I like the idea.

    Lets say I had a problem on my network and I needed help with it, but it would involve giving up information on the network setup then you could post in the private forum and the trusted and verified techs can help and you can get a good nights sleep safe in the knowledge that no pupils/staff have got access to the information.

    I'm not sure how you could do the verification, but I think this idea has a lot of potential!
    I do it the same way the Kim does ... PM a few people or put out a general request for help with limited information and continue discussions via PM, email or the phone. I've helped others out this way too. I tend to ask those who have decent rep or are known to give good advice. If your aim is to get advice with risking your network then yes ... that sound a good reason to a protected area ... the difficulty is how it is managed. Previously I used to lurk on a protected IRC channel to give advice ... there would usually be three or four people on at a time and when someone in the general channel had an issue they would ask for access ... it would be granted and a spin off channel would be made for them to discuss things with people known to be the "good guys".

    The main concern was not with where people were from but that they knew their stuff. Not sure whether that would work ... and if it is sustainable.

  6. #36

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    10,074
    Thank Post
    1,384
    Thanked 1,887 Times in 1,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by markcuk View Post
    god might as well make this place for mods and admins only at this rate!!
    That's my concern ... been in too many places that have had a cabal / clique. It always cause issues.

  7. #37
    markcuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    592
    Thank Post
    29
    Thanked 60 Times in 55 Posts
    Rep Power
    38
    @grumbledook The site does seem to be heading that way a little bit

    mark

  8. #38
    WithoutMotive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Wigan, UK
    Posts
    631
    Thank Post
    41
    Thanked 49 Times in 43 Posts
    Rep Power
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by witch View Post
    That is presuming that all techs have a) a school webserver and b) access to the website
    Some of us don't! But we are still proper school techs - what would you do about us?
    Very true. Was just an idea.

  9. #39

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,271
    Thank Post
    884
    Thanked 2,749 Times in 2,322 Posts
    Blog Entries
    11
    Rep Power
    785
    Just a word of caution for this, the more information that is collected the more chance there is for something to go wrong. Members have already had to quit the forum because their details got out. Its not that I don't trust the site or the people who run it or anything like that but the mere presence of the data increases the danger.

    There have already been attempts to hack the site - admittedly to use it a a proxy - and this would make it an even more tempting and valuable target. The other thing is that all it would take would be one weak link in the system to cause trouble, one volunteer checker with a grudge or compromised email for all hell to break loose.

    I think that although it could be useful it would cause a large administrative burden and put a lot more of a burden on the site than anyone has predicted.

    There is also a strange sense of security that comes with being anonymous that enables people to participate that otherwise may not be able to. The demonizing of students is also a dangerous path as there may well be be students that are able to provide value to the forum. The forum came along after I had left school but if it had been around back then it would have been useful to me and I could have been useful to it as I was in fact supporting some school computers. Drawing lines is sometimes necessary but it should be considered very carefully.
    Last edited by SYNACK; 23rd November 2008 at 03:05 PM.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Posts
    328
    Thank Post
    33
    Thanked 17 Times in 12 Posts
    Rep Power
    21
    I'm a student, but im not here to find vulnerabilities in peoples networks and exploit them and look for proxies...although i understand all students arnt like me.

    But i think the having a verified status section would reduce posts on the public forums which would make things more boring for people like me who wouldn't be able to get in there

    Jack

  11. #41
    ahuxham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,122
    Thank Post
    76
    Thanked 138 Times in 109 Posts
    Rep Power
    31
    Dear god no. Don't just jump into the site and try to change it, it runs perfectly fine, dos_box and the other mods have a good model for user viewing.

    Tough luck if students are viewing, there's not alot they can do. Not forgetting, majority of viewers are googlers with no accounts.

    Don't like the mechanism, don't complain.

    EDIT: Don't make this an elitist contest, because your a NM, and want everyone to know that, there's no difference on these forums between the roles, we all come here for the same reason. If the site ever became elitist like that, I'd surely leave. I don't care about your position in a school, or the fact you want to show it off. Were all on equal grounds on this site
    Last edited by ahuxham; 24th November 2008 at 10:23 AM.

  12. #42
    Friez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    839
    Thank Post
    22
    Thanked 22 Times in 21 Posts
    Rep Power
    24
    I don't think this is very feasable from an admin perspective tbh.

  13. #43

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    10,074
    Thank Post
    1,384
    Thanked 1,887 Times in 1,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by ahuxham View Post
    Dear god no. Don't just jump into the site and try to change it, it runs perfectly fine, dos_box and the other mods have a good model for user viewing.

    Tough luck if students are viewing, there's not alot they can do. Not forgetting, majority of viewers are googlers with no accounts.

    Don't like the mechanism, don't complain.

    EDIT: Don't make this an elitist contest, because your a NM, and want everyone to know that, there's no difference on these forums between the roles, we all come here for the same reason. If the site ever became elitist like that, I'd surely leave. I don't care about your position in a school, or the fact you want to show it off. Were all on equal grounds on this site

    I don't think that this is really about elitism ... more a case that some are conerned that they cannot freely share some of the information they would like to due to it being read or used by those who it is not appropriate for, possibly due to security implications, possibly due to the need to discuss sensitive issues around competency of users (staff and students) within their specific school or simply because they want to get information from those that they know are doing the same job or have the same responsibility. The last bit may come across elitist but I think in this case it is just a sense of wanting to weed out the enthusiast from the experienced.

    Anyway ... the site is always for discussion ... it is just that some suggestions can't be done due to time, costs, man hours, legal issues, are just plain silly, have been tried before and didn't work then or DB prefers to leave it as it is.

  14. #44
    DG01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    59
    Thank Post
    1
    Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
    Rep Power
    14
    Okay I feel the need to straighten thing's out immediately. I have clearly suggested something which has been discussed in the past, the idea of which was laid to rest due to time/management requirements. However, since that discussion time has passed. I was not aware of the previous discussion, but, I made my suggestion.

    The idea is very simple: a "secure" "verified" forum section for "verified" ICT Technicians and Network Managers who work in education in addition to the currently available forums. This idea would not aim to "change" the current format of EduGeek, nor would it attempt to undermine the excellent work and support the current Administrators put in to EduGeek. It would not be compulsory/it would be optional.

    Yes EduGeek is a resource - that said we all know how hard it is to manage networks, the time it takes and the dedication it requires. Some discussions on this forum may have at some point in the past, or may at some point in the future require a more "secure" "verified" discussion between professionals.

    Why should we as those professionals point out security holes/circumvention websites in such an "un-secure" way which actually feeds exploits to the end users of not only our own networks but to the end users of others.

    My aim has been simple from post #1: to establish feedback on whether people thought this would be a good idea or not.

    Yes there is the issue of how do we "verify" people. This could be done via multiple methods - phone calls, html/php uploads to a web server, email confirmation to generic office@ school emails, fax then a follow up call etc

    Yes there is the argument of you could find this information somewhere else, maybe you could, but again, do we really need to list the latest exploits for the end users of other networks?

    The majority of forums are related to technical discussions - security discussions are accessible to all registered members - so let's consider the idea of security/exploit/circumvention discussions for "verified" EduTech's. It's not a competition of elitist ism, it's not an aim to make EduGeek become Administrators/Moderators only.

    It's an idea to make some people's lives easier (who do our jobs and who aren't EduGeek members or who are EduGeek members but don't check back every day) and further develop EduGeek to a standing where exploit and circumvention related content is for "verified" EduTech's only.

    I don't want to read another post about elitism or showing off, reducing the appearance of EduGeek or people going to leave EduGeek because Technology is possibly changing. This is IT - there's years of change to come and EduGeek's aim from day #1 I imagine was always to keep up to date with IT in Education.

    Now let's all buck up and act like professionals. This isn't a "rip the idea apart discussion", "get all bitchy about a discussion".

    This is a discussion between people who help to shape the future of young people, care about education, care about their networks and strive to work with others in the same field achieving the best standards possible.

    /rant over - it had to be said.
    Last edited by DG01; 24th November 2008 at 09:15 PM. Reason: Spelling Mistake

  15. #45

    witch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Dorset
    Posts
    11,517
    Thank Post
    1,531
    Thanked 2,634 Times in 1,824 Posts
    Rep Power
    813
    Whilst I agree in principle, I think that there are always ways to speak in private to members whose posts lead you to believe that they can help you with your particular 'sensitive' issue.
    At one point I was in favour of removing students but I have come to realise that they are able to get the info elsewhere and that most of them on this site are genuinely here because they want to learn about IT, not be subversive.

    And......

    <snipped> The discussion is drawing to a close now ... time to calm down and take things as offered. Ideas for discussion, without prejudice or otherwise. [GD]
    Last edited by GrumbleDook; 24th November 2008 at 11:25 PM. Reason: At request of witch



SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Helpdesk network status & Edugeek Joomla
    By FN-GM in forum EduGeek Joomla 1.0 Package
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 8th April 2008, 09:24 AM
  2. What is your role?
    By rusty155 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 8th August 2007, 01:01 PM
  3. The role of the technican
    By GrumbleDook in forum General Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 22nd February 2006, 10:27 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •