wowaname

8 ms·

31.
by wowaname 5y ago
Which is what, exactly?
32.
by wowaname 5y ago
They remain unchanged for now (as I write this post): >Topical channels [ones that begin with ##] are given out on a first-come, first-served basis. They will expire if unused for a long time, see our policies for details regarding when
33.
by wowaname 5y ago
The drama is "interesting" but it becomes disgusting when I realise that this affects people who just want a stable communication platform and don't care about the politics.
34.
by wowaname 5y ago
I don't understand the scare quotes here, and I believe you are talking out of ignorance for the situation here.
35.
by wowaname 5y ago
One (or some) of freenode staff did make it clear that freenode was a platform rather than exclusively an IRC network, which suggested that they may have had plans to look into alternative platforms in the future. And the Matrix-IRC bridge
36.
by wowaname 5y ago
To be fair, volunteers on freenode also had lives outside of IRC.
37.
by wowaname 5y ago
They value anonymity?
38.
by wowaname 5y ago
I think IRC is nearing the end of its usefulness, but I am under no illusion over why it's still in use, and I do not believe a "modern replacement" to be automatically better than other options.
39.
by wowaname 5y ago
The policies on freenode are very clear about ##-namespace channels expiring after several weeks of being unused, or after the founder drops their account. The user hl still has his eight-year-old account, is still logged in, and barely a w
40.
by wowaname 5y ago
The "anonymous source" came out at one point and said he falsified those logs about spying on messages.
41.
by wowaname 5y ago
Neither happened here.
42.
by wowaname 5y ago
If ##hntop was truly involved in spam, you would shut it down, not take it over.
43.
by wowaname 5y ago
freenode has a traditional policy for ##-namespaced channels to require a period of inactivity before they may be re-registered. Lee ignored this.
44.
by wowaname 6y ago
Have they gotten rid of the 65k^3 map limit?
45.
by wowaname 6y ago
>How the hell is this legal? Mojang ToS clearly states they can delete accounts for any or no reason.
46.
by wowaname 7y ago
Yeah, I subscribed to that feed after seeing it posted here. It's good that they have something , but I'd much rather be opted in to "important updates regarding my account" like literally every other service does for m
47.
by wowaname 7y ago
Having too low of a reactionary period can be equally devastating; customers need to have ample time to react to the issue so they don't panic and deploy something buggy without testing beforehand.
48.
by wowaname 7y ago
So, nothing new
49.
by wowaname 7y ago
>I get an easy way to install and update my certificates You're lucky, because it took me forever to devise a renewal system that met my requirements of being able to renew certificates for domains that are used across multiple mach
50.
by wowaname 7y ago
The problem is LE had five days between reporting the bug and revoking as per Baseline Requirements, but they decided to wait until the last day to send out E-mails. This is not only inconsiderate to customers but also downright reckless to
51.
by wowaname 7y ago
[Just a note that you can set "showdead" to "yes" in settings to toggle flagged comments]
52.
by wowaname 7y ago
CF cannot handle extremely large attacks either; what makes this a more suitable solution than what they're currently using? Edit: and before anyone downvotes me, understand that I am asking an earnest question. I don't know what
53.
by wowaname 7y ago
See this from a provider standpoint and you will immediately groan at the users setting up their accounts for easy collection from spammers, who in turn use those accounts to spam your service to oblivion. You'll have to deal with the
54.
by wowaname 7y ago
First of all, thank you for the reply. Yes, my ticket was fairly … to the point and I did not make an effort to be polite, but Discord's support team does perform a good job in terms of timely and complete responses. As I said, startin
55.
by wowaname 7y ago
>Why the insistence on Tor? Short answer: I'm a privacy activist. That should be a valid enough reason for this context. >I also don't understand the 2FA point, that says nothing about your accounts' intentions. No, but
56.
by wowaname 7y ago
Yeah, I'm running my own homeserver. (Incidentally it decided to use up all my memory today and crash, so I'm hoping these performance issues with Synapse are fixed or one of the talked-about alternatives comes into fruition.)
57.
by wowaname 7y ago
Perhaps I shouldn't have used that phrase, but I felt it would resonate with people more immediately than any other choice of words. In any case, I don't pay for Discord so I am definitely not a customer, whether or not I or my da
58.
by wowaname 7y ago
>If you're worried about the full context not being understood >if your blog isn't meant to be read by people that don't know the context of your life already People who have followed me online enough to have my blog in
59.
by wowaname 7y ago
I don't capitalise on my sex/gender; I just prefer the use of neutral language when talking about anyone of unknown gender. In any case; I signed up for this when deciding to put my ideas online, and it has given me a chance to co
60.
by wowaname 7y ago
If you couldn't gather from my name on the sidebar and the overall site theme, I'm not a guy :p And yes, you're right about Tor IPs being flagged at greater frequency. That's fine, but I've had a clean account for o

More ›