UER Store sweet UER decals: Activity 840 online Server Time: 2024-05-06 15:32:35 Visit Infiltration Access All Areas AvBrand

1 2  UER Forum > Archived Old Forum Issues > Location DB idea (Viewed 395 times) El_Gordo_Uno  Location: Wenatchee, Washington Gender: Male This post brought to you by Allan Smithee  |  |  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 20 on 11/15/2003 2:02 PM >   I voted against "securing" it. I think closing it would just introvert the UE community. It does'nt exactlty encourage people to get into something when you refuse them access to parts of it. Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges 'Dukes  Noble Donor Gender: Male At least someone llikes me  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 21 on 11/15/2003 3:30 PM >   I've noticed that , especially for US locations, the forum gets used for location posts than the DB does. That would mean cutting off location related forum posts as well. As for cops, they know the places that need extra security without looking up a bunch of pictures online. I got your tour winner right here pussies, at least he'd crash out trying. Avatar-X  Alpha Husky Location: West Coast Gender: Male yay!  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 22 on 11/15/2003 7:30 PM >   I think you guys overestimate the impact of the LDB. You talk about it making the information publically available to anyone, about it exposing your "Secret" sites. Did you forget about the things that have been doing this for years beforehand? Much more accessible sources of information like Infiltration Zine, articles in newspapers or magazines, TV documentaries and spots, or the hundreds of UE websites out there? The LDB is as revealing or as secretive as you make it. Jester already posts the name, a story, and photos of his sites on his webpage... He could easily post the same information in the Location DB without giving anything extra away. Securing the information in it is as easy as typing less details. You guys keep thinking about the LDB as if it's some sort of reveal-all guide or something, where people just click once and see exact details on how to find a place, how to enter, and where to go. Come on, wake up. huskies - such fluff. Servo   |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 23 on 11/15/2003 8:05 PM >   Ok, here's what I think. I voted to secure the LDB, but only as far as you needing to have a registered account to view it. This doesn't stop anyone determined, but it does stop search engines. Like Av said, if you restrict the LDB to people who have posted locations, that'd really have a chilling effect on the site as a whole. Who's going to post information in the LDB when no one's going to see it? And people will also start adding crap like "Abandoned Shack behind McDonald's". Also, I've elected to remove the driving directions from one of my locations (the other is open to the public, so it matters not). I've left in a vague location, but that's it. Maybe we should all start doing that? Macsbug  Noble Donor Location: St. Paul, MN Gender: Male Safety First!  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 24 on 11/15/2003 8:38 PM >   Posted by Servo Ok, here's what I think. I voted to secure the LDB, but only as far as you needing to have a registered account to view it. Thats what I also think should at least be done, there is no purpose in having a LDB if nowone will see it, but blocking the search engines by requiring a login will keep it at least a little less trafficed. "Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it." Caput_58  Location: Virginia, USA Gender: Male  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 25 on 11/15/2003 11:56 PM >   I'm still in favor of securing the UEDB from search engines... I'd had google get hits on my locations plenty of times when I was searching for more info on them.. While I'm not in favor of exclusion, I don't want property owners and punk vandals finding site info. But I do want to be able to post as much specific, useful information as possible for the UE community. If the data base is unsecured, I'll have to be vague and use intentional misspellings and cryptic abbreviations to keep google away. Caput_58 scourge  Location: United States Gender: Male strive  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 26 on 11/16/2003 7:34 PM >   I think a possible solution would to put the whole DB on FTP instead of web pages, and allow anonymous FTPs. It wouldn't be picked up by search engines, but still allow free access to everyone who knows where it is. The problem would lie in converting all the existing data to a form that would be easy to FTP-download. Also, you probably couldn't use the form on the DB page anymore to generate new location pages - you'd have to create them yourself and upload them via FTP. It's an idea, probably not the best, but something to consider. sierra hotel Ben  Noble Donor Location: Mojave Desert Gender: Male  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 27 on 11/16/2003 7:59 PM >   It doesn't need to be that complicated. The entire website could be excluded from the search engines with a few minutes of work, without visibly changing anything. NoSuchPerson  Stop, or I'll ask you again!  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 28 on 11/17/2003 7:08 AM >   That's an excellent idea. Exclude the site from search engines, except for the main site. Also, only allow access to the LDB to registered members of the board. I'm not sure what the procedure is right now for approving new members, but here's an idea that I don't think would take too much to implement. Put new members on "probation" for a month or two. Every post they make during that time would have to be approved by a moderator. The topic would still show up in the list, but any messages a new member would just show something like "Moderated", then there could be a button like "Allow" or something that a moderator could press which would then allow the post to show up. I know it might be abit extra work, but I wouldn't imagine it would be too hard to have another forum "category" for Moderators which would list all the un-approved posts so it'd be pretty easy to manage. Any thoughts? -Ex Unit calling radio say again? Avatar-X  Alpha Husky Location: West Coast Gender: Male yay!  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 29 on 11/17/2003 7:16 AM >   This is ridiculous. I'm not gonna hide the forum or the DB from search engines. If you want to talk about stuff that shouldn't be public, DON'T POST IT ON A PUBLIC FORUM. Many cool people have stumbled upon this site or a sister site thanks to search engines. Where would we be without them? This community did not get where it is through secrecy. Don't get me wrong, there's a need for secrecy. Just don't post your secrets publically. huskies - such fluff. NoSuchPerson  Stop, or I'll ask you again!  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 30 on 11/17/2003 8:45 AM >   The concern is that by making everything 100% open, it'll burn us in the end. Examples: Caledon Radar Station. Used to be really easy. Now it's impossible without chopping a lock. Canada Malt Plant. Used to be easy. City got pissed, now it's next to impossible. Don Valley Brick Works: Used to be a walk in the park. Now, they're in the process of "malt planting" it. R. E. Law Factory. Used to be a cakewalk. Now impossible (torn down) Nobody can say for certain if it's a direct result of this, or any website, but it's a chance. To say "Well, there's no info on here about exact locations or exact ways in" is taking the easy way out. You've got to admit, places like the Malt Plant, Hearn, Whitby Psych, etc... have had considerable increased "traffic" because of UE sites. Is this a problem? Well, nobody can say either yes or no, because well, nobody knows, for sure. As for hiding the site from search engines, the only reason people are suggesting that is so that if the wrong people (ie, security, police, management, etc...) are searching on google for things, they won't come across this site, start questioning around and such. It's not an attempt to hide anything at all, but rather, if someone posts information on "XYZ Company" that they looked around in, and somebody from XYZ Company does a search, they won't come across the LDB, so they'll never even know someone was there. -Ex Unit calling radio say again? NoSuchPerson  Stop, or I'll ask you again!  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 31 on 11/17/2003 8:49 AM >   Further to "secrecy", yeah, there's definatly a need to keep some things secret. Malt Plant, for example. Back in the day, nobody knew about the guy living in the plant. Over time, more and more people found out about it...Well, people talk. The best way to keep something secret is just that - keep it secret! If you post something on here about a site or anything like that, and the site gets shut down or secured or whatever, you have *NO* right to bitch about it. Everyone that's complained about the City cracking down on the CMP, or other buildings really don't have a right to do so, cause well, everyone should have seen it coming.... -Ex Unit calling radio say again? Crossfire  Location: Kay-Dub Gender: Male Don't call it a comeback, I've been here for years.  |  |  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 32 on 11/17/2003 2:16 PM >   Hmm... I don't see a problem with something that used to be a 'cake walk' becoming difficult. Of the places that I've explored in the last year, only one was a 'walk in the park'. All the rest have needed scouting and creative thinking to get inside. I don't have a problem with things becoming more secured and difficult to enter. I have a problem with a bunch of morons finding out about a place, going in and torching it. I'm not blaming the LDB for this. Av's right. If you don't want anyone to know about a location, don't post it on a public webpage. I know it's difficult to not talk about the coolest place you've explored, so in a case like that someone can always put it online on their own secure webpage that requires password access. My own reasoning behind securing the LDB to registered members only was an increased effort to cut down on bandwidth. Maybe that isn't an issue - and if that's true, I recall my "Yes" vote. C. Disgruntled. Avatar-X  Alpha Husky Location: West Coast Gender: Male yay!  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 33 on 11/17/2003 2:26 PM >   The biggest problem with implenting a secured LDB is that access control is difficult. Oh, sure, each explorer has to be personally referred or whatever, but how do you know for sure that I, or jester, or ninj, might refer someone who turns out to be a vandal? As the "allowed" list grows larger, so does the risk. Would Jester really post his "super-secret" fisheries warehouse if he didn't personally know everyone who was allowed to see it? I still think the BEST way of securing information is to not make it public. Some of the stuff in the LDB need not be secured, either because the place is no more (demolished) or the construction is finished, or whatever. huskies - such fluff. Detroit  Moderator Location: Ottawa /Gatineau /Montreal Gender: Male 4-aminophenol and 2-5% potassium hydroxide  |  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 34 on 11/17/2003 2:49 PM >   Well Av, In light of the fact that a majority of people support the idea of securing the DB, can you at least make it only accessible to those who bother to register? This would take you 30 seconds to do... It is not what I had in mind but it is an easy to implement compromise ... Common AV .... PPPPPPPLLLLEEAAAASSSS!!!!! click to view The end of the beginning is the beginning of the end. Avatar-X  Alpha Husky Location: West Coast Gender: Male yay!  |  |  Re: Location DB idea <Reply # 35 on 11/17/2003 4:10 PM >   This vote is skewed, since the question is biased and the debate has changed over the course of this thread. Securing your information is your responsibility. Feel free to remove any details you don't want the public to know, but don't expect me to restrict everyone based on your misgivings. huskies - such fluff. UER Forum > Archived Old Forum Issues > Location DB idea (Viewed 395 times)  1 2  All content and images copyright © 2002-2024 UER.CA and respective creators. Graphical Design by Crossfire. To contact webmaster, or click to email with problems or other questions about this site: UER CONTACT View Terms of Service | View Privacy Policy | Server colocation provided by Beanfield This page was generated for you in 386 milliseconds. Since June 23, 2002, a total of 740822528 pages have been generated.