View and vote on the article here: Feedback Digest #10
Feedback Digest #10| Category | | | Summary | | Feedback Digest for Date:08/01/03 |
| | Body | BRIGADES
S:Hi guys, atm I think that when someone requests to join a brigade/group then they're put into the 'queue' section at the bottom of the command page for that group. Now i've often seen folk around asking how long it should be until they're accepted, and asking whats going on when they're in that state, so perhaps something is needed to improve this process.
Coding in the feature that when someone requests join into a group then an automatic cMS goes out to the C/O and X/Os of the group informing them of that someone's requested join, could help speed it all up. Lots of C/Os and X/Os dont reqularly check the command pages for queues. I suggest that it should go to the X/Os also incase the C/O is currently on LOA, and just means whoever is around first can sort out the situation.
R:The request for a cMS to be sent to the c/x/o of a brig upon entering the queue has been sugested numerous times. However, the general concensus is that it's not gonna happen any time soon. There's some consern for brigs that get massive amounts of requests. An option to turn such a feature has also been sugested, however it still seems to just be a good idea with a lot of potential that hasn't seen the light yet, and probably won't for awhile atleast.
BUG
S:Each name in Team Managment is linked to: http://www.cyberarmy.com/office/cMS/compose/?to=<thatname> but the people who control a subgroup just link to http://www.cyberarmy.com/office/cMS/. This happens in OSI -> Proddev anyway. Is that intended or a bug? Could you please inform me. THX.
R:It has been fixed.
S:It says "Please take the time to browse through the Brigade and their sites as well as the rest of the CyberArmy." but should read:
"Please take the time to browse through the Brigades and their sites as well as the rest of the CyberArmy."
R:This has been fixed as well.
FORUMS
S:If there is a less than or greater than symbol in the topic of a forum thread it appears as its HTML equivalent in the main forum list page.
R:This is because the escape htmling is done before the 'maxlength' chop.
S:Do we really need this firewalls forum, nobody has posted it on a week, and the last post on it was a question which nobody seems to be able to answer.
R:Please leave the brigade if you do not feel that you are achieving anything there or wait for activity to pick up - the firewall project will not be discontinued for the time being.
S:C/O's should have ability to decide who has access to forums - ie an honorary member. C/O + maybe X/O should be able to grant it.
R:Anyone with Admin Access over a forum can add people to the Forum Access. To add a user instead of group of brigade its ~username in all lower case. Usually a top level brigade C/O should have admin access to their brigade's forum if not contact a CA Forum Master or someone in f_admin.
Forum Masters
- CinC. Scanjack
- Ret. CinC. Chawmp
- ViceCinC. barnseyboy (OSI)
- ViceCinC. Wang (RR)
Forum Administrators
- ViceCinC. wa1800z
- Mar. Axem (SAS)
- Gen. Digitaldemon (MOD)
FEATURE
S:How about having a backup box or other such device that can be triggered by DNS to take over when server goes down. This other site just needs a lil notice that server is down and how long it has been down (you can put deja vu kitty too if you want) and maybe a lil notice to join IRC for updates.
R:No need to setup that, as more more outages are exepected, so really it's not worth it, for now.
S:Maybe we should have a time where CA can address its concerns w/ staff. Like the annual stockholders meetings and so forth so people know what's going on from staff viewpoint and maybe people will see that it's not so inert. I know some of the zzine digests try to address this, but maybe once a month or something have like 30 min open session in an IRC room or something w/ some marshals/cinc types.
R:Currently in debate. This suggestion sparked a rather long thread of discussion in the feedback forum, so don't be surprised if it comes to fruition.
S:How about getting the badges again?
R:I can only assume you're refering to the g-ranks as we still use then rank badges. This is not the first time this, and other decorations, have been suggested. However Staff is generally of the mind that we need *less* ways to divide our community, which another set of badge is only destined to do. Any time you lable something you set it apart, no matter what people say there will be a distinction between those with, and those without. We need to keep the comunity fortified as a whole and bring it together instead of push it apart.
MISC
S:I am currently looking at phpbb right now and I was wondering if you are going to upgrade the forum version to phpbb. This was just a suggestion which might lead into action as it would create more effect to the users and the forum as well.
R: We will not be going to pbpbb ever. The current forums system was specifically designed in-house by CyberArmy Staff members. (orginal design by A1B4 can be found at: http://hammer.prohosting.com/~fongdev/)
S:Just something I found in the OS Issues forum description.
"you name it some one'll be able to help"
"some one'll"? Should that be replaced with "someone will"? Just a suggestion.
R:It has been fixed.
S:Cyberarmy should have a boot camp for all troopers to learn basic security and internet warfare skills. Before anyone can get to a brigade they will have skills to be in any brigade they choose, rather than stumble around for a brigade. The boot camp would weed out wannabes and only take the skilled and talented to make a stonger CA. The camp should also make more ranks to trooper such as 1st class and 2nd class trooper and sargent so that a sargent can train a squad in basics.
R:Cyberarmy are a group of netizens who believe in a deregulated internet free from external control. I guess you could say that the whole of cyberarmy is a bootcamp as it is essentially a learning ground for everyone who is here, from the Troopers right up to the Marshals. Everyone continues to learn as they revisit cyberarmy again and again and get involved in new projects.
You mention that a bootcamp which would be mandatory before a recruit could join a brigade. Personally I dont think this would work on a mass scale since we are a non-profit organisation and none of us are paid for our roles in the cyberarmy. Some parts of cyberarmy are particular about the recruits that they take on like for example our SpecOps department and people who show talent but often don't yet have vast knowledge of a subject/area are sometimes taken on. Like with a job when a person may hand in their resume and then be interviewed. Sometimes if the applicant shows potential, the employer will be happy to take them on even if the applicant does not have all the necessary knowledge/experience to do the job. That however is up to the employer and companies dont tend to do that for large numbers of people because its not cost effective. In cyberarmy having knowledge about various areas of computing and the internet are very important and the ability to depend on yourself for education as well as those around you is of paramount importance. It is for this reason that it is unlikely that Cyberarmy would introduce a mandatory bootcamp that would need to be completed before joining a brigade. Perhaps now you can appreciate why the community operates the way in which it does.
With regard to weeding out wannabees, I know for a fact that there are certain members of CA who joined as mere script kiddies that knew nothing else but how to cause mischief on the internet with trojans and the like and yet some of those have turned around in the time they have been with CA. One such person that springs to mind happens to be the youngest person to make the rank of Marshal. He has retired from CA now for his own reasons but it shows you that you shouldn't turn people away unless they are really going to be trolls in the community. As far as your views of anarchism and the feelings you have of the command structure in CA im not really sure what to say. You mention that you dont like the way that the Cyberamry works with its Generals and Troopers but then go on to suggest that we introduce additional Rank classes :/ I don't really follow you exactly. In our experience the ranks help to keep the community operating correctly. Nobody here really has to answer to a General or other officer like they do in the real military, but they are expected to follow instructions/guidance if they join up to that brigade, otherwise why bother joining at all?
S:I am wondering if it would be ok to add #cordination channel for the Brigade Co-ordination Forum for members to discuss about certain updates etc for their brigs?
R:Seems a bit irrelevant as there already exists a channel called #brigades already that could easily serve this purpose (just nobody joins it).
OFFICE
S:Why not put a clock in the CA Office with the current UTC time? Be much easier to keep track of time of logs in, expires, etc.
R:This is to be implemented in dianh0.6, and is to be placed in the header of all the pages.
Final Word
This is the information as complete as I can make it for the time being. If anyone has a question/comment about this digest or any other feedback sent in, feel free to contact me personally via cMS or on the IRC (#feedback or #freak). If you want to discuss or need to get in contact with someone specific regarding one of these points, find associate Feedback members in #feedback (irc.cyberarmy.com:6667) and we'll talk, because after all we're here to help you.
Fideliter!
Cpt. Roguefighter
C/O Feedback Digest
|
|
This article was imported from zZine. (original author: Roguefighter)
There are no replies to this post yet.
|