Andrew Gray wrote:
On 23/11/05, Ilya N. ilyanep@gmail.com wrote:
Consider a bot (or many humans) going into the validation system and sending totally bogus (or even offensive) entries into it.
My understanding of the validation feature was that it was a "0,1,2,3,4,5 - pick one" type system, rather than a "Please leave comments" one, meaning that whilst you could game it with a bot - and no doubt that'll be attempted by a rather cunning linkspammer or three
- you couldn't fill it with offensive entries. (Or will there be a
comments field? My connection seems to be a bit unfriendly with meta. this morning, and I haven't been checking lately...)
There's a comment space too.
But that's what the testing phase is for. We _want_ people to try and spam it, try to vandalise it, do all this stuff. Then we can figure out what's good in the validation system and what's bad - perhaps we could only make comments visible to logged-in users, or to admins, if there's a problem with junk filling them up, or implement a filter to only show "useful" comments.
Yep. This is why we haven't fixed the rules of this game of Calvinball.
- d.