Coffeehouse Thread

45 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Does Channel9 even support banning?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    The Channel9 site is custom written, right?

    So I'm guessing "banning members" wasn't exactly high on the TODO list of the developers, since the term "immature experienced programmer" is a paradox.

    But can the mods (if they even exist) please delete "hello_wtf"'s posts and add his IP address to the Web.config "disallow" list?

    Only Channel9Guy can save us now!

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    thinking: The channel 9 guy flies in, with a cape, takes the spamming guy and pushes him in a garbage container. "Take this lession" he says, "don't ever come back!" The channel 9 guy flies off the scene...



    Cool!

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    littleguru wrote:

    thinking: The channel 9 guy flies in, with a cape, takes the spamming guy and pushes him in a garbage container. "Take this lession" he says, "don't ever come back!" The channel 9 guy flies off the scene...


    Did this in a quickie:


  • User profile image
    littleguru

    W3bbo wrote:
    Did this in a quickie:




    Nice picture of our mighty superhero at work. You forgot the cape. Wink

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Beer28 wrote:
    lots of the issues that have been addressed in open bulletin board software communities like phpbb have been overlooked by the board creator here.

    There was one issue with phpbb, which I actually personally got exploited on my own server over xmas with, but that was an actually exploit in the library it was coded against, not in the bb software.

    So since it probably was written from scratch and since there is no possibility for community revision, there are some things the author simply did not consider like various security and posting issues.

    It seems like they were more mindfull of something like profanity with their elaborate regex'ing of posts for naughty words, which most often actually regex's incorrect matches out of legit posts.

    So this is the corportate mentality, avoid the lawsuit due to offensive language, before addressing real security issues that may occur, due to misuse of the software.

    You have to assume that not everybody may be using the software from a browser and that port 80 applications are open to any code connecting with a TCP socket doing post, head and get's manually.

    OSS communities actually do often times consider this when making software, because some times some of the members are actually doubling as the offending miscrients.


    that's true beer. But I like that they did it from the scratch. I like the Channel9 forums much more then the standard forums. It looks simply nicer and not so overfilled like forum UIs usually are. Especially the newest versions - terrible!

    But there is still stuff to improve!

  • User profile image
    jonathanh

    Beer28 wrote:
    lots of the issues that have been addressed in open bulletin board software communities like phpbb have been overlooked by the board creator here.

    There was one issue with phpbb, which I actually personally got exploited on my own server over xmas with, but that was an actually exploit in the library it was coded against, not in the bb software.

    So since it probably was written from scratch and since there is no possibility for community revision, there are some things the author simply did not consider like various security and posting issues.

    It seems like they were more mindfull of something like profanity with their elaborate regex'ing of posts for naughty words, which most often actually regex's incorrect matches out of legit posts.

    So this is the corportate mentality, avoid the lawsuit due to offensive language, before addressing real security issues that may occur, due to misuse of the software.

    You have to assume that not everybody may be using the software from a browser and that port 80 applications are open to any code connecting with a TCP socket doing post, head and get's manually.

    OSS communities actually do often times consider this when making software, because some times some of the members are actually doubling as the offending miscrients.

    Beer, do you ever bother doing the simplest research before posting your latest FUD?  You know, like clicking on the little "Powered by ASP.NET Forums" link on the bottom of every single page on Channel9?  Or would that spoil your rants?

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    You forgot the trashcan!


  • User profile image
    littleguru

    mVPstar wrote:
    You forgot the trashcan!




    hahaha! what a wonderful cape!

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    ..borrowed it from a Halloween costume. The silly C9 guy! Smiley

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    jonathanh wrote:
    Beer, do you ever bother doing the simplest research before posting your latest FUD?  You know, like clicking on the little "Powered by ASP.NET Forums" link on the bottom of every single page on Channel9?  Or would that spoil your rants?


    I got the sensation that you both (beer and you) don't like each other very well. Is this only my sensation, or how comes? I'm curious...

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    mVPstar wrote:
    ..borrowed it from a Halloween costume. The silly C9 guy! Smiley


    Well, he has not that much money - He is spending all his money to pay for the bandwith and the servers Smiley

    [edit]I have to write a postcard to scoble to get one of those nice little fellas[/edit]

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Beer28 wrote:

    https://store.telligentsystems.com/FamilyProducts.aspx?id=1

    This is not free GPL software anybody can use. If you have a website that is not non-profit, you have to pay

    <quote>Non-Commercial License (FREE!) 

    This license is perfect for non-profit, non-commerical, and for evaluation purposes. </quote>

    Who's going to want to work on that?

    $4,499.00 for a business class license for a bulletin board, does the community working on the source get any?

    when phpbb is free and GPL

    phpbb.com's community has 164,000 members while the asp.net has 5,900

    This is a business venture under the guise of open source and community devleoped softwrae


    Don't forget: this is a microsoft page... I don't think they are going to use PHP.

    The size of the community is not so important. Keep in mind that somebody has to create the community. If nobody uses the software there is simply no community.

    Personal opinion: in my eyes ASP.NET is a far more advanced technology then PHP.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Beer28 wrote:
    I have access to both and I use php, for various reasons including the ability to pipe input from C programs and code C extensions easily, and the fact that there is no code behind seperation or need for a VS to do a UI form designer ect. The code interface is also nice, Perl is nice too.

    It's a more free coding environment, you're free to interact  with the shell, to use OO or not, to use a range of different other tools to accomplish your task.


    I have also access to both. But I don't like PHP. First it was something nice, now it's becoming more and more a disaster. They fix this, they add that, without a real concept behind. And those cryptic variables... I don't know. OO was also added in some strange way. The syntax for creating an instance of a class is weird!

    You don't need Visual Studio for ÁSP.NET. Open notepad and start creating your ASP.NET page. No problem.

    With ASP.NET 2.0 it's even getting more simpler. Create your Code directory and put there your classes. They are then compiled during the first run of the page. Very, very nice.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Beer28 wrote:

    class foo extends baseclass
    {
    function foo(...)
    {

    }
     ....
    }

    $fooinstance = new foo(...)

    That's wierd? That's exactly like java;

    There's a concept behind it, it's a scripting language for the WWW. As for cryptic variables, they're no more or less cryptic than any other scripting language, and are viewable in a debugger like active state komodo while you're running the code on a breakpoint just like visual studio.

    ASP was codable in notepad, asp.net has gotten unmanagable as a simple scripting language with no IDE in the code behind that was implemented


    You don't need the codebehind files in ASP.NET. It is also possible to do stuff simpler. For example:

    <html>
    <head>
       <script runat="Server">
          private void Page_Load()
          {
             myLabel.Text = "Test";
          }
       </script>
    </head>
    <body>
       <asp:Label ID="myLabel" Runat="Server" />
    </body>
    </html>

    What's here so complex? Smiley

  • User profile image
    littleguru


    <%
      Dim str As String
     Sub foo
         Str = "hello world"
        Response.Write(str)
      End Sub

    %>

    <somemoretags>
    <% call foo  %>


    This is one of the things i hated always with ASP. Code and markup should not be mixed.

    I hated this syntax:

    <%="Hello"%>

    it's disgusting. I like the new way. Code is no longer mixed with markup. That's fine.

    You know that the <% %>-syntax is still possible in ASP.NET. They left it in the language for some compatibility reasons. A terrible decision.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    We have a lot time to discuss those things, don't we? Big Smile

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    Your argument is lousy Beer since you are only making ASP and ASP.NET look confusing and very stringy for your side of the debate.

    You don't need to write a subroutine just to print Hello World.

    This is how simple you can code in ASP:

    <%= "Hello World" %>

    FOr the subroutine:

    <% Sub foo
       Response.Write("Hello World")
    End Sub
    %>

    <body>
    <% foo %>
    </body>

    "///Oops, error"

    How could you possibly get an error using this code block? For your example above, of course there would be an error b/c you can't use script runat variables with script blocks.

    You don't NEED to use the <script> tags either. You can get away with a simple Response.Write method. ASP.NET is supposed to make it easier to communicate with specific tags so that you CAN avoid the confusion.

    So, you would do something like:

    <script runat="server">
    Dim str as String
    str = "Hello World
    txtB.Text = str
    </script>


    <body>
    <asp:text id="txtB"/>
    </body>

    That IMO is MUCH easier than PHP.

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    Tongue Out

    I'm a bit curious, but...
    is it possible to place <asp:/> tags in xslt/xml and have it processed by.NET normally? Or will it never be executed? 

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.