A legal threat is not an appropriate way to act in this situation.

Damn you and your levity. ;)

Edit:

Do Drama Llamas spit?

Last I checked, only when extremely agitated, and itchy for a fight. After that they turn green and ugly, and transform into Trolls. Or maybe that was the Incredible Hulk. I can never remember.

I think at which point we are being spammed by abusive crawlers ran by dicks, then yeah, Mabus' threat to contact ISPs would be in order. But he first took the issue up here and has been trying to resolve it amicably, he's just gotten a load of criticism for it.

Surely it is a good idea to safeguard your logs or your MUD against attacks, I don't think anyone is disputing that, and sure, I might have been using a bit of hyperbole saying the "only" responses he has gotten has been this or that, but the fact remains he basically came in saying "hey, I'm getting spammed by this, can I opt out?" and while some people have agreed opting out is a good idea, he's basically gotten a heap of "fix your MUD" when that wasn't the issue.

He was patient, he was calm, he explained that this isn't what he's addressing, he's addressing the crawler, if someone wants to start another thread about "fixing your MUD" that's fine, but he's addressing an option to opt-out.

I sometimes wonder why we, as a community, sometimes can't seem to simply address the issue at hand (or at least drop a topic when someone says that isn't the solution they are after) rather than seemingly trying to puff themselves up by trying to continually criticize someone else for not doing things the way they think it should be done.

Also, maybe I shouldn't be trying to post at work without proper time to thoroughly read a thread, but this has been what I've taken away from what I've seen.

Scandum, actually.

No, he wasn't.

He shoved a legal threat out before even receiving a comment from an admin.

Everyone's been in agreement that opting out is a good idea.


Because there's nothing those of us that are around can do about the situation except suggest alternatives that could be completed rather quickly. Also, while the MudBytes admins are generally willing to correct errors on their part. What's he going to do about someone who thinks that He's in the wrong? Complain to the authorities over a crawler on the internet? That'd be like me saying I'm going to call the authorities on Google for having their crawler constantly connection to my Website and crawling the pages so that I get search results.

And again, I said, Drama Llama's one and all.

Actually, no, what really happened is that people agreed that the constant pinging was wrong, and then people agreed that it would be nice to be able to opt out. In other words, his original complaint was recognized as perfectly legitimate! It was then pointed out that the more general problem needs to be addressed, and that only he can do that by changing his code: as soon as you have an open port, it's only a matter of time before people hit it. Mabus refuses to accept this (although it is, frankly, a reality of the Internet – just look at web server logs some time) – I believe that this is in part because he seems to have forgotten that we all agreed with him initially, or at least has conflated the two issues (the specific one of MB's crawler, and the general one of life on the Internet). The latter issue has little to nothing to do with the brokenness of the MB crawler or the opt out option.

Since you admit that you only skimmed the thread, I'd really appreciate that you avoid casting aspersions on people (and in this instance, me in particular) unless you actually read what you're making claims about. At the very least it would be the polite thing to do. :thinking:

You can't keep saying that unless you post the link. (But since I posted it first, you lose and I win. So there. :dramatic spit:)

Dude, I totally forgot we had a picture of an actual Drama Llama. Thanks for reminding me.

Btw, You can't win, because I already called the win. Sorry. :P

Edit: Btw. 50!

I think I understand a bit better now where you're coming from.

This is not meant to sound mean or whatever, but please take the
time to re-read the thread from the start. I think you'll find there is
a continuum of testiness, quite natural among opinionated
smart people, but it's at post 23 that actual drama first blood is drawn.

I do not think Mabus is being picked on. I think he has an opinion
that enjoys unanimous agreement (he's getting spammed), and a
minority opinion (the protocol needs to be changed because of it)
that is under dispute. Of the folks here, he's the one having the most
trouble handling adverse opinion constructively.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

That was in response to the constant criticisms after asking, repeatedly, that this isn't the issue he's trying to address, but other people wouldn't drop it. The general attitude did seem to be a "deal with it yourself" type, so again, I don't think the thought of contacting an ISP was completely out of the question when others are telling him that its his responsibility to add code to filter out the crawler.

And the thing that gets me about it is if so many people agreed that an opt-in option was in order, why not drop it at that point? It seems a bit ridiculous after he asked that people drop the "fix your MUD" angle that it just continued in that way, and then people wonder why he reacted in the way he did? I'm quite sure that he's probably aware that in the event of attacks and other such it would be advisable to add in code to filter that out or block it, but that wasn't what he cared to continued with and other people just wouldn't leave it be.

Then my question is, after he made it clear he isn't interested in hearing "fix your MUD" solutions, why wasn't the issue dropped?

Have we read the thread yet, or are we still editorializing without really knowing what we're talking about?

(bold my own)

And there is the issue.

The first two responses dealt with me implementing MSSP, at least as far as being able to send a new delay:

or implementing it enough to send data that the MUD did not want crawled:

A game should not have to change their code to accommodate every new crawler that comes along.

There was also a bunch of noise meant to demean. I dismiss much of it, as I am used to seeing most of the "usual suspects" posting styles.

We log initial connection info. I am sure we are not alone in logging this info. It is this very info that alerted me to the issue. Removing this info could be counterproductive.

You are incorrect.

I posted here after receiving a PM from an admin. I alerted them to the potential issue privately (in a PM) and they responded about the possibility that it was the MSSP crawler. That is when I posted here, seeking information and guidance from the community.

It is not a "legal threat" to take the last recourse available when friendly and polite options fail, it is wise administration of an online service.

The point has been made multiple times that you haven't allowed the
inspections regime to complete before deploying your show of force.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

I think I addressed you in this:

Mabus, you can deal with people amiably and hope that things work out. In this case, it is very likely that your complaint will be resolved as soon as the admins have time to deal with it. But you will never be able to stop a random person from pinging your game in ways you don't like or didn't foresee. The only way to avoid that is to change how you deal with it, either by ignoring the logs, blocking the person, etc. To think otherwise is either ignorant or naive – that's just how the Internet works.

Anyhow, I'm not sure what your big problem is: you've managed to get everybody so far to agree that your complaint was valid, and yet here you are still terribly unhappy.

I think I've avoided trying to make assumptions about your intent, and have
posted only my good faith opinion.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

I addressed that: