Private Forums - Yes, No, Maybe

[Guard Dog]

The topic du jour is this:

Should AGD have a private forum whereby spiders are NOT let in? The purpose of this forum would be to post 'sensitive' topics that would require users be logged in to view them.

If I were to do this, ALL members would be allowed access. I do not want a private forum where only certain members are allowed a peak. I think this promotes separatism and my philosophy is that we help ALL affiliates, not just a select few.

Now - with that said, should we allow private forums for members?

(Write-In Votes are allowed on this Poll)

 

[grem]

I voted yes after reading about the visa thread.

 

[Aussie-Dave]

Hi All,

I voted yes, of course. I did raise the suggestion in the visa thread.

I understand your reservations about segrigation Andy, I don't favour it either. However on the flip, I think a minimum post quota should be set. I wouldn't feel very comfortable posting stuff knowing anyone can view it by just signing up as a member.

Although nothing is really safe on the net, least with say a minimum of 15 or so posts it would serve its purpose.


Cheers



Dave

 

[dominique]

I agree with Dave.

 

[TheGamblingGuru]

Yep, I too agree with Dave. Otherwise how will you keep out the DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, HS, Mossad...well you probably won't be able to keep the "Mossad" out considering all of our partners connections here. But the others, for sure..
____
____

 

[Rhondagrace]

I'm all for it!

 

[arkyt]

I voted no.

I don't have anything to hide. If its truly something worth hiding - odds are its something that shouldn't be posted any where online, not even in private.

IMO thats a huge negative with this industry - too many people think they have something to hide. The last 5 years or so we've had casinos running around looking for loopholes to jump through, changing this, changing that, just to try and get another gambler signed on.

As for post count, anyone could sign up and make 10,15, 20, 50 post and get the info if they really wanted it.

You really think a private forum area is going to keep DOJ/CIA/FBI etc out? Really?

 

[TheGamblingGuru]

Not really sure if this is relevant to this topic or not but don't you guys forget about the Victorias Secret Fashion Show Tonight at 10/9C on CBS ;D

The single most important conference/show of the year!
____
____

 

[TheGamblingGuru]

You really think a private forum area is going to keep DOJ/CIA/FBI etc out? Really?

It's possible, they have been known to fumble quite a bit as well as tilt when they should not have... But the "Mossad" on the other hand is another story.
____
____

 

[Aussie-Dave]

If its truly something worth hiding - odds are its something that shouldn't be posted any where online, not even in private.

I agree in part. Which part that is, is about if it's that personal/private it should not be posted online, period.

I was more thinking along the lines of industry issues. I don't know about you but I like to get a broad spectrum of feedback before making things public if that need arose.

It's far easier posting that to a private forum than PM'ing or emailing 30 or so individual webmasters. Besides a forum tends to develop people's thoughts, unlike email and PM where it's one on one.

Hence the reason I voted yes.


Cheers



Dave

 

[Aussie-Dave]

Not really sure if this is relevant to this topic or not but don't you guys forget about the Victorias Secret Fashion Show Tonight at 10/9C on CBS ;D

The single most important conference/show of the year!
____
____

mhmmm can you tape it for me...
We don't get CBS here!



Cheers



Dave

 

[Pokerkeep]

mhmmm can you tape it for me...
We don't get CBS here!



Cheers



Dave

Sucks to be you.

 

[Vladi]

I think a private forum could be useful, but if the intention is to keep out "non-affiliates who might want to take down a processor" (mentioned in another thread) or things like that then I think it is misguided.

So you put a limit of 10 or 15 posts for access. That is a trivial barrier to bypass and by the time someone did that everyone would probably trust them even more than they should. It will not stop any reasonably intelligent person with malicious intent.

If you don't want something made public then don't put it on the internet, period. All it takes is one mistake or misconfiguration, or another user who takes screenshots or cuts and pastes and posts it elsewhere and it gets spidered by google and that is irreversible. Just look at the wikileaks case now for the ultimate example.

 

[KasinoKing]

I voted "Yes" too.

I agree with most people above:
a) Some things are not suitable (or relevant) for general viewing.
b) A minimum posting limit is a GOOD idea; 10-15 seems reasonable.
c) Things which are totally private should remain that way - I don't think any members here are stupid enough to post something they don't want publicised at all.
d) It will encourage more webmasters to sign-up or post more; Curiosity killed the cat!

KK

 

[Aussie-Dave]

Ping @ KK,

I never noticed you pissed dog avatar was animated. I'm a bit tired and I swore it blinked at me...Which it did but never knew it was animated...Totally freaked me out there for a moment or two, thought I'd totally lost the plot ;D


Cheers



Dave

 

[WCD Admin]

I voted yes. Primarily to be able to post negatively about a program that is ripping you off or cheating without "immediate" retaliation.

In addition to this a way to have "some" control over who is allowed would be good. I recommend a team similar to what the GPWA have installed to keep folks out. Probably not as in-depth, but a website should be included with complete transparency. Whois checked, website examined, or maybe, a simple telephone number to talk to the person on the phone at least once, too.

Simply make it hard for them to social engineer their way in. At least require some work on their part.

PS: KK's dog sticks his tongue out, too!

 

[dominique]

Threads about payment issues out in the open can ruin the entire industry. The rest I don't mind being public.

 

[arkyt]

Threads about payment issues out in the open can ruin the entire industry. The rest I don't mind being public.

How can a thread about payment issues ruin the entire industry? Please explain ...

Thank you.

 

[Guard Dog]

How can a thread about payment issues ruin the entire industry? Please explain ...

Thank you.

I think I understand Dom's logic in that the more everyone knows about who is processing payments, the more the government entities know about it. It is the reason most places will not give out much information to affiliates about processing.

However - I don't really see it hurting anyone because you can bet the Feds already know about all of them We may like to believe they don't, but guaranteed they set up players upon players just to track where the money trail leads.

I'm not sure this is a reason to have a private forum, but the poll is leading in the other direction.

 

[Vladi]

Exactly. It is trivial for an investigator to sign up to a casino, make a deposit, play a bit then withdraw and see where the money comes from. Trawling forums to find clues amidst speculation is not necessary.