Willow ,'Conversations with Dead People'
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: Jon B, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych, msbelle, shrift, Dana, Laura
Stompy Emerita: ita, DXMachina
if you want an invite, do this, and they do it and get an invite by some automated system? So that a human doesn't have to monitor and send invites manually?
What's to stop someone from doing that and signing up as Zenkitty and doing all sorts of stuff under your name?
That's a big reason to have them the same. Transparency of identity.
I haven't taken an in depth look yet, but TWiki *might* be flexible enough to allow single authentication: [link]
What's to stop someone from doing that and signing up as Zenkitty and doing all sorts of stuff under your name?
No, I know that's bad, but - We can't do the signing-up inside the board, where we're signed in with passwords? I think I don't understand the problem enough to even frame the question correctly. Never mind.
That's interesting Jon. I'll have to take a look at that in more detail.
No, zenkitty, you`re exactly right. What we want is to do it within the board with our b.org logins. The problem is that most wiki software (we`re talking about buying or using someone else`s code and putting it on our box, not hand coding like ita did for the board itself.) comes with its own signups and logins and stuff. What we`re looking for is a solution that will let us tie our logins into their code. Then at that point we can sign into the board and also have access to the wiki, and can create content and edit it and everything.
Spike's Bitches 46?
I'm not in love with Bob as a name for Bitches 46, since in breaks the quote tradition.
I don't have any great ideas, but I don't think we've used these:
Don't I get a cookie?
I like this one.
Cooooooooooookie!
I vote for telly.