[AC-Admins] [Admins] AnthroChat Server application - wolf

[Sean McElroy]

I agree that not having exclusive access to the logical machine makes this a
less than desirable proposition.

In addition, I don't just run a server for an IRC daemon, and I doubt many
of us do -- we use our servers for various and sundry things, and so the
cost to maintain and upkeep the box isn't just for chat.  If it were, at
some point I would have thought, "Eh, the network's got enough nodes, I can
stop paying for this if I want to exit with no ill effect."  There's
something to be said for the stability in knowing that a server will likely
be around longer than 12 months.  If the only reason you're paying a hosting
company is to be an Anthrochat netadmin, I'd appreciate the desire to help
pitch in resources, but it leaves me feeling uneasy.

~Blue



On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Cheetah <cheetah at catsden.net> wrote:

> Scott Garron wrote:
>
>>     I haven't spoken with this person in the past, so I don't have much
>> of a feel for personality, but from talking over the past few days, his
>> opinions align well with those of our mission statement and he doesn't
>> show any of the signs that would cause me to raise a red flag.
>>
>
> I'd reject the application:
>
> - Channel ops experience is no substitute for administering a complex
> network application
> - Judging from xzibition's page, it looks like a turnkey package with very
> little actual influence on the machine.
> - What package is he buying?  What is the motivation?
> - What's the security model for the underlying host?
>
> I'm not particularly happy with the 'buy one's way' into the network,
> regardless of how nice someone may or may not be.  In addition, the hosting
> solution is too much a black box.
>
> -Cheetah
>
> _______________________________________________
> Admins mailing list
> Admins at lists.anthrochat.net
> http://lists.anthrochat.net/mailman/listinfo/admins
>



-- 
Sean McElroy
e: me at seanmcelroy.com
c: 405-824-1069