> > I got the first message. I don't know why I didn't reply. It must
> > have just gotten buried.
>
> Apologies for the redundancy
Not necessary. That was intended to be an apology, not a complaint.
> > I'm a bit paranoid, so I'm only going to play on adjudicators where
> > I know the security policy of the admins - specifically the USAL,
> > USAZ and UKYS judges. When I started USAK, I did so because I
> > didn't like to GM games on some of the judge that had registrations
> > on them grandfathered from before version 1.5 of the nJudge code
> > and USAL has a limit on the number of games... and Todd Lawson was
> > using most of that limit before he started USAZ.
> I'm not sure with the jargon here, what you mean by "security
> policy". If you mean how many games you can join that depends on how
> many points you have, you can read about points here:
> http://phpdiplomacy.net/points.php
>
> It's a simple idea once you understand it I think, not as simple as a
> hard upper limit but pretty straightforward.
I do like the point system. It makes me wonder if it would be possible
to implement a per-judge implementation of the JDPR and add a game
control like dedication requirement.
By security, however, I mean limiting the ability for people to cheat
or otherwise misbehave on that server. This includes providing a
description of expected behavior, like the Electronic Protocol House
Rules (believe or not people need to be *told* that taking two
positions or hacking someones password is wrong) and monitoring
activity on the server for indications of duplicate positions,
collusion, etc.
That happens to be my big issue. Once 0.8 is available on Sourceforge,
I'd love to set up an install and provide more detailed input, maybe
some usable patches.
Chris
|
