| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pensggs
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 361
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:34 pm Post subject: Hijack of your posting identity at Dimsum |
 |
|
I have discovered to my horror that someone at Dimsum with administrative access to the site can be so unprofessional, unethical as to be able to hijack your identity within Dimsum. This is unforgiving and compromise the whole intregrity of the site.
In any organisation, this would fall in the realms of gross misconduct.
However did this is obviously immature, inexperienced and is a danger to any credible employer or crganisations if they prevail with this unethical and unprofessional attitude. They have abused their trust given to them.
So posters beware. Your postings can be manipulated within Dimsum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Editor
Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Posts: 215
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rather than accuse Dimsum members of 'gross misconduct' please can you contact the team via email to resolve the situation?
We have no knowledge of what has been written in your name and will attempt to resolve the situation, but you will have to specify what your concerns are.
Please contact me at editor@dimsum.co.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pensggs
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 361
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:41 pm Post subject: A statement of fact |
|
|
A statement of fact is not an accusation.
An email had been sent as requested. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pensggs
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 361
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:39 am Post subject: Partial explanation received |
|
|
Refer to the Susie Wong article.
Partial explanation received from loulabelle, however, manipulation of postings by changing the date and repositioning the postings, thereby compromising the integrity of the postings and taking the posting out of context, still needed to be explained. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pensggs
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 361
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:40 pm Post subject: Conflict of Interest |
|
|
The question to be asked
Should a member of Dimsum with the administrative ability to make adjustments to any postings be allowed to write a viewpoint - which they then have the ability to change and manipulate postings from responding posters.
In any other name this would be classified as 'Misinformation' if not misrepresentation.
There clearly is a 'Conflict of interest'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Editor
Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Posts: 215
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Our technical team have informed me of the following:
"There is a very simple explanation here. pensggs in their post made a typo in their comment (“hot hat” instead of “old hat”) and then immediately posted another comment to say that they meant old hat not hot hat. I saw this and corrected the original comment. However, it appears in doing so the date was updated to the time I made the correction.
In order to change comments you need admin access to Joomla. It is properly secured. There is another issue in that you can type in whatever name you want when leaving a comment – this is common to almost all blogs and websites – but this does not allow existing comments to be modified.
Please feel free to forward this email to pensggs and anyone else concerned. I will also post a comment on the article concerned to explain, and go into the database to restore the original post date." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pensggs
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 361
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:20 pm Post subject: Not a simple typo error |
|
|
I cannot accept Luke's explanation as 'true' . I dare challenge Luke to a meeting as to the other outstanding questions such as to
I cannot accept Luke's explanation as 'true' .
I dare challenge Luke to a meeting as to the other outstanding questions such as to
'why was the answer to 12th August 2009 posting simultaneously removed as well ?
Also, the re-dating was so conveniently posted to a position to answer the question by the poster identified as 'Chinaman''.
One incident can be an error, two connected incidents spell of 'process or system problem' and the third connected incident spell of 'human interference'.
As a person with years of working experience investigating problems in control system processes, Luke's explanation for so many co-incidences as a simple 'one off' error' lacks crediblity.
The above was sent to Sarab Yeh.
Please do not insult your diners ability to think for themselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luke
Site Admin
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
Posts: 70
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | 'why was the answer to 12th August 2009 posting simultaneously removed as well ? |
Hi pensggs. I have done some investigation and believe you are referring to the reply to your comment by jing140986 which can be seen on the article.
The reason is quite technical so I will try to make it as understandable as possible.
The comments are stored in a database in the form of a simple list ordered by date. However, when the comments are displayed after the article, they are converted into a tree format. This means that if you reply to the first of many comments, your comment appears in context directly after that first comment, not at the end of the list, where normal non-replies go.
The code that reads this date-ordered list and converts it into the tree assumes that, as replies are posted after the comment they refer to, that by the time it comes across a reply in the list, it will have already seen the comment it is a reply to, and will be able to link the two together.
However, as previously explained, when the typo in your comment was corrected, the date inadvertently changed to the date of the edit. (I have since changed the code so that this does not happen).
Therefore, the reply to your comment now appeared BEFORE your comment. When the code was laying out the tree of comments, it came across the reply without having first seen your comment, and therefore could not make the link. No link means the reply did not get added to the tree, and therefore was not shown on the site.
When I reinstated the post date of your comment, then the reply once again appeared AFTER your comment, and therefore it then could be added to the tree properly and shown on the site.
I can completely understand your suspicions - from your perspective your comment suddenly moved, a reply disappeared, and it appeared out of context. Given your background in researching breaches of security, it was natural to assume that this was the cause.
However, I really hope that this explains your remaining concerns, and that you will accept that it was just the unfortunate technical consequence of what was a simple act to correct a typo on your behalf.
Rest assured that as a long time volunteer who has dedicated hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of my time over the last few years to build up the technology underpinning the site, the last thing I want to do is suppress or drive away our valued readers and contributors.
I am now based in Hong Kong so a meeting is probably impractical, but feel free to contact me further by email, on this thread, or by private message. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pensggs
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 361
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:27 am Post subject: Hats off to you Luke |
|
|
I take my hat off to you, Luke, I do not envy you your job and responsibility.
I do appreciate your trouble on my behalf. I think your hard work to solve all these issues will assure many posters, of Sarah Yeh and your dedication to Dimsum.
Let's hope you and Sarah are supported by a strong team of professional and self respecting members.
The Devil will always take care of their own, eh? 666 
Loyalty is to be encouraged.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
666
Joined: 08 Sep 2009
Posts: 25
Location: Dreamland
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| “是啊，尽管我走过的山谷死亡的阴影，我将不怕邪恶，因为我最大的私生子山谷中。 ” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
