Rado S <regrado at web.de> writes:
> But with respect to the "consensus", we have this one:
> "We've got clients, we've got servers, we've got a network protocol
> with RSA client verification, ..."
> is then obsolete, if I understood the "consensus" right?

Not in the least. 

> Now... without RSA (or any replacement) to make such things harder,
> _anyone_ without even basic 2-3y cs experience could hack that.
> It's not about making things 100% safe, but making it harder for the
> clueless spoilsports. If they had enough clue for such hacking, they
> wouldn't be such lamers to cheat.

I don't think anyone is talking about ditching the RSA system.
It was turned off on several servers during MacTrek's teething 
pains, but I think it's back on on pickled and continuum. 

>> We have that. No metaserver currently discriminates.
> Well... there have been times when people felt like favouring one
> server over the others (or type of servers). Especially recently
> when Bill's Sturgeon server caught some players this was raised.
> I just want to know what the powers feel about it generally.

Yes, and those times were resolved, and the resolution demonstrates
how the server admins feel about it. 

>> Right now we have a resource shortage, not an organization
>> shortage.
> Like what resource?

Like the ones I've been trying to tell you about since December.
Players, Programmers, Sysadmins, Web developers. 

>> We are a lean and efficient organization.
> Then please add some more progress publicity.
> I don't check every page on netrek.org each day to catch every
> significant progress that could happen randomly.
> Last relevant news: 23-Feb-2007 We're beginning to resurrect the
> website.

If you want to see the changes, set up a darcs repository for
yourself. When you want to see what's happened lately, update
your repo; you will be presented with change logs and patches 
you can read. 

>> Find me five hundred additional active players, a half dozen more
>> game servers live, six to ten more coders, web authors, and
>> sysadmins, and we might need some of the stuff you post about.
> ... in the past we had all that and _therefore_ no need for an
> organisation (league aside). We need something to get started again.
> Chaotic "everyone does what he wants when he wants" (possibly
> struggling against each other) dissolves into nothingness. We need
> more coordination for the little that we have left.


People in software development projects always dispute and 
have personality issues; adding another organizational level 
increases, not decreases, that overhead. We're progresssing slowly,
but definately progressing. Because of random chaos; Narcis wrote
a Mac client, someone else is doing a Nokia port, I rewrote a lot
of webpages. Any of us bothering to vote on directors would have
just eaten more effort and detracted from that progress. 

You seem to like Wikis. They mostly don't have directors, and make 
a lot of progress. Their whole advantage is flexible self-organization
with easy access.