Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: more encrypts
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 1994 01:22:10 -0600
On Sat, 26 Mar 1994, Scott D. Peterson wrote:

> Are you saying that if we encrypt something me must list those who
> may not read it. Or do we list everyone in the cast list that may not
> read it.

I'm say, that if what you wnat to post only goes to three people, then
you wouldn't post it to a PUBLIC system.

-----------------

The situation with these blasted (a mild word) encryptions has got to
change. Every time someone posts an encrypted message, you have
eliminated 99% of the list from participation. Furthermore, many people
outright ignore encrypts, which leads to everyone getting pissed. It
makes for a shitty story, shitty participation, and generally a bad time.

Now, we have two choices:

1) Drop encryptions altogether. Fir the first five or six months, we
didn't have any and it worked VERY well.
2) Come up with something better.

I vote for #1, but most don't like that.

All I do know is that somethign better chnage fast and change radically,
because what we have currently is unworkable.

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is
\/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
Message no. 2
From: Timothy Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 1994 14:57:03 -0600
> 1) Drop encryptions altogether. Fir the first five or six months,
> we didn't have any and it worked VERY well.
> 2) Come up with something better.

I've said it before...how about just having messages be either in the
standard Shadowtalk format or just using a system where you can post things
that would NOT be putting on Shadowland...ie private mail that is explaining
parts of what's happening to everyone EXCEPT the players. A separate list
could be made for this, possibly, although I don't think that anyone is up
for yet another one...

----------------------- "Well, you see, they took the Bible literally.
Tim Skirvin Adam and Eve, the snake and the apple...took
(tskirvin@ it word for word. Unfortunately, their
superdec.uni.uiuc.edu) version had a misprint."
----------------------- - Rimmer, Red Dwarf (The Last Day)
Message no. 3
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 1994 15:10:25 -0600
On Sun, 27 Mar 1994, Timothy Skirvin wrote:

> I've said it before...how about just having messages be either in the
> standard Shadowtalk format or just using a system where you can post things
> that would NOT be putting on Shadowland...ie private mail that is explaining
> parts of what's happening to everyone EXCEPT the players. A separate list
> could be made for this, possibly, although I don't think that anyone is up
> for yet another one...

No!

no No NO!

The purpose is to make a story. Read the edited logs. It's a GREAT
story. If you start fragmenting stuff, you might as well forget the
story idea.

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is
\/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
Message no. 4
From: Timothy Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 1994 15:49:59 -0600
> The purpose is to make a story. Read the edited logs. It's a
> GREAT story. If you start fragmenting stuff, you might as well
> forget the story idea.

But as it is, it's hard to show what's happening in the outside world
and such. I know it's hard, but there's got to be a solution somehow...

I've also said before that we can make a header for messages that ONLY
one person would receive to be PRIVATE Mails. It would help the story, while
ignoring encrypts.

----------------------- "Well, you see, they took the Bible literally.
Tim Skirvin Adam and Eve, the snake and the apple...took
(tskirvin@ it word for word. Unfortunately, their
superdec.uni.uiuc.edu) version had a misprint."
----------------------- - Rimmer, Red Dwarf (The Last Day)
Message no. 5
From: Ed Matuskey <MATUSKEY@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 1994 22:57:06 -0800
Once again I'll post my own solution to the "What do we do about
giving the players/characters information they need (world events or
the like) but don't necessarily constitue proper shadowtalk messaagges?"
dilemna:

Use Plot-D. I don't see it as being very far from it's orignal charter
(from what I remember of it....). Post background info that players
wuld knowhere (like....I don't know, I can't come up with any examples
at this hour). This won't detract from the storylines, I don't
think.....
-Ed
Feeling very tired and incoherent.
But that's....Okay
Message no. 6
From: What ? <MCM@***.BRIGHTON.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 13:52:00 BST
Hmmm, I do really think the encryption needs to be totally nuked. Plot-D is
really the place for background events. How about seeing how many of us want
encryptions and how many don't.
Otherwise this subject is going to bounce about forever.

Anyhow, I assume scramble IC is a form of encryption, and a good decker can
open that up in a second, and that's Corp security stuff. Encrpytions on the
shadowland MUST be a piece of piss in comparsion. :-)

Just some thoughts.

-WHAT
Message no. 7
From: Joshua James Harrison <harrij4@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 12:37:55 -0500
Hmm... I thought of doing background stuff on Plot-D as well... but it wouldn't
work very well, because 1) Many people on the list don't subscribe to Plot-D
(don't ask me why, they just don't) and won't see the stuff and 2) It won't go
into the Shadowtalk logs (straight or edited) and so there is a gap in the
action, so to speak... we get everybody planning the run, and then everybody
reacting to the run, but we never see the cool bit of the run itself...

I agree that encryptions are getting out of hand... but I don't have any real
solutions... if you really want a message private, send it direct e-mail and
talk about it publicly later... if it isn't really immportant to forward the
plot (ie, you're just setting up a meet to trade something) why not do the
following:

>>>>>[Hey Frenchy, I'll get in touch with you privately regarding our
meeting
to do YOU KNOW WHAT.]<<<<<
-- Raul <T/D stamp>

This conveys plot info (there is a meet between Frenchy and Raul) without
revealing 'sensitive' information (where and when it is, what its about). It's
a matter of intelligent writing. Use a little bit of creativity, and the need
for encrypts should decline... or if you must, use the simple >>location<<
bit.

In response to the Scramble IC comment... Scramble IC (as far as I understood
it) is not an encryption. If the Scramble is tripped, it takes all the data
pieces and messes them up. If that happens, the decker needs time to work on
it and piece it back together. What you're thinking of in terms of 'opening it
up in a second' is the work needed to not trigger it. If the data were really
that sensitive, it would be really hard to get there, and it wouldn't be
protected by Scramble, now would it (try Red nodes and Blaster/Trace & Burn or
even Black IC. Not too much fun now, is it chummer?

Besides, don't you think that the premiere deckers in the world can't set up a
decent security system? They know how to crack it, they should know how to
make it very difficult to crack... Shadowland is one of the most secure places
in the net, because of that reason. Not completely impenetrable, but still
very secure.

That's my two bits... give or take.



--
Josh Harrison | A Elbereth Gilthoniel | "The Hedgehog"
aka A.M. Hawke | o menel palan-diriel, | \ \ | / /
Internet: | le nallon si di'nguruthos! | \ \ | / /
harrij4@***.edu | A tiro nin, Fanuilos! | --- O O ---
------------------------------------------------------------| / C \
'Now come, you filth!' he cried. 'You've hurt my master, | / m\_/m \
you brute, and you'll pay for it. We're going on; but we'll |---------------
settle with you first. Come on, and taste it again!' - Sam, "The Two Towers"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GE/T/O d++(--) -p+ c+(++) l u e+ m+(-) s+/ !n h f+(*) !g w+@ t+@ r(+) y?
Message no. 8
From: Timothy Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 12:55:38 -0600
>From tskirvin Mon Mar 28 12:55:16 1994
From: tskirvin
To: SHADOWTK Plot and Administrative Discussions
<PLOT-D%HEARN.bitnet@***.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 12:55:16 -0600
Cc: s

Encryptions can be good. Plot-D, if we start cluttering it with
background stuff, is just going to be a MUCH different place, let's face it...
it's more of a place to talk about the plots right now, not to do write-ups
on them.

I like encrypts, but I agree that we're using too many. I still like
the idea of using Private messages, instead, instead of just having it be
encrypted every time...

----------------------- "Well, you see, they took the Bible literally.
Tim Skirvin Adam and Eve, the snake and the apple...took
(tskirvin@ it word for word. Unfortunately, their
superdec.uni.uiuc.edu) version had a misprint."
----------------------- - Rimmer, Red Dwarf (The Last Day)
Message no. 9
From: Necromancer <shilberg@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 15:02:04 -0600
Uh, I hate to tell you Skirv, but plot-d is for the background stuff. Please
refrain from being stupid.

-------------
Steve Hilberg <shilberg@********.uni.uiuc.edu>
aka Jarred Wellsley <Necromancer>
aka Phaeros Lostchilde <Archlich of the Dark Order, High Necromancer
of Zalanthas>
Play Armageddon <studsys.mscs.mu.edu 4444>!
Message no. 10
From: Basilisk <prier@***.UNIBAS.CH>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 01:38:59 +0200
Necromancer, I think if you read Mr. Skirvin's last post again, you
will see that he was saying plot-d is for background and discussion of
plots, not for the actual write-ups. The big problem with writing
would-be-encrypted stuff to another list is just what Josh Harrison
wrote, that is a lot of poeple won't see it and it won't go in the
logs. It needs to stay on the talk list. If that means encrypting
it, so be it. But there are ways around having to encrypt things
if people will just try.

Sorry for going on like this, but it's late and I'm getting more tired
of this discussion than trying to figure out what my decker could read
and what was encrypted.

Good night all.

Kevin Prier, aka Basilisk, etc.
Message no. 11
From: Timothy Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: more encrypts
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 21:42:28 -0600
NE> Uh, I hate to tell you Skirv, but plot-d is for the background
NE> stuff. Please refrain from being stupid.

Steve (I'm ignoring all insults, just because it's pointless and I don'
want a flame war), Plot-D is not USED for background all that much. It certainly
is not used for the actual runs. This place seems mostly for discussion of
the plots, not the actual plots themselves. It's a forum for ideas, and an
area to tell people what's going on, a little, in terms that the players would
know.

----------------------- "Well, you see, they took the Bible literally.
Tim Skirvin Adam and Eve, the snake and the apple...took
(tskirvin@ it word for word. Unfortunately, their
superdec.uni.uiuc.edu) version had a misprint."
----------------------- - Rimmer, Red Dwarf (The Last Day)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about more encrypts, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!