Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Sign in to follow this  
James R Gordon

Lancer Archive Restoration

Recommended Posts

This is to let members know that the Lancer Archive will be restored this August.

I understand it will not be a restoration of the previous system. It will be a bespoke rebuild.

It has been confirmed by the developers that they expect to restore all the data saved prior to the hack.

EF Members will need to apply to be members of Lancer. Present membership of the EF will not give members access to the site. Nor will it be possible to have read access without membership. Lancer membership will be needed to have both read and write access.

The site will not only be a reading archive, it will also be an active posting site. It is hoped the site will be active by early September.

Any ideas would be appreciated and considered as the time for the restoration approaches.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nor will it be possible to have read access without membership.

Is there any way to revise that horrible decision, James?

IMO, it's incredibly silly to go to the trouble of restoring all those Lancer posts and then cut off everyone except "members" from reading the content. Why would anyone choose to incorporate such a stiff restriction? I really don't understand that. ~shrug~

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

I do not see a problem. If the archive is something you are interested in then request to be a member. Unless there is good reason not to admit a member into the JFKLancer, it is simply a matter of routine.

In your time you must have applied to join numerous sites. JFK Lancer is not the property of the EF. The EF has been entrusted with the upkeep it. We promised Debra - when possible - we would have the site professionally restored. It will not be hosted by Invision - who host the EF. The EF will have a hyperlink attached to a thread so members can visit JFKLancer. It is also going to cost quite a bit of money to restore in the way we want it restored and it does not seem unreasonable to create a separate membership for the site.

Bottom line, it is up to each member to decide whether they also wish to be a member of JFKLancer as well. Nobody is being forced to join.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But why REQUIRE someone to JOIN a forum just to READ its contents? That was my point. I hate that restriction. And I think some other people do too.

Some people prefer to lurk (i.e., just read), but prefer not to "join up". Virtually all forums that I have been a part of have allowed everyone on the Internet to at least SEE the posts being written without being forced to join the forum as an official member.

Duncan MacRae's forum permits everyone to read the site (although, for some reason, there is a restriction on viewing links and photos unless you're a registered member). The Usenet newsgroups are completely open to all readers. As is Greg Parker's forum. And DPF. And Wim Dankbaar's forum. And, of course, this Education Forum does not restrict the reading of threads to just members. So why would JFK Lancer restrict readership? They never did before their shutdown a few years ago. Anybody could read the posts in past years.

I don't understand the logic of such a restriction at all. Without the restriction, the site would undoubtedly get far more hits too. (How could it not?) And isn't that one of the things that a website owner strives for--a bigger audience, in order to get its message out there to the public?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For once, I completely agree with DVP. Limiting the reading of posts to members only will certainly shrink the audience. I guess I understand if the intent is to

create a research database, but you indicated that there will also be a new forum.

Was this Debra's decision? If not, whose idea was it?

Lancer had a nice period there, with lots of solid contributions. I have no problem registering, but if the goal is to share knowledge and information, then the posts

should be available to everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don,

The idea and decision was mine. I have no idea who hacked and destroyed the site but it is going to cost a very large sum of money to restore.

Through registration admin will know who is on the site at any time. It is just an extra level of security to ensure the site is better protected.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Through my I.T. security background, I have a reasonably good idea of the cost involved in restoring a site that has been destroyed by hackers, so I can fully appreciate where James is coming from. If, as we all seem to agree, the Lancer site was - and hopefully will be again - a very worthwhile site with which we want to be associated, then why not just register as a member? As a registered member, one is not obliged to post, and can remain a reader/"lurker" with the option to post if and when desired.

James, if the developers hope to restore all the data saved prior to the hack, does it mean they will be able to restore the previous membership files, or has all the old membership data been corrupted/lost?

Me? FWIW, I will have no problem registering again as a member if necessary.

Chris.

Edited by Chris Scally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any problem registering as a member, as I said. But I don't understand not giving the public access to the material. Is there an extra cost involved in making the information visible to everyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with James on this.While requiring registration will not PREVENT another hacking, it would serve as a bit of a deterrent.

So for that reason I'm in favor of requiring registration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using this logic, shouldn't you prevent non-members from reading the Education Forum's posts, as well, else you'll risk being hacked here, too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, Greg, why did you want to go and plant that seed into Jim Gordon's head? You probably just started him on the road to mandatory registration here too. Which would mean that all of the Edu. Forum posts that I have ever linked to at my own site will become worthless and unavailable to 95% of the people looking at my webpages, because they are not (of course) members of The Education Forum. ~sigh~

You should have kept quiet, Greg.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James,

I don't see any response to Chris Scally's question in post #7. Essentially, the issue raised was whether or not current Lancer members had to register all over again.
Also, is the Lancer Forum archive restoration still on schedule to be completed in August which is now just a few days away?
Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ken,

My preference is to still require registration. The restoration is being done for the benefit of EF members - as well as fulfilling a promise we made to Debra Conway. It is not a public forum - in a sense it is a private forum for the use of members of the EF.

As far as scheduling is concerned it is likely to be more like September before it is complete.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To EF administrators, members & visitors:

The original post I had placed here, I failed to copy when I deleted it, so please consider this explanation of why it's not here now. Hopefully, I'll be cut some slack for being a cyber dummy due to the fact that I'm now approaching 64 years of age & I date back to a time when there were no personal computers, Internet, cell phones or Pokémon. Please go easy on an old dinosaur!

The post I made originally began a series of exchanges between myself & distinguished JFK researcher & author Larry Hancock. Those exchanges have now been restored on page 2 of this thread. I deleted them in an attempt to visually demonstrate to Larry how the JFK Lancer website Forum appeared to me as a lurker when it was attacked by cyber assassins, hacked & destroyed. Not knowing what was transpiring behind the scenes (as a lurker), what I saw online appeared to me to be the work of the then Forum administrator (or someone impersonating the administrator). That misconception has now been corrected in the exchanges on page 2 of this thread. I've also learned that Larry Hancock also had a website on the same server the original JFK Lancer Forum was on that also was the victim of a cyber attack.

The last entry I have made on page 2 is in response to email inquiries I have received since this original post & the subsequent exchanges were made. Evidently, not much info is currently available online concerning the JFK Lancer website & it's original destroyed Forum. Search engines are not finding results to inquiry questions such as 'when was JFK Lancer hacked?' or 'who hacked JFK lancer?' as of this post. There's not even a mention of JFK Lancer website or Debra Conway in Wikipedia at the moment. I expect this will change quickly as interest in EF's Lancer Restoration grows and the subject spreads globally.

Again, sorry for losing my original post. Go easy on me. You wouldn't bash Sir Paul McCartney for hitting a bad note once in a while, would you? I'm close to being as old as Sir Paul.

I realize that's not a good excuse & leaning on Sir Paul may be viewed as a pathetic, desperate attempt for sympathy, but it's all I can think of at the moment....

Sincerely,

Brad Milch

Edited by Brad Milch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×