YALR (yet another lock request)

[bsobel]

In this thread the poster wants to circumvent the filtering his school has on his internet connection. The poster did reasonable point out the new rule talks about bandwidth shaping products not url filterting ones. I actually hadn't caught that distinction before (and I don't think we should make a distinction). But, gonna need an 'official mod ruling' on if this is kosher or not.

Bill


It is under review

AnandTech Moderator

 

[narzy]

guess it would be time to rephrase the restriction.

Option #1:

No Asking about Getting around or assisting with, circumventing, disabling, packet shaping / bandwidth limiting devices or software employed at university, place of employment, or any other deployment of such a device or software. I also suggest that offenders be handed a one week vacation, this constitutes theft of bandwidth, period, there is no, No, NO excuse for it, if you needed the bandwidth you would have it.

No Asking about or assisting with Getting around, circumventing, disabling, Network filtering devices or software employed at university, place of employment, or any other deployment of such a device or software. I also suggest that offenders be handed a one week vacation, this constitutes theft of bandwidth, period, there is no, No, NO excuse for it. If you needed the access to said resources you would have it.

Network filters would also include web traffic filters.

Theft of bandwidth on the second rule, may need to be rephrased, although it does fit into said catigory fairly well. When I wrote the rule, the main focus was on the bandwidth limiting devices, but was intended to cover filters aswell, it was somthing that I overlooked when typing it out.

Option #2:

No Asking about or assisting with Getting around, circumventing or disabling Access Control Devices, Systems or Software employed at university, place of employment, or any other deployment of such Access Control Devices, Systems or Software. I also suggest that offenders be handed a one week vacation, this can constitutes theft of bandwidth, network terms of use violation, hacking, electronic trespass or other serious offenses. It will not be tolerated, there is no, No, NO excuse for it. If you needed the access to said resources you would have it.

I would like to say I am not a moderator and the decision as always is left for them to decide, but I did think that my imput may be of benifit.

if any of this sounds a bit wack, its 0553 in the morning and I've been up all night.

 

[Tallgeese]

Originally posted by: narzy
guess it would be time to rephrase the restriction.

Yep...I think so.
I would suggest phrasing the rule sufficiently broad enough by using terminology like "access control devices or systems" instead of narrow equipment definitions.