Voting Results Turned over to the Board.

[HalWhitewyrm]

Just friendly advice from an outsider of the whole affair.

Noted.

 

[SavageRobby]

You speaking up for your friends is commendable. But let me suggest that sometimes, things are better left unsaid. Let FTB speak up if they chose to do so, otherwise there is a risk that too much is said, that they themselves wouldn't want to have spoken on official record.

You mean, such as this?

Hey all, this is Luke from Fear the Boot.

The entire ordeal stemmed from an ambiguous comment made by our moderator, Dan, in Episode 62. We jested a bit about the voting process which was in poor taste (as are a good portion of the jokes in our shows, for those who listen), but then clarified the ambiguity in a Episode 63.

We were initially accused of cheating by voting multiple times from multiple IPs. We were offered no defense and the judges have not shown us any proof to back up these accusations. Later, we were told my Michael Morris that we were not being disqualified because we cheated, but because we held the awards in contempt by joking about the voting system on our podcast.

Let me reiterate that no evidence has been shown to back up the charges of cheating. We fully take responsibility for the tongue-in-cheek comments we made at the expense of the awards. Satire and sarcasm are the bread and butter of Fear the Boot and are what we thought helped get us nominated. The one thing that none of us will stand for is to be called cheaters on when the ENnie judges have shown nothing to back up this claim.

It's a disappointing situation all around. This is the ENnies Judges' show and they have to do what they feel is best for the awards, so we'll go our separate ways.

Cheers,

Luke

 

[Maggan]

You mean, such as this?

Yes. A very well balanced reply, that didn't reveal contents of other peoples private e-mail conversations.

I think FTB have handled themselves very well in their responses on this matter, and they have earned my respect for that.

/M

 

[zacharythefirst]

If it's like the last few years Gaming Report will have someone there reporting as things happen.

I'll also be liveblogging for theRPGsite from the awards ceremony, in addition to listening to see if I'm going to be a 2008 judge or not.

 

[Crothian]

I'll also be liveblogging for theRPGsite from the awards ceremony, in addition to listening to see if I'm going to be a 2008 judge or not.

That's cool. You might want to have a thread here that day with a link to your blog for people to watch. You'll have to come by the booth or introduce yourself at the event.

 

[zacharythefirst]

That's cool. You might want to have a thread here that day with a link to your blog for people to watch. You'll have to come by the booth or introduce yourself at the event.

Hey, that's a great idea! Sure thing! I'll definitely stop by and say hello, as well. Hopefully, we'll have the chance to work together over the next year!

 

[woodelf]

I do have plans on how to increase security for the voting process, but I will not discuss them publicly as any public discussion would give cheaters an advantage.

Um, pretty much the only thing modern security and programming has concluded is that all security can be bypassed/compromised/hacked. There is no such thing as security through obscurity (that is, it doesn't actuall provide security). The only difference is that publicly-discussed security will have flaws known to all--the whitehats and the blackhats. Keeping it secret stops the whitehats from helping, but doesn't stop the blackhats from hurting.

 

[Mark]

Um, pretty much the only thing modern security and programming has concluded is that all security can be bypassed/compromised/hacked. There is no such thing as security through obscurity (that is, it doesn't actuall provide security). The only difference is that publicly-discussed security will have flaws known to all--the whitehats and the blackhats. Keeping it secret stops the whitehats from helping, but doesn't stop the blackhats from hurting.

. . . and can turn passive, uneducated blackhats into active, educated blackhats. Unwise. Security measures are best kept on a need-to-know basis.

 

[SavageRobby]

. . . and can turn passive, uneducated blackhats into active, educated blackhats. Unwise. Security measures are best kept on a need-to-know basis.

Microsoft seems to feel the same way, yet compare the security of Windows to that of Linux.

 

[Jarrod]

This is somewhat off-topic, but it needs to be said.

The security of Linux vs. Windows has nothing to do with obscurity. It has to do with fundamental system design.

Windows: a system that was originally designed for a workplace; easy sharing of resources is key, and so the system is open.
Linux: a system based on old time-sharing UNIX servers, where sharing was explicitly not the point. So the system is closed.

Obscurity is not a replacement for a good security system, but it helps. In fact, the best thing you can have is both. Make it hard to find the holes and then make it hard to exploit them. Think about it for a second - of course making something harder to find makes it harder to exploit. Problem is, once it's found (and thanks to easy communication and automation) then the obscurity part doesn't help anymore.

"Security through Obscurity" is a bad idea - because there's no security and only one person has to get "lucky". Security _and_ obscurity is best.

(and I'm a security researcher in real life )