[messaging] Group consistency with removal (was: Matrix.org)
trevp at trevp.net
Mon Mar 16 13:55:50 PDT 2015
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Jonathan Moore <moore at eds.org> wrote:
> On Mar 16, 2015 2:04 AM, "Trevor Perrin" <trevp at trevp.net> wrote:
>> So the idea is that we're just flooding positive/negative lists
>> simultaneously, and letting the most recent action take precedence.
> If some one sees a remove message for them selves what stops them from
> flooding with add messages for them selves, racing against the remove?
> (Possibly from a second account.) Would this lead to Ops fighting like you
> sometimes see on irc?
Good point, you'd have to disallow users from adding themselves:
* Discard messages from users who aren't in your positive list
* Don't allow a message from user X to update user X's timestamp in
the positive list
Alice and Bob could still fight over adding / removing Charlie, but
that's an inherent limitation with the "anyone can add, anyone can
remove" policy. Alice and Bob could remove each other simultaneously,
but that seems OK.
The requirement for time sync and timestamping is arguably a problem.
Someone could timestamp MAXTIME to the entries they add/remove,
creating an add/remove event that can't be superceded. But if
someone's being that annoying you could start a new group....
I dunno. Definitely limits to this. But if you want better
semantics, like multiple group admins with special privileges, I worry
you're going to end up with something more complicated.
More information about the Messaging