[tor-relays] System Time

[eliaz]

On 1/15/2014 8:19 AM, nano wrote:
> On 15/01/2014 10:29 PM, Sebastian Urbach wrote:
>> I really tried very hard to stay calm but at least someone has to say
>> it. I think operating relays / bridges can be described as a cutting
>> edge job or experience.
[snip]
>> If you don't know what you are doing, then be honest to yourself and
>> stop doing it !
[snip]
>> And further, i strongly disagree with the text Robert wrote today that
>> the project should provide more material for newbies because there is
>> already more than enough material.
[snip]
>> I would like to propose a new list which may or may not be called
>> "tor-relays-new" or so. New operators should start there for a certain
>> period of time and if everything seems to be in order they may be
>> transferred to tor-relays.
[snip]
> Sebastian,
> 
> I respect your opinion and appreciate your frustration borne from the
> inabilities of less skilled correspondents and their submissions.
> However, I don't believe running a Tor node, of any kind, requires
> either "it professionals with years and years of experience" or "serious
> skills" in system administration.
[snip]
> In part, I
> agree with the sentiment that "[if] you don't know what you are doing,
> then be honest to yourself and stop doing it"; however, I would instead
> change the apodosis to: 'seek assistance'. I would find that outcome
> preferable to ceasing participation entirely. Correspondingly, I
> consider this mailing list an excellent resource to facilitate said
> assistance; subscribers will either choose to contribute, or not.
> Furthermore, more documentation is rarely a bad idea and while limited
> resources should be prudently managed, I don't believe requests for
> assistance from mailing list correspondents consume said resources.
[snip]
> Nevertheless, subscribers are free to acknowledge mailing list
> correspondence or ignore it
[snip]
In the interest of
> full disclosure, I consider myself one of these "new relay operators"
> [0] so my opinions are most likely affected by bias.
> 
> [0]
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/799B025E25850A88CD133276301FAFB731C2EA94

I've been thinking for a while that a separate list for *bridge*
operators might be a good idea. I've put effort (and cash) into running
a bridge approaching 24/7, at which I was successful with TBB ver 2, but
have been frustrated since the advent of browser 3.5 and standalone
vidalia. Running the bridge blindly - just loading 3.5 and not trying to
assess whether the bridge is working properly,  or indeed if it's
necessary, hasn't been satisfying. I want to know why/how certain things
wok or don't work. I've been conflicted in this; either I run my own
experiments, resulting in the bridge being up erratically; or I ask what
I can well believe experienced node operators & developers might
consider dunderheaded questions. And since bridges are supposed to be
secret,  I'm not even sure what should or should not beasked  in a clear
list. I've tried asking tor support via encrypted msgs with mixed
results: I can understand that support has more important things to do
than reassure me that I'm on the right track.
	If other bridge operators also feel underserved and experienced users
feel beleaguered by us, maybe opening a list for bridge operators (or an
encrypted support address) might be a good experiment. Even if   a
dedicated list is populated only amateurs it might help us keep running
more consistently & intelligently.
	Yup, my bridge is down for now. Understanding what I'm doing has taken
too much time away from other work. I hope to have the bridge up again
as soon as I have enough time to work things out on my own or frame
intelligent questions. - eliaz
---- gpg 04DEF82B

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com