Discuss mailing list

[Jeff Taylor <shdwdrgn AT sourpuss.net>]

Sure you can change your vote.  I didn't realize this issue would be so 
closely divided or I would have put up an official vote on the website.

I just added in the votes from yesterday, we're now currently standing 
at 9 votes for A and 8 votes for B.  There is obviously not going to be 
any clear leader in this discussion, so perhaps what we need to do is 
shift our focus to a better compromise between the two positions...

Per my previous email, I have just launched the new geoip code which by 
default will try to maximize the number of different server admins 
represented in the results.  Since a large number of people are using 
the results from https://www.opennicproject.org/nearest-servers/ I 
believe this will go a long way towards minimizing the impact to users 
when an admin removes their servers, however a lot of people still seem 
keen on the idea of limiting the number of official servers any one 
admin is allowed to provide.  So what should that number be?  It seems 
most fair to keep this as a percentage of the total list.  As mentioned 
before, that is currently set at 25%, which is adjusted downward for 
admins who have been hosting opennic servers for less time.  Should we 
increase this maximum?  What value would be satisfactory to everyone?  
33%?  50%?  Let's try to find a balance that everyone is comfortable 
with, but still allows for a substantial number of servers to be added 
by those with the resources.


On 11/03/2015 07:29 PM, Christopher wrote:
> Also as a note even if we go with option (A) and someone reaches the
> limit, they can still run more T2 servers and give out those IP
> addresses to other folks, they just won't be officially listed as an
> OpenNIC T2 on the website. Have we been hurting for servers to support
> the load of OpenNIC users?
>
> I feel like A and B are effectively the same thing from a network
> stability PoV. Maybe a limit would help focus people on providing
> better servers, not just more? Or maybe if people are limited, they'll
> try to get others to join in, thereby raising the limit? Maybe that'd
> be effective to help get new server operators in. Can I change my vote
> to A?