Upgrade StorageGroup application by non-existing user
Hi all
I have had a group application request from one person on the 1st of january. When i visited my settings page to accept or deny, i tried to visit the profile of the person requesting. Not that i have a policy or anything, except perhaps that users have some form of institutionnal account to access a bundle of scholarly publications (btw, I wouldn't know how to deal with someone that do not and never had such an access .... any insights? --> i'm sharing pdfs).
Anyway i have not approved nor denied this request because the profile seems non existent. I remember to have seen somewhere here that it's hard to totally erase/replace your profile uri (or something), and so it's really weird that someone registered and was able to delete its zotero registration so quickly. I'm assuming that is what happened, but thought i'd still lay this out here for double-checking.
Nick
I have had a group application request from one person on the 1st of january. When i visited my settings page to accept or deny, i tried to visit the profile of the person requesting. Not that i have a policy or anything, except perhaps that users have some form of institutionnal account to access a bundle of scholarly publications (btw, I wouldn't know how to deal with someone that do not and never had such an access .... any insights? --> i'm sharing pdfs).
Anyway i have not approved nor denied this request because the profile seems non existent. I remember to have seen somewhere here that it's hard to totally erase/replace your profile uri (or something), and so it's really weird that someone registered and was able to delete its zotero registration so quickly. I'm assuming that is what happened, but thought i'd still lay this out here for double-checking.
Nick
It is a user that was banned after being reported as a spammy user. When a user is banned their profile goes to a 404, but we do not automatically delete data on the off chance that it is a mistake, hence the remaining application for your group. There are various aspects that could be handled better, but for the moment this is the best solution we have in place.
There was something fishy about this, but i did not want to deny a legitimate request.
As for the process, i think it's not so bad. I'm assuming this is a notice-and-notice system (with the bonus from the defendant side that you keep everything up as a failsafe). Could even be noticeS-and-takedown-(and-possible-notice-to-take-back-up) and still be allright. Anyways, as usual, keep up the good work.
Nick
I too got a request from a jackson1 also on Jan 1
The zotero email exact details:
Sat, 01 Jan 2011 04:03:33 -0500
Thanks for raising this. I almost said yes because I thought it was someone I knew.
Mike
I felt bad too about procrastinating on the request because its time suggested that someone already late was on a schedule ...
How do people spam, again?
Nick