Talk:Ezboard

message: What is the policy when you have an article that cannot be placed at the correct name?  It's ezboard, not Ezboard, EZBoard, EZboard, or anything with any capital letters at all. The official name of the company is "ezboard, Inc.". Aranel ("Sarah") 17:16, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, figured it out. Aranel ("Sarah") 17:23, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: wiki policy

message: Someone recently rewrote most of the article.  It definitely portrays EZBoard in a more positive light now.  I'd venture to say that it also isn't very well written.  (The second "paragraph" is just a run on sentance.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Starwed (talk • contribs) 10:32, 8 February 2006  (UTC)
I agree: the truth about the extent of the major data loss is well known and even acknowledged by ezboard, Inc. Most of the ezboards, active as well as inactive, lost substantial amounts of data. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RichardHMorris (talk • contribs) 23:58, 27 February 2006  (UTC)
:Turning the article into an attack piece doesn't fix the problem. Articles should not contain "spin" or any other bias; please respect WP:NPOV. If you have information which is verifiable, please add it and cite your sources per WP:CITE. Thanks, Alphax τεχ 06:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Substantial revision 

message: The current phrase in the article: "... causing over 9,000 boards to lose information" does not reflect the history as publicly known, or is too misleading about the scale. The only official announcements to the public, relevant to this issue, were:
1. "This attack resulted in the loss of a significant amount of current and historical board postings and interrupted services across all systems"
2. "We are taking the fastest route to restore data, but it may take up to 48 hours to get data back to approximately 9,000 boards. A more manual method requiring upwards of seven to ten days is required to restore data to the other boards that lost data"
3. "We would love to send you a list of which boards are getting what data restored, but it is not information that can be generated at this time."
4. "... have reports of a great many boards getting significant amounts of data back"
(Source of above not online available anymore to my knowing apart from a blacklisted host. There goes free speech...)
Fact is that Ezboard contained around May 2005 at least several hundreds of thousands of communities (source). Combined with announcement #1 which to my knowing never was further specified or retracted later, the article should then read: "causing over hundreds of thousands communities to lose information". Precise statistics of amounts of posts across the Ezboard network have never been published so it might well be that the amount of damage done can never be accurately estimated at all.
Any comments or additional information is welcome.
:* You can't say hundreds of thousands of ezboards lost information, thats not a provable fact. It was stated that approximately 9,000 boards lost some form of data, but its not stating what kind of data or how much.
::*Any source you can quote on that? The only statements known containing the number 9,000 are related to restore progress from a limited incomplete supply of (secondary) backups and it was clearly indicated by ezboard more boards were affected that were in need of other forms of restoring. If ezboard didn't want, or wasn't able to specify the damage further publicly, then this article surely shouldn't attempt to.  --Furoria 16:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see now the number was removed by you. Fine by me. --Furoria 16:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data about hack 

message: Removed a lot of staff member names and usernames. A lot of these staff members are not currently employed with ezboard at this time, and the only actual notable staff members are Robert Labatt and Ceco Gakovic as noted on the ezboard website. --Regimemachine
-- Good point. I suppose I was trying to add more historical names and was counting on someone to put their roles. Since you edit the page quite a lot, perhaps you want to do that? --M.A. Walters 11:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Staff Members 

message: Why is it that some people (like 'RLabatt', is that the CEO of ezboard? Same name...) feel the need to keep erasing lots of text from this article without comment? First in May, then the 25th and now today again? Wikipedia is not about putting ones view in without allowing other voices. It's *not* about deleting and removing historical facts out of view. 
Anyone who feels like things have to be substantially moved, removed or changed, can't it be discussed here like adults? There are many ways to phrase and source statements. Not talking about people like "Frankbanner" who just added a stray line full of frustration. It's clear such things do not belong here and anyone can remove those. Thanks in advance,   Furoria 12:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editors please discuss significant changes first 

message: I was thinking that maybe a new article should be created to display info about the claimed hack in 2005, and any other topics (like Yuku's apparent ad revenue sharing) and the fact that the 2005 hack is a litle too similar to the incident in 2001 when an update caused massive data loss. Just stick a link to it in the ezboard and yuku articles. I think it's a fair article to create, their are bound to be people who would want to know about the hack and other issues regarding ezboard and Yuku, and they have a right to know, so why not give them a place to find it all out?
This would also mean that the ezboard/yuku staff can add their opinions etc without turning the ezboard and yuku articles into battlegrounds. Lord Yaksha 10:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "battleground" usually consists of someone deleting the entire "ezboard cracked" section and someone reinstating it shortly afterwards. If this became a separate page it might reduce the number of edits on the main ezboard page but the new "ezboard cracked" page might just be flagged for deletion, which IMHO is more of a hassle than reversing changes. I don't believe it is worth creating additional pages for ezboard, particularly for the "ezboard cracked" incident, as there is a lack of concrete information, and anything that was posted was deleted long ago. Some ezboard admins copied the announcements to their boards but these are spread across a lot of different boards and I don't know if we can cite sources that are cut-and-paste jobs from a deleted original. Yes people have a right to know, but in the absence of any references to the original postings, is there a lot more information that can be put on Wikipedia than is already there? Suggestions welcome... JamminBen 13:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:   Yeah, I suppose you're right, it just seems kinda silly to keep coming and trying to change what the article says, especially the ez/yuku staff, you'd think they'd be far to busy with sorting out yuku and all other related stuff (helping confused/worried users through the transition from ezboard to yuku, for example) than constantly trying to make both ezboard and yuku look like shining beacons of divine perfection, especially when so many people know that's not true and aren't going to let the ezboard and yuku articles be edited in such a way as to both provide false/inaccurate information and spam their services. That's not what the articles are supoosed to be for, as Wiki's policies clearly state and users have constantly pointed out aswell. Lord Yaksha 13:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with JamminBen, I had the same doubts about a separate article becoming mostly speculative, although there appears to be a lot more to say about the topic than is stated now. We'll just have to wait for the official auto-biography of Vanchau so we can quote from there :) ... Anyway, good to see more people keeping an eye out here, this way I think attempts to delete the crack section again will not go unnoticed that easily. This struggle is quite normal for many WP articles containing some disputed or sensitive material so it comes with the territory I guess. As noted already before on this page I'd like to have a section about the actual size of ezboard, history, claims and realities, but same problem here: where to get neutral information? For sure they were market leader for hosted boards once and for sure they stopped being that one or two years ago. I think it's very relevant for a complete description of ezboard to add somewhere in the article in the future. Furoria 12:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well I seriously doubt ezboard will release that info, or any other info that would show them as less than perfect or being anywhere other than on top of all the competition, even though it's plain as day to anybody that is not so. A seperate article could be run, but only if a person with a genuinely nutral point of view were running it. But that person would be contending with constant attempts to remove all of the info, that and most of the info was on ezboard and has been conveniently deleted or hidden from public view. Lord Yaksha 10:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Judging by the edit history on the ezboard page (and many other pages for that matter) there are several people who keep the page neutral, not just one. I wouldn't say there are "constant attempts" to remove information, it seems to have calmed down a bit recently. I turned to web.archive.org for historical information about the May 31st 2005 "incident" and found nothing at all. The web archives only go back to 2005 for ezboard. The ones with the appropriate forum threw up a page not found error when I tried to access it. I tried them all, and got nothing. This may suggest that the archives have recently been purged, or that ezboard has asked for certain archives to be deleted. For me the web archives were a last resort, so I don't have any more ideas for sourcing this information without trawling through a lot of very similar news articles. JamminBen 14:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's 2015 and everything relating to the hack has been completely whitewashed. Adding NPOV tag and reinstating the censorship content. Feldon23 (talk) 14:31, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: New Article?

message: I noticed that TV-VCR added an "advert" tag to this page. I have removed this. A great deal of effort has been put into making this page neutral. There may be parts of it that could be improved further - for instance the "surprising" comment in the technology section - but by and large this is a very balanced article and has been discussed extensively. If anyone wishes to highlight specific sections for modification then feel free. But this is certainly not an advertisement. I should know, as I wrote most of the history section (for instance) and I am not ezboard staff. JamminBen 05:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * Removed "surprising" since I put it there. It was meant as 'unusual' but this sentiment cannot be traced clearly down to a source, not in those words or any specifics anyway. It's not important for the history and Cincom's later comments on it are enough on the subject. Thanks JB for the upkeep Furoria 08:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * I think the revised wording is better. Generally speaking this page is very low on content that would make the use of the advert tag valid, so I really don't know why the tag was added. I don't understand why we have to keep justifying the existence of a page that has already been justified several times. JamminBen 08:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advert tag 

message: The entries were all over the place, so I have reordered them. Please add all new Talk sections to the bottom of the page by using the "+" link that appears at the top. It makes this page a lot easier to follow because we can see what's new. Thank you. JamminBen 08:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I tidied up the Talk page 

message: I removed the cleanup icon. This was added by an anonymous user and they have not contributed anything else. As I mentioned when removing the advertisement tag, a lot of work has been done on this page and without specific examples (or actually making changes instead of adding a tag) I don't see what needs changing. It would be nice if people could actually try and add some value to the page instead of adding icons that aren't given any explanation. JamminBen 00:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The entire article has been gutted. NPOV, Advertisement, and other flags are completely relevant. Trudging back through historical versions to 2006 would be incredibly time-consuming but may be necessary. The 2005 destruction of tens of thousands of EZBoard forums DID happen. I was a participant in two forums that lost nearly their entire post history. Also, let's stop pretending this was an outside hacker. The attack affected primary AND backup systems which were stored separately. The person who did the damage was too familiar with the systems. Finally, there have been plenty of facts which came out after the fact about hiring practices at EZBoard and extremely unprofessional employees. This was done by disgruntled employees. Feldon23 (talk) 18:25, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed cleanup icon 

message: Does anyone know how many machines host this service?  It would be intersting to know how many forums or how many servers per machine the software supports. DonPMitchell (talk) 16:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  System Size 

message: EzBoard has now switched all its boards to Yuku, and ezBoard now goes to Yuku.--real_decimic 12:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yuku 

message: Since I noticed many additions of clearly unsourced opinions in the article, which are impossible to verify, I removed most of them since the topic had already ad nauseum been covered before. I urge people to read the discussion here above since it's a recurring problem with certain former employees. If you want to bring 'your truth' out, just publish something in a notable publication somewhere else first! And get some grip on Wikipedia rules too before editing. Perhaps some more needs to be removed for lack of sourcing but I only checked recent months. --Furoria (talk) 20:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Along these lines, I took out the part that claimed many people think there never was a hack. Without a citation, that has to go.. it accuses Ezboard of serious criminal activity. Kansan (talk) 18:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Stop whitewashing the article. It will not be possible to find journalistic sources for what happened at EZBoard because everything was hushed up. This is NO WAY this was an outside hacker. I'm sorry you weren't there to read all the misleading and fraudulent statements by EZBoard staff during the time of the attack. Unfortunately all this information has been lost to the internet and all that's left is for disinterested editors to take a wrecking ball through crucial information. Feldon23 (talk) 18:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unverified edits 2010 

message: The main event of Ezboard's history appears to have not survived the edits while it's one of the few informational bits on this page with actual sources available, not to mention the large impact it had on hundreds of thousand of people that year. Since not much is stated officially or verifiable on the exact scale or cause, or if the case has ever been solved, the entry has IMO to remain brief. The original founder and architect Vanchau Nguyen appears to have offered his alternative version in older edits but this cannot be verified independently.   Furoria (talk) 11:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  History block needs to remain neutral, complete and relevant 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Ezboard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=407.topic
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=911.topic
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=914.topic
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=930.topic
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=968.topic
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1485.topic
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=990.topic
*Added  tag to http://p094.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1133.topic
*Added archive https://archive.is/20061030154412/http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1264.topic to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1264.topic
*Added  tag to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1317.topic
*Added  tag to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1395.topic
*Added  tag to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1398.topic
*Added  tag to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1405.topic
*Added  tag to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1439.topic
*Added  tag to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1437.topic
*Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20091013051017/http://www.ezboard.com/corporate/corp_team.html to http://www.ezboard.com/corporate/corp_team.html
*Added  tag to http://p080.ezboard.com/fezboardfrm29.showMessage?topicID=1634.topic
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071017092145/http://www.networkworld.com/news/2005/060805-ezboard-hack.html?nl to http://www.networkworld.com/news/2005/060805-ezboard-hack.html?nl
*Added archive https://archive.is/20070306063834/http://p066.ezboard.com/fckerrtestfrm1.showMessage?topicID=7.topic to http://p066.ezboard.com/fckerrtestfrm1.showMessage?topicID=7.topic
*Added archive https://archive.is/20070504044008/http://p079.ezboard.com/fezboardimportantannouncements.showMessage?topicID=562.topic to http://p079.ezboard.com/fezboardimportantannouncements.showMessage?topicID=562.topic
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071017122441/http://www.mojowire.com/EzBoard-EnterpriseLinuxMag.html to http://www.mojowire.com/EzBoard-EnterpriseLinuxMag.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061023063225/http://www.cincom.com/common/success-stories/profiles/ezboarddetail.html to http://www.cincom.com/common/success-stories/profiles/ezboarddetail.html
*Added  tag to http://www.ezboard.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified