Two 'v's is not a 'w'. Maybe your font is playing tricks with you (as that user is).

You're right about the font.

But the point about authentication stands.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

RIP Neil Armstrong

Except that this is not a failure of authentication.


When's the last time you used duct tape on a duct? --Larry Wall

How would you like people to be authenticated? Like have someone check copies of ID cards whether they say "BrowserUK" before admitting someone? Run soundex or "graphex" on user names before allowing them? Not admitting users unless they can prove ownership of a like-named account on another forum with at least $n posts?

Can't be "authenticating" as in "checking that the user is actually the owner of the account she's trying to use" as there's nothing wrong with how that's implemented as far as I can see.

It's called "ClearType".

SCNR!

Not a hack, just some tomfoolery. It's two 'v' characters rather than a 'w', perhaps easier to read on their homenode.

This isn't me. Why is it so difficult for the "experts" that run this place to implement proper authentication? If you ever want a reason for the decline in Perl's popularity; the fact that the Perl expertise, that code the premier Perl website -- in Perl -- can't work out how to do proper authentication probably is -- and should be -- a damn good one.

This MUST be you! =)

Welcome back, prima donna!

It it April already?

Nope, just some trolls fighting.

I Go Back to Sleep, Now.

That's the best reaction to this "hack". Have a nice hibernation. ;-)

Alexander

--
Today I will gladly share my knowledge and experience, for there are no sweeter words than "I told you so". ;-)